Podcasts about Memorandum

In the Memorandum of Law supporting Sean Combs's Motion to Dismiss Count Three of the Superseding Indictment in case 1:24-cr-00542-AS, the defense argues that the charge is legally insufficient and fails to meet the required statutory elements. They contend that the indictment lacks specificity, particularly in detailing the alleged conduct and its connection to the purported criminal enterprise. Furthermore, the defense asserts that the prosecution's interpretation of the statute is overly broad, potentially criminalizing behavior beyond the law's intent. They emphasize that without clear evidence linking Combs to the alleged illegal activities in Count Three, the charge should be dismissed to uphold the principles of fair notice and due process.to contact  me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.153.0.pdf

In the case of Doe v. Combs et al., No. 1:24-cv-01457-JPO, the plaintiff, Jane Doe, filed a lawsuit against Sean Combs and associated entities, alleging personal injury. The court issued a Memorandum and Order addressing several key motions. Firstly, the court granted the plaintiff's motion to proceed under a pseudonym, allowing her to maintain anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the allegations. Secondly, the court denied the defendants' motion to dismiss the case, finding that the plaintiff's claims were sufficiently plausible to proceed to discovery.Additionally, the court addressed the defendants' motion to strike certain allegations from the complaint, which was denied. The court found that the contested allegations were relevant to the plaintiff's claims and did not prejudice the defendants. The Memorandum and Order concluded by setting a schedule for discovery and encouraging both parties to consider settlement discussions. This decision allows the case to move forward, with both sides preparing for the next stages of litigation.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:24cv1457 Jones v. Combs Sanctions Order.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Here's what happened last night: Saying Goodbye: Committee Member Lima Barbosa announced that next month's meeting will be her last. Her departure will create an opening on the Committee, yet we did not hear about the process of filling her seat. Host Ross Wilson announced that he will look into potentially joining the committee in her stead. Public Comment: Eid, Henderson, and Equity: The Eid Coalition Group dominated public comment as multiple speakers urged the district to close schools on Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha. The parents, students, and advocates highlighted the difficulty of having to choose whether they must miss a school day or an important holiday. Additionally, parents from the Henderson Inclusion School gave a moving statement about how the school's original inclusive mission has eroded, illustrating greater concerns raised over the past year about its decline. Votes, Votes, Votes: The School Committee ticked off a number of unanimous votes on various matters that had been previously brought up before the members. These included: authorization for student activity funds, superintendent approval authority over trust expenditures, Boston Green Academy's charter renewal, Urban Achievers High School private school application, graduation requirements amendment for alternative education, and the competency determination for the Class of 2026. Notably, there was little inquiry from any School Committee members on graduation rates for this past year. We will be on the lookout for further information about this during future meetings. Superintendent's Report: Progress, But Few Details Superintendent Mary Skipper opened her report with a thank you to this year's retiring BPS staff. She then introduced a new Memorandum of Understanding with the Boston Police Department, which outlines limited circumstances under which schools will share information with law enforcement. The agreement maintains the district's commitment to restorative justice and explicitly prohibits inquiries into students' immigration status. The quarterly update on transformation schools noted “slow and steady” progress, particularly with more coaching and monitoring around grade-level curriculum as well as excitement and school culture improvements. The Superintendent also stated that there remains major issues with chronic absenteeism throughout these schools. Superintendent Evaluation: “Proficient” The Committee presented its annual evaluation of Superintendent Skipper, giving her an overall rating of 4.0 out of 5 and labeling her “proficient.” According to the report, she showed improvement in every category over the past year. However, the evaluation relied on a BPS-specific rubric, diverging from the state's DESE model, raising questions about alignment and transparency. More critically, the Committee did not address major issues in its evaluation, including: the long-term facilities plan, ballooning White Stadium costs, declining enrollment, transportation controversy, and federal funding uncertainty. Exam Schools: Bonus Points No More? The night's final report focused on the exam school admissions policy. While no changes were proposed, as the district made clear their presentation was just an analysis, data simulations hinted at a likely shift away from the controversial “bonus points” system, especially as exam school applicants have dropped by more than 1,000 students over the past five years. Vice Chair O'Neill expressed concern about the unintended consequences of the current tier-based residency system, despite having supported the policy in the past. Two public speakers critiqued the district for their actions, stating that the information they presented was clear when they began the process of changing the admissions policy. Looking Ahead The School Committee's next meeting is scheduled for July 9th, when it will formally vote on Superintendent Skipper's evaluation. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Washington Policy Center's Todd Myers says President Trump's memorandum protecting the Snake River dams rolls back costly Biden Administration policies and aligns with science-based recommendations to retain the hydroelectric system. Myers explains why this move benefits Washington's economy, energy future, and salmon recovery efforts. https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/opinion/opinion-president-trump-signs-memorandum-to-protect-the-snake-river-dams/ #SnakeRiverDams #ToddMyers #WashingtonPolicyCenter #Hydropower #ColumbiaRiverBasin #TrumpMemo #BidenAdministration #SalmonRecovery #VancouverWA #ClarkCountyToday

In the case of Doe v. Combs (No. 1:24-cv-08054-MKV), the plaintiff, Jane Doe, filed a Memorandum of Law supporting her motion for reconsideration of the court's decision denying her request to proceed under a pseudonym. She also sought permission to file a supporting declaration under seal. The plaintiff argued that the court had overlooked critical factors, including the highly sensitive nature of the allegations and the potential for significant harm if her identity were disclosed. She emphasized that revealing her identity could lead to severe emotional distress and possible retaliation, given the prominence of the defendant, Sean Combs.Additionally, the plaintiff contended that allowing her to proceed anonymously would not prejudice the defendants and would serve the public interest by encouraging victims of sexual assault to come forward without fear of exposure. The request to file the declaration under seal was made to protect the confidentiality of detailed personal information pertinent to her motion.(commercial at 7:07)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.21.0.pdf

Kimsenin elinde sihirli değnek yok. Yeni dünya düzeninin ilk büyük konvansiyonel savaşı bu. Bir milyondan fazla kişi öldü. Ateşkesi sağlamak, barış şartlarını oluşturmak ve bunu imza altına almak için çetin ve sabırlı bir mücadele gerekiyor. Tarafların talepleri arasında uçurum var. Bu makas konuşmadan kapanmaz. Türk diplomasisinin İstanbul'da yapmaya çalıştığı şey tam da bu: Tarafları konuşturarak barışı mümkün kılmak. Bunun için geçilmesi gereken merhaleler var. İstanbul'da 16 Mayıs ve 2 Haziran'da yapılan müzakereler bunun parçasıydı. Ancak müzakereler, bu yolun ne kadar çetrefilli olduğunu da gözler önüne serdi. İlk turda yaşanan tartışmalarla ilgili bazı bilgileri paylaşmıştık. İkinci tur müzakerelerle ilgili yeni yansımalar ortaya çıkıyor. Aktaralım…

​In Case 1:24-cv-08054-MKV, the defendants have filed a Memorandum of Law opposing the plaintiff's amended motion for the pro hac vice admission of attorney Anthony Buzbee. Pro hac vice admission allows an out-of-state lawyer to participate in a specific case in a jurisdiction where they are not licensed to practice regularly. The defendants argue that Buzbee's admission should be denied due to concerns about his prior professional conduct, which they believe could negatively impact the proceedings. They emphasize the importance of maintaining the integrity of the court and ensuring that all participating attorneys adhere to the highest ethical standards.Furthermore, the defendants contend that the plaintiff has not sufficiently demonstrated that Buzbee's involvement is necessary for their case, especially considering the availability of other qualified counsel who are already licensed in the jurisdiction. They assert that granting the motion could set a concerning precedent, potentially allowing attorneys with questionable conduct records to participate in cases without proper scrutiny. The memorandum concludes by urging the court to carefully consider these factors and deny the amended motion for Buzbee's pro hac vice admission to uphold the court's standards and ensure a fair trial.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

​In Case 1:24-cv-08054-MKV, the defendants have filed a Memorandum of Law opposing the plaintiff's amended motion for the pro hac vice admission of attorney Anthony Buzbee. Pro hac vice admission allows an out-of-state lawyer to participate in a specific case in a jurisdiction where they are not licensed to practice regularly. The defendants argue that Buzbee's admission should be denied due to concerns about his prior professional conduct, which they believe could negatively impact the proceedings. They emphasize the importance of maintaining the integrity of the court and ensuring that all participating attorneys adhere to the highest ethical standards.Furthermore, the defendants contend that the plaintiff has not sufficiently demonstrated that Buzbee's involvement is necessary for their case, especially considering the availability of other qualified counsel who are already licensed in the jurisdiction. They assert that granting the motion could set a concerning precedent, potentially allowing attorneys with questionable conduct records to participate in cases without proper scrutiny. The memorandum concludes by urging the court to carefully consider these factors and deny the amended motion for Buzbee's pro hac vice admission to uphold the court's standards and ensure a fair trial.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In this filing, plaintiff Anthony Tate submits a Memorandum of Law opposing Defendants' Motion to Dismiss in the civil case against Sean Combs and his affiliated corporate entities, including Daddy's House Recordings, Combs Global, and various Bad Boy Entertainment subsidiaries. Tate argues that his complaint sufficiently states claims for relief and that dismissal is unwarranted at this stage. The opposition contends that the complaint provides detailed factual allegations that meet the pleading standards required under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), addressing each of the Defendants' arguments for dismissal. Tate emphasizes that the alleged conduct—spanning personal misconduct by Combs and organizational liability through the named corporate entities—is sufficiently documented to move forward to discovery.Furthermore, the memorandum asserts that the corporate defendants should not be dismissed merely because Combs is a named individual defendant; instead, Tate argues that the corporate entities were allegedly used to facilitate or conceal the unlawful acts in question. The opposition also challenges any argument that certain claims are time-barred, asserting that various legal doctrines—including equitable tolling and the discovery rule—preserve the plaintiff's ability to pursue those claims. Ultimately, Tate urges the Court to deny the Motion to Dismiss in full and allow the case to proceed, arguing that the defendants' motion relies heavily on factual disputes inappropriate for resolution at the motion-to-dismiss stage.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.632026.46.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

​In Case 1:24-cv-08054-MKV, the defendants have filed a Memorandum of Law opposing the plaintiff's amended motion for the pro hac vice admission of attorney Anthony Buzbee. Pro hac vice admission allows an out-of-state lawyer to participate in a specific case in a jurisdiction where they are not licensed to practice regularly. The defendants argue that Buzbee's admission should be denied due to concerns about his prior professional conduct, which they believe could negatively impact the proceedings. They emphasize the importance of maintaining the integrity of the court and ensuring that all participating attorneys adhere to the highest ethical standards.Furthermore, the defendants contend that the plaintiff has not sufficiently demonstrated that Buzbee's involvement is necessary for their case, especially considering the availability of other qualified counsel who are already licensed in the jurisdiction. They assert that granting the motion could set a concerning precedent, potentially allowing attorneys with questionable conduct records to participate in cases without proper scrutiny. The memorandum concludes by urging the court to carefully consider these factors and deny the amended motion for Buzbee's pro hac vice admission to uphold the court's standards and ensure a fair trial.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Ireland and Northern Ireland's cybersecurity sectors are set to deepen collaboration and unlock new opportunities as Cyber Ireland and NI Cyber today announced a landmark Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) at their event "All Island Cybersecurity Sector Opportunity" in the City North Hotel, County Meath. The MoU outlines key shared goals to align with both clusters' strategic priorities, including enhancing cross-border connections, supporting industry-academic R&D collaboration, and raising the international profile of the all-island sector. The announcement coincides with the launch of a comprehensive report commissioned by Cyber Ireland and NI Cyber, with support from InterTradeIreland's Synergy Programme. Produced by Perspective Economics, the report provides the first in-depth mapping of the all-island cybersecurity ecosystem. Key findings from the report reveal that the all-island cybersecurity sector is among the largest in Western Europe, comprising 632 firms and employing 10,600 professionals, with the sector generating an estimated €3.2 (£2.9 bn) billion and contributing €1.5 (£1.3 bn) billion in Gross Value Added (GVA) in the most recent financial year. Irish firms alone have seen revenue growth of 13.4% annually over the past two years, signifying steady growth for the cybersecurity sector. The study also highlights that the all-island cybersecurity sector benefits greatly from the presence of multinational companies, as well as indigenous enterprises, with 41% of firms headquartered in Ireland and 7% in Northern Ireland. However, barriers remain for the industry with policy gaps, procurement challenges and security clearance issues hindering cross-border collaboration. Speaking at the event, Eoin Byrne, Cluster Manager at Cyber Ireland, stated: "Cybersecurity is not just a technological issue, it's a strategic economic opportunity. This report demonstrates the strength of the all-island cybersecurity sector and the huge potential to improve our cyber resilience and drive economic growth by working together. The signing of the MoU between Cyber Ireland and NI Cyber is a major step forward in that journey." Joanne English, Cluster Manager at NI Cyber, added: "The cybersecurity threats we face don't stop at borders. Through enhanced collaboration, we can boost innovation and better support our companies and communities. This report and its findings highlight the opportunity for our respective clusters. The MoU paves the way for joint action and shared success. 42 cybersecurity companies already have active offices in both NI and Ireland, which shows a clear appetite for cross-border collaboration, and we must now work to realise the opportunities of a more integrated all-island cybersecurity market." Alison Currie, Director of Innovation & Entrepreneurship at InterTradeIreland, commented: "Cybersecurity is now a critical and vital consideration for all businesses. This report, funded by our Synergy programme, will benefit all businesses across the island of Ireland as they strive to collectively improve their cybersecurity preparedness, support their digitalisation processes and reduce their risk of cyber-attacks. InterTradeIreland is committed to supporting the cybersecurity sector as it continues to collaborate, innovate and overcome obstacles to further accelerate growth potential." To learn more about the partnership and the all-island cybersecurity sector, visit cyberireland.ie or nicyber.tech. More about Irish Tech News Irish Tech News are Ireland's No. 1 Online Tech Publication and often Ireland's No.1 Tech Podcast too. You can find hundreds of fantastic previous episodes and subscribe using whatever platform you like via our Anchor.fm page here: https://anchor.fm/irish-tech-news If you'd like to be featured in an upcoming Podcast email us at Simon@IrishTechNews.ie now to discuss. Irish Tech News have a range of services available to help promote your business. Why not drop us a line at Info@IrishTechNews.ie...

Doc 1: Cable, From: U.S. Embassy Beijing, To: Department of State, Wash DC, A Student Demonstration of Sorts in Tiananmen Square (11/21/85) Doc 2: Cable, From: U.S. Embassy Beijing, To: Department of State, Wash DC, Government Arrests Student Demonstrators (11/25/85) Doc 3: Cable, From: U.S. Embassy Beijing, To: Department of State, Wash DC, More Student Demonstrations (12/23/85) Doc 4: From: U.S. Embassy Beijing, To: Department of State, Wash DC, Student Demonstrations Update (12/24/86) Doc 5: IPAC Daily Intelligence Summary 1-87, China: Student Demonstrations (01/02/87) Doc 6: IPAC Daily Intelligence Summary 10-87, China: Hu Yaobang Resigns (01/17/87) Doc 7: Memorandum of Conversation, [George Bush] Meeting with Wan Li, Chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress and Member of the Politburo, People's Republic of China (05/23/89) Doc 8: Secretary of State's Morning Summary for 06/0289, China: Stalemate Continues Doc 9: Secretary of State's Morning Summary for 06/03/89, China: Police Use Tear Gas on Crowds Doc 10: Cable, From: U.S. Embassy Beijing, To: Department of State, Wash DC, SITREP No. 27: Martial Law with Chinese Characteristics (06/03/89) Doc 11: Cable, From: U.S. Embassy Beijing, To: Department of State, Wash DC, SITREP No. 28: Ten to Fifteen Thousand Armed Troops Stopped at City Perimeter by Human and Bus Barricades (06/03/89) Doc 12: Cable, From: Department of State, Wash DC, To: U.S. Embassy Beijing, and All Diplomatic and Consular Posts, TFCHO1: SITREP 1, 1700 EDT (06/03/89) Doc 13: Secretary of State's Morning Summary for 06/04/89, China: Troops Open Fire Doc 14: Cable, From: U.S. Embassy Beijing, To: Department of State, Wash DC, SITREP No. 32 (06/04/89) Doc 15: Cable, From: U.S. Embassy Beijing, To: Department of State, Wash DC, SITREP No. 33 (06/04/89) Doc 16: Cable, From: Department of State, Wash DC, To: U.S. Embassy Beijing, China Task Force Situation Report No. 3 (06/04/89) Doc 17: Secretary of State's Morning Summary for 06/05/89, China: After the Bloodbath Doc 18: Cable, From: U.S. Embassy Beijing, To: Department of State, Wash DC, SITREP No. 35 (06/05/89) Doc 19: Secretary of State's Morning Summary for 06/06/89, China: Descent into Chaos Doc 20: Cable, From: U.S. Embassy Beijing, To: Department of State, Wash DC, TFCH01--SITREP No. 37 (06/06/89) Doc 21: Secretary of State's Morning Summary for 06/07/89, China: Tense Standoff Continues Doc 22: Cable, From: U.S. Embassy Beijing, To: Department of State, Wash DC, TFCH01--SITREP No. 38 (06/07/89) Doc 23: Secretary of State's Morning Summary for 06/9/89, China: Uneasy Calm Doc 24: Department of State Intelligence Brief, "Current Situation in China: Background and Prospects" (Ca. 06/10/89) Doc 25: Secretary of State's Morning Summary for 06/10/89, China: Mixed Signals on Purge Doc 26: Cable, From: U.S. Embassy Beijing, To: Department of State, Wash DC, SITREP No. 49, (06/11/89) Doc 27: Secretary of State's Morning Summary for 06/14/89, China: Back to Business, But Crackdown Continues Doc 28: Secretary of State's Morning Summary for 06/15/89, China: Accusation over Fang Lizhi Doc 29: Secretary of State's Morning Summary for 06/21/89, China: Swift Justice Doc 30: Cable, From: U.S. Embassy Beijing, To: Department of State, Wash DC, Eyewitness Account of June 4 PLA Tank Crushing 11 Students and Related Early Morning Events in Tiananmen Square (06/22/89) Doc 31: Cable, From: U.S. Embassy Beijing, To: Department of State, Wash DC, What Happened on the Night of June 3/4? (06/22/89) Doc 32: Cable, From: U.S. Embassy Beijing, To: Department of State, Wash DC, TFCH01: SITREP No. 65 (06/27/89) Doc 33: State Department document entitled "Themes" (06/29/89) Doc 34: State Department Bureau of Intelligence and Research, "Status Report on Situation in China as of 07/ 26/89" Doc 35: State Department Bureau of Intelligence and Research, "China: Aftermath of the Crisis" (07/27/89) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

New Era Helium CEO Will Gray joined Steve Darling from Proactive to share major news regarding the company's rapidly evolving joint venture, Texas Critical Data Centers, LLC (TCDC). The joint venture, established between New Era Helium and Sharon AI, has entered into a non-binding Memorandum of Understanding with PowerForward Energy Solutions to provide 250 megawatts of on-site power generation capacity for its planned AI and high-performance computing campus in Ector County, Texas. This initiative represents a strategic step toward positioning TCDC as a key player in the booming AI and cloud infrastructure market. The campus is being designed to meet surging demand for GPU-powered data environments, driven by the exponential growth of artificial intelligence, machine learning, and other compute-intensive technologies. Under the terms of the MOU, PFES will take responsibility for manufacturing, installing, and operating the generation infrastructure at the TCDC site. The first phase will include the delivery of 100MW of power within 12 months of securing funding, with the full 250MW targeted for completion within an 18-month timeline. Gray emphasized the importance of the agreement as a foundational element in bringing the data center campus online quickly and efficiently. The site's development is already well underway, with the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment successfully completed. Work is also progressing on air permitting, an essential step in ensuring full regulatory compliance for power generation and data center operations. In parallel, TCDC, along with partners Sharon AI and PFES, is evaluating the integration of advanced carbon capture technologies. This reflects a broader commitment to environmental responsibility and aligns with emerging sustainability requirements for large-scale data infrastructure. The joint venture is also engaged in active discussions with multiple prospective customers, including companies seeking access to “powered land” for rapid deployment of their computing infrastructure. In terms of next steps, the project is focused on securing natural gas supply agreements to fuel the planned generation capacity, while also advancing interconnection planning with regional grid partners. These milestones will be critical in aligning the data center with the energy and digital infrastructure required to support high-performance workloads. #proactiveinvestors #neweraheliuminc #nasdaq #nehc #oil #gas #perimianbasin #HeliumProduction #NaturalGas #DataCenters #AIInfrastructure #PecosSlope #VerticalIntegration #EnergyMarkets #PermianBasin #Semiconductors #PowerGeneration #ProactiveInvestors

Wskaźnik PMI dla przemysłu tąpnął w maju. EBC zintensyfikował kontrolę ekspozycji banków na rynki prywatne. PZU i Pekao podpisują memorandum ws. reorganizacji. Enterprise Investors inwestują w suplementy klasy premium. Komisja Europejska nałożyła 329 mln EUR kary na Delivery Hero i Glovo za udział w kartelu.Zasubskrybuj prasówkę na www.businessupdate.pl.Podcast powstał przy pomocy ElevenLabs.

Es begann mit dem markerschütternden Heulen von Sirenen auf russischem Boden und endete in panischen Anrufen deutscher Bürger. „Kommt jetzt der Gegenschlag?“ fragten mich Freunde am Sonntagabend, als erste Videos brennender russischer Bomber über Telegram und X kursierten. In der Nacht zuvor hatte die Ukraine das Undenkbare gewagt: einen massiven Drohnenangriff tief im russischen Hinterland auf Stützpunkte der strategischen Luftwaffe – eine Attacke, die laut dem ukrainischen Präsidenten Wolodymyr Selenskyj „die brillanteste“ seit Kriegsbeginn war. Doch was als militärisches Meisterwerk gefeiert wird, entpuppt sich bei genauerem Hinsehen als ein gefährliches geopolitisches Spiel, das die Welt an den Rand eines größeren Konflikts treibt – und US-Präsident Donald Trump bewusst außen vor ließ.Ein Standpunkt von Sabiene Jahn.Die Operation „Spinnennetz“, wie der ukrainische Geheimdienst SBU den Angriff taufte, war ein logistisches und psychologisches Schauspiel. 117 Drohnen, ferngesteuert von präparierten Lastwagen, schlugen in fünf russischen Regionen ein: Murmansk, Irkutsk, Ivanovo, Ryazan und Amur. Laut ukrainischen Angaben wurden etwa 34 bis 36 Prozent der russischen strategischen Bomberflotte zerstört – darunter Tupolew Tu-95, Tu-22 und Berijew A-50 Frühwarnflugzeuge –, mit Schäden, die Kiew auf bis zu sieben Milliarden Dollar beziffert. Selbst wenn diese Zahlen übertrieben sind, bleibt die Botschaft klar: Der Angriff zielte auf Russlands nuklearfähige „Weltuntergangs-Bomber“ und damit auf Moskaus Zweitschlagsfähigkeit – ein Bruch aller strategischen Tabus.Der Zeitpunkt war kein Zufall. Nur einen Tag vor geplanten Friedensgesprächen in Istanbul, bei denen eine russische Delegation unter Außenminister Sergej Lawrow ein Memorandum für eine Waffenruhe vorlegen wollte, setzte die Ukraine ein spektakuläres Zeichen. Während Russland im Mai über 580 Quadratkilometer Geländegewinne verzeichnete und Orte wie Wodolaghi, Alexandria, Vladimirovka und Dyleevka befreite, stand die Ukraine militärisch mit dem Rücken zur Wand. Laut internen Berichten kämpfen viele ukrainische Einheiten mit nur 40 Prozent Personalstärke, und 2024 wurden 90.000 Deserteure registriert, 45.000 allein im ersten Quartal 2025. Die Drohnensalve war kein Versuch, den Krieg zu gewinnen, sondern eine verzweifelte Machtdemonstration, um die Verhandlungen zu beeinflussen – und die Weltöffentlichkeit zu blenden.Die Antwort war AngriffNoch brisanter ist die Tatsache, dass US-Präsident Donald Trump über die Operation nicht informiert wurde. Während Axios zunächst behauptete, Trump sei gewarnt worden, korrigierte sich die Plattform, und CBS News dementierte klar: Der Präsident war außen vor. Trump, der wiederholt betonte, den Krieg durch Verhandlungen beenden zu wollen, wurde von seinem eigenen Sicherheitsapparat oder ukrainischen Akteuren gezielt umgangen. Seine Reaktion war schon zuvor ungewöhnlich scharf: „Das ist nicht mein Krieg. Es ist der Krieg von Selenskyj, Putin und Biden. Ich versuche nur, die großen und hässlichen Feuer zu löschen, die durch Inkompetenz und Hass entfacht wurden.“ Mit diesen Worten positioniert sich Trump gegen das transatlantische Kriegskartell – und genau das scheint der Grund für seine Ausbootung zu sein...hier weiterlesen: https://apolut.net/trump-im-dunkeln-ein-gezielter-affront-von-sabiene-jahn/ Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In Case No. 1:24-cv-07975-AT, Defendant Shawn Carter, professionally known as Jay-Z, has filed a Memorandum of Law supporting his motion to dismiss the Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint. Carter argues that the Plaintiff's allegations lack sufficient legal basis and fail to meet the necessary pleading standards required to proceed with the case. He contends that the complaint does not present concrete facts to substantiate the claims made against him, rendering the lawsuit legally deficient.Furthermore, Carter emphasizes that the Plaintiff's complaint is not only baseless but also frivolous, warranting dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11. He asserts that the allegations are unfounded and appear to be an attempt to misuse the legal system, potentially causing unwarranted harm to his reputation. Carter's memorandum seeks both the dismissal of the complaint and the imposition of sanctions against the Plaintiff for filing a meritless lawsuit.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Microsoft Word - Motion to Dismiss FAC (SDNY) (15549242_8) (004).docx

In Case No. 1:24-cv-07975-AT, Defendant Shawn Carter, professionally known as Jay-Z, has filed a Memorandum of Law supporting his motion to dismiss the Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint. Carter argues that the Plaintiff's allegations lack sufficient legal basis and fail to meet the necessary pleading standards required to proceed with the case. He contends that the complaint does not present concrete facts to substantiate the claims made against him, rendering the lawsuit legally deficient.Furthermore, Carter emphasizes that the Plaintiff's complaint is not only baseless but also frivolous, warranting dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11. He asserts that the allegations are unfounded and appear to be an attempt to misuse the legal system, potentially causing unwarranted harm to his reputation. Carter's memorandum seeks both the dismissal of the complaint and the imposition of sanctions against the Plaintiff for filing a meritless lawsuit.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Microsoft Word - Motion to Dismiss FAC (SDNY) (15549242_8) (004).docx

In Case No. 1:24-cv-07975-AT, Defendant Shawn Carter, professionally known as Jay-Z, has filed a Memorandum of Law supporting his motion to dismiss the Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint. Carter argues that the Plaintiff's allegations lack sufficient legal basis and fail to meet the necessary pleading standards required to proceed with the case. He contends that the complaint does not present concrete facts to substantiate the claims made against him, rendering the lawsuit legally deficient.Furthermore, Carter emphasizes that the Plaintiff's complaint is not only baseless but also frivolous, warranting dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11. He asserts that the allegations are unfounded and appear to be an attempt to misuse the legal system, potentially causing unwarranted harm to his reputation. Carter's memorandum seeks both the dismissal of the complaint and the imposition of sanctions against the Plaintiff for filing a meritless lawsuit.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Microsoft Word - Motion to Dismiss FAC (SDNY) (15549242_8) (004).docx

Bei neuen Verhandlungen über eine Waffenruhe will die russische Seite ein Memorandum übergeben. Ukrainische Beobachter sehen darin altbekannte Positionen und Forderungen des Angreifers. Es werden keine Fortschritte bei den Gesprächen erwartet. Kellermann, Florian www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de, Studio 9

Diddy has fired back at Joi Dickerson Neal and her allegations against him and in this episode, we are going to get a look at what Diddy had to say.   A "Memorandum of Law in Support of Defendants' Partial Motion to Dismiss the Complaint" is a legal document filed by defendants in a lawsuit. Let's break down what each component means:Memorandum of Law: This is a written legal document that presents arguments and supporting authorities (such as statutes, regulations, and case law) in support of a specific legal position. It is used to persuade the court to rule in favor of the party presenting the memorandum.Defendants' Partial Motion to Dismiss: A motion to dismiss is a request made by one party in a lawsuit to terminate the case before it goes to trial. In this case, the defendants are asking the court to dismiss only certain parts of the complaint filed against them. This motion is "partial" because it seeks dismissal of only some claims or allegations, rather than the entire complaint.The Complaint: This refers to the initial document filed by the plaintiff(s) in a lawsuit, which outlines the claims and allegations against the defendant(s). The defendants' motion to dismiss is a response to the complaint, arguing that some or all of the claims in the complaint should be dismissed for various reasons, such as failure to state a legal claim, lack of jurisdiction, or other deficiencies in the complaint.So, the "Memorandum of Law in Support of Defendants' Partial Motion to Dismiss the Complaint" would be a document prepared by the defendants' legal team that lays out the legal arguments and authorities supporting their request to dismiss certain parts of the complaint. It would likely include analysis of relevant case law, statutes, and legal principles to demonstrate why the court should grant their motion to dismiss.(commercial at 10:34)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:diddy-motion.pdf (documentcloud.org)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Diddy has fired back at Joi Dickerson Neal and her allegations against him and in this episode, we are going to get a look at what Diddy had to say.   A "Memorandum of Law in Support of Defendants' Partial Motion to Dismiss the Complaint" is a legal document filed by defendants in a lawsuit. Let's break down what each component means:Memorandum of Law: This is a written legal document that presents arguments and supporting authorities (such as statutes, regulations, and case law) in support of a specific legal position. It is used to persuade the court to rule in favor of the party presenting the memorandum.Defendants' Partial Motion to Dismiss: A motion to dismiss is a request made by one party in a lawsuit to terminate the case before it goes to trial. In this case, the defendants are asking the court to dismiss only certain parts of the complaint filed against them. This motion is "partial" because it seeks dismissal of only some claims or allegations, rather than the entire complaint.The Complaint: This refers to the initial document filed by the plaintiff(s) in a lawsuit, which outlines the claims and allegations against the defendant(s). The defendants' motion to dismiss is a response to the complaint, arguing that some or all of the claims in the complaint should be dismissed for various reasons, such as failure to state a legal claim, lack of jurisdiction, or other deficiencies in the complaint.So, the "Memorandum of Law in Support of Defendants' Partial Motion to Dismiss the Complaint" would be a document prepared by the defendants' legal team that lays out the legal arguments and authorities supporting their request to dismiss certain parts of the complaint. It would likely include analysis of relevant case law, statutes, and legal principles to demonstrate why the court should grant their motion to dismiss.(commercial at 10:34)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:diddy-motion.pdf (documentcloud.org)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Die Geschichte verzeihe weder Zaudern noch Zögern, hat Ursula von der Leyen gerade bei der Verleihung des Karlspreises gesagt. Host Kai Küstner beleuchtet die Frage, ob die neue Bundesregierung sowohl bei der militärischen Stärkung Europas als auch bei der Unterstützung der Ukraine nun eine Führungsrolle zu übernehmen bereit ist. Der Berlin-Besuch des ukrainischen Präsidenten Selenskyj lieferte erste Hinweise, wie gemeinsame Rüstungsprojekte für weitreichende Waffen aussehen könnten. Stefan Niemann schildert die Lage an der Front, berichtet von einer möglichen russischen Offensive im Raum Sumy und beschreibt, warum ein neuer Drohnentyp mit Glasfaseranbindung für die ukrainische Landesverteidigung besonders bedrohlich ist. Eher gering sind die Erwartungen in Kiew vor den für Montag geplanten erneuten russisch-ukrainischen Gesprächen in Istanbul – zumal Moskau sich weigert, sein Memorandum vorab vorzulegen. Der Militärökonom an der Militärakademie ETH Zürich, Marcus Keupp, nennt die Gespräche "Scheinverhandlungen". Russland werde erst dann mit ernsthaften Absichten an den Verhandlungstisch treten, wenn es vor der Perspektive stehe, den Krieg zu verlieren. Nötig sei militärischer Druck. Das Einzige, was Russland respektiere, seien Mut und Stärke. Wenn Europa dies anerkennen würde, müsste es "politisch völlig anders auftreten". Im Interview mit Anna Engelke erklärt Keupp, wie realistisch es ist, dass Russland in wenigen Jahren einen NATO-Staat angreift, warum man keine Angst vor russischen Atomwaffen haben sollte und wie es um Russlands Wirtschaftskraft steht. Der Militärökonom wirft auch einen Blick auf die Einsatzfähigkeit der Bundeswehr. Lob und Kritik, alles bitte per Mail an streitkraefte@ndr.de Alle Folgen von "Streitkräfte und Strategien" https://www.ndr.de/nachrichten/info/podcast2998.html Das Interview mit Militärökonom Marcus Matthias Keupp https://www.ndr.de/nachrichten/info/audio1883786.html Zum Besuch des ukrainischen Präsidenten bei Merz: https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/selenskyj-merz-berlin-100.html „Spurwechsel - die neue Weltordnung nach Russlands Krieg“ - Marcus Keupp https://bastei-luebbe.de/Buecher/Sachbuecher/Spurwechsel/9783869951539 Podcast-Tipp: Weltspiegel-Podcast "Migration in Dänemark: Härte statt Hygge" https://1.ard.de/weltspiegel_podcast?cp=sus

Il tribunale federale statunitense per il commercio internazionale ha giudicato illegittimi i dazi che l'amministrazione Trump ha imposto ricorrendo all'International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Ne parliamo con Claudio Dordi, professore di Diritto internazionale all'Università Bocconi.Elon Musk ha annunciato ieri con un post su X la fine del suo impegno a guida del dipartimento DOGE. Ne parliamo con Mario Del Pero, Professore a Sciences Po, Parigi.Il Ministro degli esteri russo Sergey Lavrov ha proposto di tenere il secondo round di colloqui diretti tra delegazione russa e quella ucraina a Istanbul il 2 giugno. Con l'occasione, Mosca presenterà il Memorandum di pace che Kiev aveva chiesto di poter visionare in anticipo. Ne parliamo Antonella Scott, giornalista del Sole 24Ore esperta di Russia.

Bei einem geplanten Gespräch in Istanbul will Russland ihr „Memorandum“ für eine Beendigung des Ukraine-Konflikts präsentieren.

In the Memorandum of Law supporting Sean Combs's Motion to Dismiss Count Three of the Superseding Indictment in case 1:24-cr-00542-AS, the defense argues that the charge is legally insufficient and fails to meet the required statutory elements. They contend that the indictment lacks specificity, particularly in detailing the alleged conduct and its connection to the purported criminal enterprise. Furthermore, the defense asserts that the prosecution's interpretation of the statute is overly broad, potentially criminalizing behavior beyond the law's intent. They emphasize that without clear evidence linking Combs to the alleged illegal activities in Count Three, the charge should be dismissed to uphold the principles of fair notice and due process.to contact  me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.153.0.pdf

A memorandum in law in opposition to a motion for sanctions is a legal document filed by a party in a lawsuit to argue against the imposition of sanctions that have been requested by the opposing party. Here are the key components and purposes of this document:Purpose:Counter Argument: The memorandum aims to counter the claims made in the motion for sanctions, presenting reasons why the court should not grant the requested sanctions.Defense: It serves as a defense against allegations of improper conduct or violations of court rules or orders.Content:Introduction: An introduction that outlines the context and purpose of the memorandum.Statement of Facts: A section that provides a factual background, often challenging or clarifying the facts as presented in the motion for sanctions.Legal Arguments: Detailed legal arguments explaining why the motion for sanctions should be denied. This includes citing relevant laws, rules, and case precedents.Justification of Conduct: Explanation and justification of the actions or behavior that led to the motion for sanctions, demonstrating that there was no misconduct or that any alleged misconduct does not warrant sanctions.Conclusion: A conclusion summarizing the main points and reiterating the request for the court to deny the motion for sanctions.Common Arguments:Compliance: Demonstrating that the party has complied with all court orders and procedural rules.Lack of Harm: Arguing that the alleged conduct did not cause any significant harm or prejudice to the opposing party.Good Faith: Showing that any actions taken were in good faith and not intended to obstruct or delay the legal process.Proportionality: Arguing that the proposed sanctions are disproportionate to the alleged misconduct.Supporting Evidence:The memorandum may include supporting evidence such as affidavits, exhibits, and other documents that back up the arguments presented.Legal Standards:It will address the legal standards that the court must apply when deciding on a motion for sanctions, explaining why those standards have not been met in this case.In this episode, we dive back into the Diddy situation and this time we are taking a look at Tyrone Blackburn's memorandum in law in opposition to sanctions.(commercial at 8:13)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.616406.58.0.pdf (courtlistener.com)

A memorandum in law in opposition to a motion for sanctions is a legal document filed by a party in a lawsuit to argue against the imposition of sanctions that have been requested by the opposing party. Here are the key components and purposes of this document:Purpose:Counter Argument: The memorandum aims to counter the claims made in the motion for sanctions, presenting reasons why the court should not grant the requested sanctions.Defense: It serves as a defense against allegations of improper conduct or violations of court rules or orders.Content:Introduction: An introduction that outlines the context and purpose of the memorandum.Statement of Facts: A section that provides a factual background, often challenging or clarifying the facts as presented in the motion for sanctions.Legal Arguments: Detailed legal arguments explaining why the motion for sanctions should be denied. This includes citing relevant laws, rules, and case precedents.Justification of Conduct: Explanation and justification of the actions or behavior that led to the motion for sanctions, demonstrating that there was no misconduct or that any alleged misconduct does not warrant sanctions.Conclusion: A conclusion summarizing the main points and reiterating the request for the court to deny the motion for sanctions.Common Arguments:Compliance: Demonstrating that the party has complied with all court orders and procedural rules.Lack of Harm: Arguing that the alleged conduct did not cause any significant harm or prejudice to the opposing party.Good Faith: Showing that any actions taken were in good faith and not intended to obstruct or delay the legal process.Proportionality: Arguing that the proposed sanctions are disproportionate to the alleged misconduct.Supporting Evidence:The memorandum may include supporting evidence such as affidavits, exhibits, and other documents that back up the arguments presented.Legal Standards:It will address the legal standards that the court must apply when deciding on a motion for sanctions, explaining why those standards have not been met in this case.In this episode, we dive back into the Diddy situation and this time we are taking a look at Tyrone Blackburn's memorandum in law in opposition to sanctions.(commercial at 8:13)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.616406.58.0.pdf (courtlistener.com)

A memorandum in law in opposition to a motion for sanctions is a legal document filed by a party in a lawsuit to argue against the imposition of sanctions that have been requested by the opposing party. Here are the key components and purposes of this document:Purpose:Counter Argument: The memorandum aims to counter the claims made in the motion for sanctions, presenting reasons why the court should not grant the requested sanctions.Defense: It serves as a defense against allegations of improper conduct or violations of court rules or orders.Content:Introduction: An introduction that outlines the context and purpose of the memorandum.Statement of Facts: A section that provides a factual background, often challenging or clarifying the facts as presented in the motion for sanctions.Legal Arguments: Detailed legal arguments explaining why the motion for sanctions should be denied. This includes citing relevant laws, rules, and case precedents.Justification of Conduct: Explanation and justification of the actions or behavior that led to the motion for sanctions, demonstrating that there was no misconduct or that any alleged misconduct does not warrant sanctions.Conclusion: A conclusion summarizing the main points and reiterating the request for the court to deny the motion for sanctions.Common Arguments:Compliance: Demonstrating that the party has complied with all court orders and procedural rules.Lack of Harm: Arguing that the alleged conduct did not cause any significant harm or prejudice to the opposing party.Good Faith: Showing that any actions taken were in good faith and not intended to obstruct or delay the legal process.Proportionality: Arguing that the proposed sanctions are disproportionate to the alleged misconduct.Supporting Evidence:The memorandum may include supporting evidence such as affidavits, exhibits, and other documents that back up the arguments presented.Legal Standards:It will address the legal standards that the court must apply when deciding on a motion for sanctions, explaining why those standards have not been met in this case.In this episode, we dive back into the Diddy situation and this time we are taking a look at Tyrone Blackburn's memorandum in law in opposition to sanctions.(commercial at 8:13)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.616406.58.0.pdf (courtlistener.com)

A memorandum in law in opposition to a motion for sanctions is a legal document filed by a party in a lawsuit to argue against the imposition of sanctions that have been requested by the opposing party. Here are the key components and purposes of this document:Purpose:Counter Argument: The memorandum aims to counter the claims made in the motion for sanctions, presenting reasons why the court should not grant the requested sanctions.Defense: It serves as a defense against allegations of improper conduct or violations of court rules or orders.Content:Introduction: An introduction that outlines the context and purpose of the memorandum.Statement of Facts: A section that provides a factual background, often challenging or clarifying the facts as presented in the motion for sanctions.Legal Arguments: Detailed legal arguments explaining why the motion for sanctions should be denied. This includes citing relevant laws, rules, and case precedents.Justification of Conduct: Explanation and justification of the actions or behavior that led to the motion for sanctions, demonstrating that there was no misconduct or that any alleged misconduct does not warrant sanctions.Conclusion: A conclusion summarizing the main points and reiterating the request for the court to deny the motion for sanctions.Common Arguments:Compliance: Demonstrating that the party has complied with all court orders and procedural rules.Lack of Harm: Arguing that the alleged conduct did not cause any significant harm or prejudice to the opposing party.Good Faith: Showing that any actions taken were in good faith and not intended to obstruct or delay the legal process.Proportionality: Arguing that the proposed sanctions are disproportionate to the alleged misconduct.Supporting Evidence:The memorandum may include supporting evidence such as affidavits, exhibits, and other documents that back up the arguments presented.Legal Standards:It will address the legal standards that the court must apply when deciding on a motion for sanctions, explaining why those standards have not been met in this case.In this episode, we dive back into the Diddy situation and this time we are taking a look at Tyrone Blackburn's memorandum in law in opposition to sanctions.(commercial at 8:13)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.616406.58.0.pdf (courtlistener.com)

A memorandum in law in opposition to a motion for sanctions is a legal document filed by a party in a lawsuit to argue against the imposition of sanctions that have been requested by the opposing party. Here are the key components and purposes of this document:Purpose:Counter Argument: The memorandum aims to counter the claims made in the motion for sanctions, presenting reasons why the court should not grant the requested sanctions.Defense: It serves as a defense against allegations of improper conduct or violations of court rules or orders.Content:Introduction: An introduction that outlines the context and purpose of the memorandum.Statement of Facts: A section that provides a factual background, often challenging or clarifying the facts as presented in the motion for sanctions.Legal Arguments: Detailed legal arguments explaining why the motion for sanctions should be denied. This includes citing relevant laws, rules, and case precedents.Justification of Conduct: Explanation and justification of the actions or behavior that led to the motion for sanctions, demonstrating that there was no misconduct or that any alleged misconduct does not warrant sanctions.Conclusion: A conclusion summarizing the main points and reiterating the request for the court to deny the motion for sanctions.Common Arguments:Compliance: Demonstrating that the party has complied with all court orders and procedural rules.Lack of Harm: Arguing that the alleged conduct did not cause any significant harm or prejudice to the opposing party.Good Faith: Showing that any actions taken were in good faith and not intended to obstruct or delay the legal process.Proportionality: Arguing that the proposed sanctions are disproportionate to the alleged misconduct.Supporting Evidence:The memorandum may include supporting evidence such as affidavits, exhibits, and other documents that back up the arguments presented.Legal Standards:It will address the legal standards that the court must apply when deciding on a motion for sanctions, explaining why those standards have not been met in this case.In this episode, we dive back into the Diddy situation and this time we are taking a look at Tyrone Blackburn's memorandum in law in opposition to sanctions.(commercial at 8:13)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.616406.58.0.pdf (courtlistener.com)

A memorandum in law in opposition to a motion for sanctions is a legal document filed by a party in a lawsuit to argue against the imposition of sanctions that have been requested by the opposing party. Here are the key components and purposes of this document:Purpose:Counter Argument: The memorandum aims to counter the claims made in the motion for sanctions, presenting reasons why the court should not grant the requested sanctions.Defense: It serves as a defense against allegations of improper conduct or violations of court rules or orders.Content:Introduction: An introduction that outlines the context and purpose of the memorandum.Statement of Facts: A section that provides a factual background, often challenging or clarifying the facts as presented in the motion for sanctions.Legal Arguments: Detailed legal arguments explaining why the motion for sanctions should be denied. This includes citing relevant laws, rules, and case precedents.Justification of Conduct: Explanation and justification of the actions or behavior that led to the motion for sanctions, demonstrating that there was no misconduct or that any alleged misconduct does not warrant sanctions.Conclusion: A conclusion summarizing the main points and reiterating the request for the court to deny the motion for sanctions.Common Arguments:Compliance: Demonstrating that the party has complied with all court orders and procedural rules.Lack of Harm: Arguing that the alleged conduct did not cause any significant harm or prejudice to the opposing party.Good Faith: Showing that any actions taken were in good faith and not intended to obstruct or delay the legal process.Proportionality: Arguing that the proposed sanctions are disproportionate to the alleged misconduct.Supporting Evidence:The memorandum may include supporting evidence such as affidavits, exhibits, and other documents that back up the arguments presented.Legal Standards:It will address the legal standards that the court must apply when deciding on a motion for sanctions, explaining why those standards have not been met in this case.In this episode, we dive back into the Diddy situation and this time we are taking a look at Tyrone Blackburn's memorandum in law in opposition to sanctions.(commercial at 8:13)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.616406.58.0.pdf (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

A memorandum in law in opposition to a motion for sanctions is a legal document filed by a party in a lawsuit to argue against the imposition of sanctions that have been requested by the opposing party. Here are the key components and purposes of this document:Purpose:Counter Argument: The memorandum aims to counter the claims made in the motion for sanctions, presenting reasons why the court should not grant the requested sanctions.Defense: It serves as a defense against allegations of improper conduct or violations of court rules or orders.Content:Introduction: An introduction that outlines the context and purpose of the memorandum.Statement of Facts: A section that provides a factual background, often challenging or clarifying the facts as presented in the motion for sanctions.Legal Arguments: Detailed legal arguments explaining why the motion for sanctions should be denied. This includes citing relevant laws, rules, and case precedents.Justification of Conduct: Explanation and justification of the actions or behavior that led to the motion for sanctions, demonstrating that there was no misconduct or that any alleged misconduct does not warrant sanctions.Conclusion: A conclusion summarizing the main points and reiterating the request for the court to deny the motion for sanctions.Common Arguments:Compliance: Demonstrating that the party has complied with all court orders and procedural rules.Lack of Harm: Arguing that the alleged conduct did not cause any significant harm or prejudice to the opposing party.Good Faith: Showing that any actions taken were in good faith and not intended to obstruct or delay the legal process.Proportionality: Arguing that the proposed sanctions are disproportionate to the alleged misconduct.Supporting Evidence:The memorandum may include supporting evidence such as affidavits, exhibits, and other documents that back up the arguments presented.Legal Standards:It will address the legal standards that the court must apply when deciding on a motion for sanctions, explaining why those standards have not been met in this case.In this episode, we dive back into the Diddy situation and this time we are taking a look at Tyrone Blackburn's memorandum in law in opposition to sanctions.(commercial at 8:13)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.616406.58.0.pdf (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

A memorandum in law in opposition to a motion for sanctions is a legal document filed by a party in a lawsuit to argue against the imposition of sanctions that have been requested by the opposing party. Here are the key components and purposes of this document:Purpose:Counter Argument: The memorandum aims to counter the claims made in the motion for sanctions, presenting reasons why the court should not grant the requested sanctions.Defense: It serves as a defense against allegations of improper conduct or violations of court rules or orders.Content:Introduction: An introduction that outlines the context and purpose of the memorandum.Statement of Facts: A section that provides a factual background, often challenging or clarifying the facts as presented in the motion for sanctions.Legal Arguments: Detailed legal arguments explaining why the motion for sanctions should be denied. This includes citing relevant laws, rules, and case precedents.Justification of Conduct: Explanation and justification of the actions or behavior that led to the motion for sanctions, demonstrating that there was no misconduct or that any alleged misconduct does not warrant sanctions.Conclusion: A conclusion summarizing the main points and reiterating the request for the court to deny the motion for sanctions.Common Arguments:Compliance: Demonstrating that the party has complied with all court orders and procedural rules.Lack of Harm: Arguing that the alleged conduct did not cause any significant harm or prejudice to the opposing party.Good Faith: Showing that any actions taken were in good faith and not intended to obstruct or delay the legal process.Proportionality: Arguing that the proposed sanctions are disproportionate to the alleged misconduct.Supporting Evidence:The memorandum may include supporting evidence such as affidavits, exhibits, and other documents that back up the arguments presented.Legal Standards:It will address the legal standards that the court must apply when deciding on a motion for sanctions, explaining why those standards have not been met in this case.In this episode, we dive back into the Diddy situation and this time we are taking a look at Tyrone Blackburn's memorandum in law in opposition to sanctions.(commercial at 8:13)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.616406.58.0.pdf (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

A memorandum in law in opposition to a motion for sanctions is a legal document filed by a party in a lawsuit to argue against the imposition of sanctions that have been requested by the opposing party. Here are the key components and purposes of this document:Purpose:Counter Argument: The memorandum aims to counter the claims made in the motion for sanctions, presenting reasons why the court should not grant the requested sanctions.Defense: It serves as a defense against allegations of improper conduct or violations of court rules or orders.Content:Introduction: An introduction that outlines the context and purpose of the memorandum.Statement of Facts: A section that provides a factual background, often challenging or clarifying the facts as presented in the motion for sanctions.Legal Arguments: Detailed legal arguments explaining why the motion for sanctions should be denied. This includes citing relevant laws, rules, and case precedents.Justification of Conduct: Explanation and justification of the actions or behavior that led to the motion for sanctions, demonstrating that there was no misconduct or that any alleged misconduct does not warrant sanctions.Conclusion: A conclusion summarizing the main points and reiterating the request for the court to deny the motion for sanctions.Common Arguments:Compliance: Demonstrating that the party has complied with all court orders and procedural rules.Lack of Harm: Arguing that the alleged conduct did not cause any significant harm or prejudice to the opposing party.Good Faith: Showing that any actions taken were in good faith and not intended to obstruct or delay the legal process.Proportionality: Arguing that the proposed sanctions are disproportionate to the alleged misconduct.Supporting Evidence:The memorandum may include supporting evidence such as affidavits, exhibits, and other documents that back up the arguments presented.Legal Standards:It will address the legal standards that the court must apply when deciding on a motion for sanctions, explaining why those standards have not been met in this case.In this episode, we dive back into the Diddy situation and this time we are taking a look at Tyrone Blackburn's memorandum in law in opposition to sanctions.(commercial at 8:13)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.616406.58.0.pdf (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

A memorandum in law in opposition to a motion for sanctions is a legal document filed by a party in a lawsuit to argue against the imposition of sanctions that have been requested by the opposing party. Here are the key components and purposes of this document:Purpose:Counter Argument: The memorandum aims to counter the claims made in the motion for sanctions, presenting reasons why the court should not grant the requested sanctions.Defense: It serves as a defense against allegations of improper conduct or violations of court rules or orders.Content:Introduction: An introduction that outlines the context and purpose of the memorandum.Statement of Facts: A section that provides a factual background, often challenging or clarifying the facts as presented in the motion for sanctions.Legal Arguments: Detailed legal arguments explaining why the motion for sanctions should be denied. This includes citing relevant laws, rules, and case precedents.Justification of Conduct: Explanation and justification of the actions or behavior that led to the motion for sanctions, demonstrating that there was no misconduct or that any alleged misconduct does not warrant sanctions.Conclusion: A conclusion summarizing the main points and reiterating the request for the court to deny the motion for sanctions.Common Arguments:Compliance: Demonstrating that the party has complied with all court orders and procedural rules.Lack of Harm: Arguing that the alleged conduct did not cause any significant harm or prejudice to the opposing party.Good Faith: Showing that any actions taken were in good faith and not intended to obstruct or delay the legal process.Proportionality: Arguing that the proposed sanctions are disproportionate to the alleged misconduct.Supporting Evidence:The memorandum may include supporting evidence such as affidavits, exhibits, and other documents that back up the arguments presented.Legal Standards:It will address the legal standards that the court must apply when deciding on a motion for sanctions, explaining why those standards have not been met in this case.In this episode, we dive back into the Diddy situation and this time we are taking a look at Tyrone Blackburn's memorandum in law in opposition to sanctions.(commercial at 8:13)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.616406.58.0.pdf (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

A memorandum in law in opposition to a motion for sanctions is a legal document filed by a party in a lawsuit to argue against the imposition of sanctions that have been requested by the opposing party. Here are the key components and purposes of this document:Purpose:Counter Argument: The memorandum aims to counter the claims made in the motion for sanctions, presenting reasons why the court should not grant the requested sanctions.Defense: It serves as a defense against allegations of improper conduct or violations of court rules or orders.Content:Introduction: An introduction that outlines the context and purpose of the memorandum.Statement of Facts: A section that provides a factual background, often challenging or clarifying the facts as presented in the motion for sanctions.Legal Arguments: Detailed legal arguments explaining why the motion for sanctions should be denied. This includes citing relevant laws, rules, and case precedents.Justification of Conduct: Explanation and justification of the actions or behavior that led to the motion for sanctions, demonstrating that there was no misconduct or that any alleged misconduct does not warrant sanctions.Conclusion: A conclusion summarizing the main points and reiterating the request for the court to deny the motion for sanctions.Common Arguments:Compliance: Demonstrating that the party has complied with all court orders and procedural rules.Lack of Harm: Arguing that the alleged conduct did not cause any significant harm or prejudice to the opposing party.Good Faith: Showing that any actions taken were in good faith and not intended to obstruct or delay the legal process.Proportionality: Arguing that the proposed sanctions are disproportionate to the alleged misconduct.Supporting Evidence:The memorandum may include supporting evidence such as affidavits, exhibits, and other documents that back up the arguments presented.Legal Standards:It will address the legal standards that the court must apply when deciding on a motion for sanctions, explaining why those standards have not been met in this case.In this episode, we dive back into the Diddy situation and this time we are taking a look at Tyrone Blackburn's memorandum in law in opposition to sanctions.(commercial at 8:13)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.616406.58.0.pdf (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

memorandum of law in support of a motion for sanctions is a legal document submitted to a court that outlines the legal arguments and relevant facts supporting a party's request for the court to impose penalties or corrective measures against an opposing party for misconduct or violation of court rules. Here's a detailed breakdown of what it typically includes:Structure and Content:Title and Caption:The document begins with a title that clearly states it is a "Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Sanctions."The caption includes the name of the court, the parties involved in the case, the case number, and other identifying information.Introduction:A brief overview of the nature of the motion and the sanctions being requested.A summary of the key points that will be elaborated on in the memorandum.Background and Factual Context:A detailed explanation of the facts that led to the motion for sanctions.Specific instances of the opposing party's misconduct or violation of court rules.Any previous warnings or attempts to resolve the issue without court intervention.Legal Standard:An outline of the legal standards and rules governing sanctions (e.g., Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11, Rule 37, or other applicable state or federal rules).Discussion of the authority and discretion of the court to impose sanctions under these rules.Argument:A comprehensive legal argument detailing why sanctions are appropriate in this case.Citation of relevant case law, statutes, and rules that support the request for sanctions.Analysis of how the opposing party's conduct fits within the legal framework warranting sanctions.Discussion of the specific type of sanctions being sought (e.g., monetary penalties, dismissal of claims, striking of pleadings, etc.).Conclusion:A concise statement reiterating the request for sanctions.A summary of the key reasons the court should grant the motion.Certificate of Service:A statement verifying that the memorandum and the motion for sanctions have been properly served on the opposing party.Purpose and Importance:Accountability: It seeks to hold the opposing party accountable for improper conduct, such as frivolous filings, failure to comply with discovery obligations, or other abuses of the judicial process.Deterrence: Imposing sanctions serves to deter similar conduct in the future by the offending party or others.Compensation: Sanctions can compensate the moving party for expenses incurred due to the misconduct, such as attorney fees and costs.Efficiency: It helps maintain the integrity and efficiency of the judicial process by discouraging actions that waste court time and resources.(commercial at 8:31)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:2024.05.17 MOL ISO Motion for Sanctions(8677390.10) (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

memorandum of law in support of a motion for sanctions is a legal document submitted to a court that outlines the legal arguments and relevant facts supporting a party's request for the court to impose penalties or corrective measures against an opposing party for misconduct or violation of court rules. Here's a detailed breakdown of what it typically includes:Structure and Content:Title and Caption:The document begins with a title that clearly states it is a "Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Sanctions."The caption includes the name of the court, the parties involved in the case, the case number, and other identifying information.Introduction:A brief overview of the nature of the motion and the sanctions being requested.A summary of the key points that will be elaborated on in the memorandum.Background and Factual Context:A detailed explanation of the facts that led to the motion for sanctions.Specific instances of the opposing party's misconduct or violation of court rules.Any previous warnings or attempts to resolve the issue without court intervention.Legal Standard:An outline of the legal standards and rules governing sanctions (e.g., Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11, Rule 37, or other applicable state or federal rules).Discussion of the authority and discretion of the court to impose sanctions under these rules.Argument:A comprehensive legal argument detailing why sanctions are appropriate in this case.Citation of relevant case law, statutes, and rules that support the request for sanctions.Analysis of how the opposing party's conduct fits within the legal framework warranting sanctions.Discussion of the specific type of sanctions being sought (e.g., monetary penalties, dismissal of claims, striking of pleadings, etc.).Conclusion:A concise statement reiterating the request for sanctions.A summary of the key reasons the court should grant the motion.Certificate of Service:A statement verifying that the memorandum and the motion for sanctions have been properly served on the opposing party.Purpose and Importance:Accountability: It seeks to hold the opposing party accountable for improper conduct, such as frivolous filings, failure to comply with discovery obligations, or other abuses of the judicial process.Deterrence: Imposing sanctions serves to deter similar conduct in the future by the offending party or others.Compensation: Sanctions can compensate the moving party for expenses incurred due to the misconduct, such as attorney fees and costs.Efficiency: It helps maintain the integrity and efficiency of the judicial process by discouraging actions that waste court time and resources.(commercial at 8:31)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:2024.05.17 MOL ISO Motion for Sanctions(8677390.10) (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

memorandum of law in support of a motion for sanctions is a legal document submitted to a court that outlines the legal arguments and relevant facts supporting a party's request for the court to impose penalties or corrective measures against an opposing party for misconduct or violation of court rules. Here's a detailed breakdown of what it typically includes:Structure and Content:Title and Caption:The document begins with a title that clearly states it is a "Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Sanctions."The caption includes the name of the court, the parties involved in the case, the case number, and other identifying information.Introduction:A brief overview of the nature of the motion and the sanctions being requested.A summary of the key points that will be elaborated on in the memorandum.Background and Factual Context:A detailed explanation of the facts that led to the motion for sanctions.Specific instances of the opposing party's misconduct or violation of court rules.Any previous warnings or attempts to resolve the issue without court intervention.Legal Standard:An outline of the legal standards and rules governing sanctions (e.g., Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11, Rule 37, or other applicable state or federal rules).Discussion of the authority and discretion of the court to impose sanctions under these rules.Argument:A comprehensive legal argument detailing why sanctions are appropriate in this case.Citation of relevant case law, statutes, and rules that support the request for sanctions.Analysis of how the opposing party's conduct fits within the legal framework warranting sanctions.Discussion of the specific type of sanctions being sought (e.g., monetary penalties, dismissal of claims, striking of pleadings, etc.).Conclusion:A concise statement reiterating the request for sanctions.A summary of the key reasons the court should grant the motion.Certificate of Service:A statement verifying that the memorandum and the motion for sanctions have been properly served on the opposing party.Purpose and Importance:Accountability: It seeks to hold the opposing party accountable for improper conduct, such as frivolous filings, failure to comply with discovery obligations, or other abuses of the judicial process.Deterrence: Imposing sanctions serves to deter similar conduct in the future by the offending party or others.Compensation: Sanctions can compensate the moving party for expenses incurred due to the misconduct, such as attorney fees and costs.Efficiency: It helps maintain the integrity and efficiency of the judicial process by discouraging actions that waste court time and resources.(commercial at 8:31)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:2024.05.17 MOL ISO Motion for Sanctions(8677390.10) (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

For review:1.  Updated Info on Strike that Targeted Hamas Leader.  The strike that targeted and possibly eliminated Hamas leader Muhammad Sinwar in Gaza earlier this month was made possible when the terror chief made the rare mistake of moving without a defensive “hostage belt” protecting him, according to a Friday report. 2.  Israel will receive a “devastating and decisive response” if it attacks Iran, the IRGC said on Thursday as Tehran vowed to defend its nuclear sites, days after two separate reports suggested Israel was making preparations to strike Iranian nuclear facilities. 3.  Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Friday that Tehran's discussions with the United States over its nuclear program were “complicated,” as the fifth round of talks concluded in Rome.  Asked about the negotiations, US State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said “we believe that we are going to succeed” in the talks and in Washington's push for no enrichment. 4. Russia & Ukraine Swap 390 Prisoners; More Expected in Coming Days. Russia will be ready to hand Ukraine a draft document outlining conditions for a long-term peace agreement once a prisoner exchange is completed, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Friday. 5.  A former leading Ukrainian official has been shot dead outside an American school in the Spanish capital Madrid, authorities have confirmed. 6.  German defense firm Rheinmetall and India's Reliance Defence announced a “strategic partnership” on ammunition supplies today after officials from both companies signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU).  A future production base in the Watad Industrial Area of Ratnagiri, will become one of the largest in South Asia and hold the capacity to manufacture up to 200,000 artillery shells, 10,000 tons of explosives and 2,000 tons of propellants annually. 7.  General Atomics is in talks to sell Saudi Arabia up to 200 MQ-9 unmanned systems, according to a company spokesperson. The discussions are part of the $142 billion in defense deals announced by President Donald Trump during last week's visit to the Gulf Region.8. USAF Test Launches Minuteman III Missile. Air Force Global Strike Command launched the Minuteman III at 12:01 Pacific time from Vandenberg Space Force Base in California. It flew about 4,200 miles, at a speed of more than 15,000 miles per hour, to a test site at the Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands.  The missile was randomly selected and came from Malmstrom Air Force Base in Montana.9. Article from Military.com: Summary of Transformative changes to the Army. 10. US Aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman (CVN-75) sailed through the Strait of Gibraltar early this morning as it headed home following an eight-month deployment. The carrier is westbound in the Atlantic Ocean, a Navy official confirmed to USNI News Friday. 11. US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth will travel to the Shangri-La Dialogue, the largest defense conference in Asia, where he will deliver a speech on the Pentagon's approach to the region under the second Trump administration. The 2025 Shangri-La Dialogue event will take place in Singapore on 30 May–1 June. 

Cornelia Richter ist am Nachmittag in Wien zur evangelisch-lutherischen Bischöfin gewählt worden ++ Vor Kurzem hat der Besuch des Chefs der türkischen Religionsbehörde Diyanet, Ali Erbas, bei der IGGÖ für Aufregung gesorgt ++ Papst Leo XIV. hat die italienische Ordensfrau Tiziana Merletti zur Nummer zwei in der Ordensbehörde erhobenModeration: Susanne Krischkegesendet in Ö1 am 23.05.2025

PHARR, TEXAS - Victor Perez, president of Pharr Economic Development Corporation, has welcomed COMCE to the city.COMCE stands for Consejo Empresarial Mexicano de Comercio Exterior, Inversión y Tecnología (Mexican Business Council for Foreign Trade, Investment and Technology). It is a non-profit organization representing the Mexican private sector in international affairs, particularly focusing on promoting foreign trade, investment, and technology. COMCE Nacional has announced a new satellite office in Pharr at the Pharr Global Business Hub. Its leaders did so during a two-day tour of the Pharr area. The trip included a visit to the Pharr International Bridge and the Mexican Consulate's Office in McAllen, along with meetings with the Food & Drug Administration (FDA), Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and UT-Rio Grande Valley.“We signed a Memorandum of Understanding with COMCE National a couple of months back. And when we sign an MOU we want to make sure that we follow up. We want to make sure that we continue the collaboration, we continue the communications with those entities or organizations that we have signed an MOU with,” Perez told Ron Whitlock Reports.“So, today, we're officially designating the Pharr Global Business Hub as a headquarters of COMCE National in the Rio Grande Valley.”Asked why the MOU is important, Perez said: “Because the Pharr Global Business Park is a key component, a commercial gateway into the US market, into the Texas market.”Perez said he expects other foreign entities to sign MOUs with Pharr EDC in order to make use of the Pharr Global Business Hub.“The word is getting around, on both sides of the border, that Pharr is the place to be,” Perez said.“We are moving forward rapidly. And with the new bridge coming in, we expect more business, more trade, and more investors.”Go to www.riograndeguardian.com to read the latest border news stories and watch the latest news videos.

The US and Saudi Arabia say they have signed commercial deals worth $142bn during Donald Trump's ongoing trip in the Middle East. Also on the programme, the head of the UN agency for Palestinians has told the BBC that Israel's blockade of food deliveries to Palestinians inside Gaza constitutes a war crime; and, a self-declared "king" of Germany and three of his senior "subjects" have been arrested and their group banned for attempting to overthrow the state.(Photo: U.S. President Donald Trump and Saudi Crown Prince and Prime Minister Mohammed Bin Salman exchange a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) during a ceremony at the Royal Court in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, May 13, 2025. REUTERS/Brian Snyder)

Tetanus has probably been around for most of human history, or even longer. But it’s preventable today thanks to vaccines. Research: "Emil von Behring." Notable Scientists from 1900 to the Present, edited by Brigham Narins, Gale, 2008. Gale In Context: Science, link.gale.com/apps/doc/K1619001490/GPS?u=mlin_n_melpub&sid=bookmark-GPS&xid=464250e5. Accessed 17 Apr. 2025. Breasted, J.H., translator. “OIP 3. The Edwin Smith Surgical Papyrus, Volume 1: Hieroglyphic Transliteration, Translation, and Commentary.” Oxford University Press. 1930. Chalian, William. “An Essay on the History of Lockjaw.” Bulletin of the History of Medicine, FEBRUARY, 1940, Vol. 8, No. 2. Via JSTOR. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44446242 Emil von Behring: The founder of serum therapy. NobelPrize.org. Nobel Prize Outreach 2025. Thu. 17 Apr 2025. https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/medicine/1901/behring/article/ Galassi, Francesco Maria et al. “Tetanus: historical and palaeopathological aspects considering its current health impact.” Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene vol. 65,4 E580-E585. 31 Jan. 2025, doi:10.15167/2421-4248/jpmh2024.65.4.3376 George, Elizabeth K. “Tetanus (Clostridium tetani Infection).” StatPearls. January 2025. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK482484/ Hippocrates. “VI. Diseases, Internal Affections.” Harvard University Press. 1988. Jean-Marc Cavaillon, Historical links between toxinology and immunology, Pathogens and Disease, Volume 76, Issue 3, April 2018, fty019, https://doi.org/10.1093/femspd/fty019 Jones CE, Yusuf N, Ahmed B, Kassogue M, Wasley A, Kanu FA. Progress Toward Achieving and Sustaining Maternal and Neonatal Tetanus Elimination — Worldwide, 2000–2022. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2024;73:614–621. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm7328a1 Kaufmann, Stefan H E. “Remembering Emil von Behring: from Tetanus Treatment to Antibody Cooperation with Phagocytes.” mBio vol. 8,1 e00117-17. 28 Feb. 2017, doi:10.1128/mBio.00117-17 Kreston, Rebecca. “Tetanus, the Grinning Death.” Discover. 9/29/2015. https://www.discovermagazine.com/health/tetanus-the-grinning-death Milto, Lori De, and Leslie Mertz, PhD. "Tetanus." The Gale Encyclopedia of Public Health, edited by Brigham Narins, 2nd ed., vol. 2, Gale, 2020, pp. 1074-1076. Gale In Context: Environmental Studies, link.gale.com/apps/doc/CX7947900274/GPS?u=mlin_n_melpub&sid=bookmark-GPS&xid=a44bc544. Accessed 14 Apr. 2025. Milto, Lori De, and Leslie Mertz, PhD. "Tetanus." The Gale Encyclopedia of Public Health, edited by Brigham Narins, 2nd ed., vol. 2, Gale, 2020, pp. 1074-1076. Gale In Context: Environmental Studies, link.gale.com/apps/doc/CX7947900274/GPS?u=mlin_n_melpub&sid=bookmark-GPS&xid=a44bc544. Accessed 15 Apr. 2025. National Institutes of Health. “Tetanus.” https://history.nih.gov/display/history/Tetanus Ni, Maoshing. “The Yellow Emperor's Classic of Medicine: A New Translation of the Neijing Suwen with Commentary.” Shambhala. 1995. Smithsonian. “The Antibody Initiative: Battling Tetanus.” https://www.si.edu/spotlight/antibody-initiative/battling-tetanus Sundwall, John. “Man and Microbes.” Illustrated lecture given under the auspices of the Kansas Academy of Science, Topeka, January 12, 1917. https://archive.org/details/jstor-3624335/ The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1901. NobelPrize.org. Nobel Prize Outreach 2025. Thu. 17 Apr 2025. https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/medicine/1901/summary/ Tiwari, Tejpratap S.P. et al. “Chapter 21: Tetanus.” CDC Pink Book. https://www.cdc.gov/pinkbook/hcp/table-of-contents/chapter-21-tetanus.html Von Behring, Emil and Kitasato Shibasaburo. “The Mechanism of Immunity in Animals to Diphtheria and Tetanus.” Immunology. 1890. http://raolab.org/upfile/file/20200612164743_201234_56288.pdf War Office Committee for the Study of Tetanus. “Memorandum on Tetanus.” Fourth Edition. 1919. https://archive.org/details/b32171201/ World Health Organization. “Tetanus.” 7/12/2024. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/tetanus See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Give to help Chris continue making Truce A small group of men calling themselves The New Right had a major role to play in bonding some evangelicals to the Republican Party. Yet many Christians don't know who these guys were or how they used money and influence to accomplish their goal. Let's meet the fellas. One was named Paul Weyrich. Weyrich's contribution to the movement is that he knew how to organize people, a skill he learned from watching liberal protests. He was a former radio newsman from Wisconsin, member of the Melkite Greek Catholic Church when he thought the Roman Catholic Church became too liberal. He saw how liberals were organizing in the US and decided to do something similar with conservatives. The goal was to bring together politicians, activists, money, and the press to have a unified front. Organizational skills were his secret weapon. Howard Phillips was a follower of RJ Rushdoony's Christian Reconstruction plan. He gutted the Office of Economic Opportunity for Richard Nixon and then founded a think tank called The Conservative Caucus. He said "we organize discontent" meaning that the New Right used emotional issues to rile up their base. Then there was Richard Viguerie. He was the king of bulk mail. The New Right used his services to advocate for their kind of politicians, for Anita Bryant, and to raise money. His company RAVCO was investigated for fraud. These men and more were vital in bringing some evangelicals into the Republican Party. Our guest today is Rick Perlstein, author of amazing history books like Reaganland and The Invisible Bridge. Sources: Reaganland and The Invisible Bridge by Rick Perlstein Mobilizing the Moral Majority: Paul Weyrich and the Creation of a Conservative Coalition, 1968-1988 by Tyler J. Poff pages 22-23 The Evangelicals by Frances Fitzgerald Weyrich, Memorandum, April 16, 1973, Paul M. Weyrich Scrapbooks. But accessed through Mobilizing the Moral Majority: Paul Weyrich and the Creation of a Conservative Coalition, 1968-1988 by Tyler J. Poff page 18 Christian Reconstruction: RJ Rushdoony and American Religious Conservatism - by Michael McVicar Memo from Gerald Ford Library The 1974 Campaign Finance Reform Act James Robison at the Religious Roundtable Discussion Questions: What was meant by "we organize discontent"? Is this a statement Jesus would have made? Have you ever heard of the New Right guys before? Google Paul Weyrich and watch videos of him talking. How does he use language to stir fear in others? Are there issues that politicians can use to push your buttons? What are they? Why? Why are some evangelicals driven by these push button issues? How was the New Right able to use issues of sex to steer some evangelicals? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Clean Wisconsin has been keeping track of the many attacks on bedrock environmental safeguards being carried out by the Trump Administration. Dozens of rules and regulations that protect our air, water, land, endangered species and more are being targeted. With so much happening in such a short time, how do you know what's important, what's just a lot of bluster, and what's even legal?  Host: Amy Barrilleaux Guest: Brett Korte, Clean Wisconsin attorney Resources for You: Running list of attacks on environmental safeguards 1/20 Freeze All In-Progress Standards  EO - Freezes in-progress climate, clean air, clean water (including proposed limits on PFAS in industrial wastewater) and consumer protections. 1/20 Energy Emergency Declaration EO - Authorizes federal government to expedite permitting and approval of fossil fuel, infrastructure, and mining projects and circumvent Clean Water Act and Endangered Species Act requirements. 1/20 Withdrawal from Paris Climate Agreement EO - Reverses the US' international commitment to tackling climate change and reducing pollution. 1/20 Revokes Biden Climate Crisis and Environmental Justice Executive Actions EO -  Reverses U.S. commitment to fight climate change and its impacts, and protect overburdened communities. 1/20 Attacks on Clean Car Standards EO -  to stop clean car standards that required automakers to reduce tailpipe pollution from vehicles beginning in 2027. 1/20 Resumes LNG Permitting EO - Expedites Liquid Natural Gas export terminal approval over analysis finding exports raise energy costs for consumers. Attacks Climate and Clean Energy Investments from IRA and BIL EO - Freezes unspent funds from the Inflation Reduction Act and Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and directs agencies to reassess. 1/20 Attacks NEPA Protections EO - Rescinds order requiring White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) to assess environmental and community impacts and allow community input into federal infrastructure projects. 1/21 Expands Offshore Oil Drilling EO - Reopens U.S. coastlines to offshore drilling. 1/21 Terminate American Climate Corps EO - Ends all programs of the American Climate Corps, which created thousands of jobs combatting climate change and protecting and restoring public lands. 1/21 Freezes New Wind Energy Leases EO - Withdraws wind energy leasing from U.S. waters and federal lands. 1/21 Open Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and other Alaska Lands for Drilling EO - Reopens sensitive federal lands and waters in Alaska to drilling. 1/28 EPA's Science Advisory Panel Members Fired Memorandum - Acting EPA administrator James Payne dismisses members of the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee and Science Advisory Board, which provides independent expertise to the agency on air quality standards and sources of air pollution. 1/28 EPA Suspends Solar For All Grants Memorandum - The EPA halted $7 billion in contractually obligated grants for Solar For All, an Inflation Reduction Act program that delivers clean energy and lower prices to vulnerable communities 1/31 Trump administration scrubs "climate change" from federal websites Memorandum - Mentions of climate change have been removed from federal websites such the Department of Agriculture, which includes the Forest Service and climate-smart agriculture programs, and the EPA. 2/3 Trump requires removal 10 existing rules for every new rule EO - The order requires that when an agency finalizes a new regulation or guidance they identify 10 existing rules to be cut. 2/3 Interior secretary weakens public lands protections in favor of fossil fuel development Sec Order - After Trump's "Unleashing American Energy" executive order, Interior Secretary Burgum ordered the reinstatement of fossil fuel leases, opened more land for drilling, and issued orders weakening protections of public lands, national monuments and endangered species, and overturned advanced clean energy and climate mitigation strategies. 2/5 Energy secretary announces review of appliance efficiency standards Sec Order - Energy Secretary Wright ordered a review of appliance standards following Trump's Day One order attacking rules improving the efficiency of household appliances such as toilets, showerheads, and lightbulbs as part of a secretarial order intended to increase the extraction and use of fossil fuels. 2/5 Army Corps of Engineers halts approval of renewables Guidance via DOD - The Army Corps of Engineers singled out 168 projects – those that focused on renewable energy projects – out of about 11,000 pending permits for projects on private land. Though the hold was lifted, it was not immediately clear if permitting had resumed. 2/6 Transportation Department orders freeze of EV charging infrastructure program Memorandum - A Transportation Department memo ordered the suspension of $5 billion in federal funding, authorized by Congress under the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) program, for states to build electric vehicle chargers. 2/11 SEC starts process to kill climate disclosure rule Memorandum - The acting chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission paused the government's legal defense of a rule requiring companies to identify the impact of their business on climate in regulatory findings. The rule was challenged in court by 19 Republican state attorneys general and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and Energy Secretary Chris Wright's Liberty Energy, among others. 2/14 EPA fires hundreds of staff Memorandum - The Trump administration's relentless assault on science and career expertise at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency continued today with the firing of almost 400 staff who had ‘probationary' status. 2/14 DOE issues the first LNG export authorization under new Trump administration DOE Secretary Wright issued an export authorization for the Commonwealth LNG project in Cameron Parish, Louisiana, despite a 2024 DOE report finding that unfettered LNG exports increase energy bills and climate pollution. 2/18 Trump issues order stripping independent agencies of independence EO - Trump signed an executive order stripping independent regulatory agencies, including the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) of their independence, moving them to submit proposed rules and final regulations for review by the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) and granting the attorney general exclusive authority over legal interpretations of rules. The order is likely to be challenged as Congress created these agencies specifically to be insulated from White House interference. 2/19 Zeldin recommends striking endangerment finding Memorandum - After Trump's "Unleashing American Energy" executive order, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin has told the White House he would recommend rescinding the bedrock justification defining six climate pollutants – carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride – as air pollution to be regulated by the Clean Air Act. 2/19 Trump administration moves to rescind all CEQ regulatory authority Rulemaking - The Trump administration has moved to rescind the Council on Environmental Quality's role in crafting and implementing environmental regulations, revoking all CEQ orders since 1977 that shape how federal agencies comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) which requires the government to consider and disclose environmental impacts of its actions. 2/19 Trump directs agencies to make deregulation recommendations to DOGE EO - Trump issues executive order directing agencies to work with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to make recommendations that will accelerate Trump's efforts to dismantle regulations across the federal government as part of his 10 out, 1 in policy. Among the protections likely to be in DOGE's crosshairs are those that keep polluters from ignoring environmental laws and protect clean air and water. 2/19 FEMA staff advised to scrub "changing climate" and other climate terms from documents Memorandum - A Federal Emergency Management Agency memo listed 10 climate-related words and phrases, including "changing climate," “climate resilience,” and “net zero," to be removed from FEMA documents. The memo comes after USDA workers were ordered to scrub mentions of climate change from websites. 2/21 Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund Director Placed on Administrative Leave Guidance - According to media reports, EPA administrator Lee Zeldin has put the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) director on administrative leave. The GGRF is a $27 billion federal financing program that addresses the climate crisis and is injecting billions of dollars in local economic development projects to lower energy prices and reduce pollution especially in the rural, urban, and Indigenous communities most impacted by climate change and frequently left behind by mainstream finance. 2/27 Hundreds fired as layoffs begin at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Guidance - On Thursday, February 27, about 800 employees at NOAA, the agency responsible for the nation's bedrock weather, climate, fisheries, and marine research, were fired in the latest round of Trump administration-led layoffs. The layoffs could jeopardize NOAA's ability to provide life-saving severe weather forecasts, long-term climate monitoring, deep-sea research and fisheries management, and other essential research and policy. 3/10 Energy secretary says climate change a worthwhile tradeoff for growth Announcement - Speaking at the CERAWeek conference, Energy Secretary Chris Wright said the Trump administration sees climate change as “a side effect of building the modern world,” and pledged to “end the Biden administration's irrational, quasi-religious policies on climate change." 3/10 Zeldin, Musk Cut $1.7B in Environmental Justice Grants Guidance - EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced the cancellation of 400 environmental justice-related grants, in violation of a court order barring the Trump administration from freezing "equity-based" grants and contracts. 3/11 EPA eliminates environmental justice offices, staff Memorandum - EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin ordered the closure of environmental justice offices at the agency's headquarters and at all 10 regional offices and eliminate all related staff positions "immediately." The reversal comes just days after the EPA reinstated environmental justice and civil rights employees put on leave in early February. 3/12 EPA Announcement to Revise "Waters of the United States" Rule Announcement - The EPA will redefine waters of the US, or WOTUS, to comply with the US Supreme Court's 2023 ruling in Sackett v. EPA, which lifted Clean Water Act jurisdiction on many wetlands, Administrator Lee Zeldin said 3/14 Zeldin releases 31-rollback ‘hit list' Memorandum (announced, not in effect as of 4/10) - EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced plans to dismantle federal air quality and carbon pollution regulations, identifying 31 actions ranging from from soot standards and power plant pollution rules to the endangerment finding – the scientific and legal underpinning of the Clean Air Act. 3/14 EPA halts enforcement of pollution rules at energy facilities Memorandum - According to a leaked memo, the EPA's compliance office has halted enforcement of pollution regulations on energy facilities and barred consideration of environmental justice concerns. The memo states: "Enforcement and compliance assurance actions shall not shut down any stage of energy production (from exploration to distribution) or power generation absent an imminent and substantial threat to human health or an express statutory or regulatory requirement to the contrary.” 3/14 Trump revokes order encouraging renewables EO - Trump signed an executive order rescinding a Biden-era proclamation encouraging the development of renewable energy. Biden's order under the Defense Production Act permitted the Department of Energy to direct funds to scale up domestic production of solar and other renewable technologies. 3/17 EPA plans to eliminate science staff Memorandum - Leaked documents describe plans to lay off as many as 1,155 scientists from labs across the country. These chemists, biologists, toxicologists and other scientists are among the experts who monitor air and water quality, cleanup of toxic waste, and more. 3/16 EPA invites waivers on mercury pollution and other hazardous pollutants Memorandum - The EPA invited coal- and oil-fired power plants to apply for exemptions to limits on mercury and other toxic pollutants under the Clean Air Act. Mercury is an extremely dangerous pollutant that causes brain damage to babies and fetuses; in addition to mercury, pollution from power plants includes hazardous chemicals that can lead to cancer, or damage to the lungs, kidneys, nervous system and cardiovascular system. 4/3 Trump administration adds "deregulation suggestion" website A new page on regulations.gov allows members of the public to submit "deregulation" ideas. The move is the latest in the Trump administration's efforts to slash public health, safety, and climate safeguards, and comes soon after the administration offered companies the opportunity to send the EPA an email if they wished to be exempted from Clean Air Act protections. 4/8 Series of four EOs to boost coal  EO - Under the four orders, Trump uses his emergency authority to allow some older coal-fired power plants set for retirement to keep producing electricity to meet rising U.S. power demand amid growth in data centers, artificial intelligence and electric cars. Trump also directed federal agencies to identify coal resources on federal lands, lift barriers to coal mining and prioritize coal leasing on U.S. lands. In a related action, Trump also signed a proclamation offering coal-fired power plants a two-year exemption from federal requirements to reduce emissions of toxic chemicals such as mercury, arsenic and benzene. 4/9 Executive Order Attacking State Climate Laws EO - Directs the U.S. Attorney General to sue or block state climate policies deemed "burdensome" to fossil fuel interests — including laws addressing climate change, ESG investing, carbon taxes, and environmental justice. 4/9 New expiration dates on existing energy rules EO - The order directs ten agencies and subagencies to assign one-year expiration dates to existing energy regulations. If they are not extended, they will expire no later than September 30, 2026, according to a White House fact sheet on the order. The order also said any new regulations should include a five-year expiration, unless they are deregulatory. That means any future regulations would only last for five years unless they are extended. 4/17 Narrow Endangered Species Act to allow for habitat destruction The Trump administration is proposing to significantly limit the Endangered Species Act's power to preserve crucial habitats by changing the definition of one word: harm. The Endangered Species Act prohibits actions that “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect” endangered plants and animals. The word “harm” has long been interpreted to mean not just the direct killing of a species, but also severe harm to their environment  

In this episode of The Olympia Standard, we dive into the city's now-dormant effort to revise its Memorandum of Understanding with neighborhood associations and explore how representative those groups really are. We bring academic and personal insights into why public participation in local government remains so limited, from structural complexity and lack of access to the outsized influence of well-resourced voices. We also consider what it takes to make local democracy more inclusive, transparent, and effective.

​In Case No. 24-CV-07774 (JPO), the defendants, including Sean Combs and associated entities, have filed a Memorandum of Law supporting their Motion to Dismiss the complaint brought by the plaintiff, John Doe. The defendants argue that the plaintiff's allegations lack sufficient factual basis and fail to meet the necessary legal standards to proceed. They contend that the claims are speculative and do not establish the required elements to support causes of action against them.Additionally, the defendants assert that certain claims are barred by statutes of limitations and that the plaintiff has not demonstrated any applicable exceptions to these time constraints. They also challenge the appropriateness of the plaintiff proceeding under a pseudonym without prior court approval, emphasizing the importance of transparency in judicial proceedings. Based on these arguments, the defendants request that the court dismiss the complaint in its entirety.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.629907.58.0.pdf

​In Case No. 24-CV-07774 (JPO), the defendants, including Sean Combs and associated entities, have filed a Memorandum of Law supporting their Motion to Dismiss the complaint brought by the plaintiff, John Doe. The defendants argue that the plaintiff's allegations lack sufficient factual basis and fail to meet the necessary legal standards to proceed. They contend that the claims are speculative and do not establish the required elements to support causes of action against them.Additionally, the defendants assert that certain claims are barred by statutes of limitations and that the plaintiff has not demonstrated any applicable exceptions to these time constraints. They also challenge the appropriateness of the plaintiff proceeding under a pseudonym without prior court approval, emphasizing the importance of transparency in judicial proceedings. Based on these arguments, the defendants request that the court dismiss the complaint in its entirety.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.629907.58.0.pdf

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/antiwarcom/Phone bank for Defend the Guard: https://defendtheguard.us/phonebankChapters00:00 - Intro00:23 - US Kills Yemeni Civilian Workers, Paramedics07:58 - Trump 'Not in a Rush' To Attack Iran12:36 - Saudi Defense Minister Visits Iran, Meets With Khamenei14:34 - Israel Bombs Multiple Tent Camps in Gaza16:26 - Palestinian Man Dies in Israeli Prison Days Before Scheduled Release17:49 - End War Now: Signers on Petitions in Israel Exceed 120,00018:56 - US Removing Hundreds of Troops From Syria20:25 - Many Iraqis Unhappy With Syrian President's Invite to Summit21:50 - Somalia: US Launched Strikes Against Al-Shabaab24:36 - US, Ukraine Sign 'Memorandum' on Minerals Deal26:34 - Lebanon: Over 2,700 Israeli Ceasefire Violations27:33 - US-Backed Government Losing Control of Haiti29:24 - Viewpoints/Outro