Podcasts about motta

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Uma audiência pública no Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF) sobre a execução das emendas parlamentares impositivas nesta sexta-feira (27) vai reunir os presidentes da Câmara, Hugo Motta (Republicanos-PB), e do Senado, Davi Alcolumbre (União Brasil-AP). O encontro foi convocado pelo ministro Flávio Dino, relator de três ações sobre o tema na Corte, e também terá a participação de integrantes do governo, associações e especialistas em finanças públicas. Dino convocou a audiência porque considera que o tema tem "inegável relevância do ponto de vista social, econômico e jurídico". "A audiência pública é uma prerrogativa do relator para discutir um tema. Nos últimos 10 grandes julgamentos do Supremo eles convocaram, mas movimento pelos presidentes do Legislativos eu não me lembro. Foi uma decisão de Motta e Alcolumbre numa clara posição de confronto ao STF. Está fazendo 11 meses desde que Dino 'jogou a primeira bomba' contra as emendas do Congresso e exatamente agora eles confirmaram que vão - e irão armados até os dentes. Eles são injustos quando jogam toda culpa no Dino, porque suas decisões passaram três vezes por plenário e foram aprovadas por unanimidade. Têm de estar bravos com todo Supremo", diz Eliane.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Mariana Carneiro, repórter do Estadão em Brasília, repercute Política e Economia internas às 2ªs, 4ªs e 6ªs, 8h30, no Jornal Eldorado.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Uma audiência pública no Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF) sobre a execução das emendas parlamentares impositivas nesta sexta-feira (27) vai reunir os presidentes da Câmara, Hugo Motta (Republicanos-PB), e do Senado, Davi Alcolumbre (União Brasil-AP). O encontro foi convocado pelo ministro Flávio Dino, relator de três ações sobre o tema na Corte, e também terá a participação de integrantes do governo, associações e especialistas em finanças públicas. Dino convocou a audiência porque considera que o tema tem "inegável relevância do ponto de vista social, econômico e jurídico". "A audiência pública é uma prerrogativa do relator para discutir um tema. Nos últimos 10 grandes julgamentos do Supremo eles convocaram, mas movimento pelos presidentes do Legislativos eu não me lembro. Foi uma decisão de Motta e Alcolumbre numa clara posição de confronto ao STF. Está fazendo 11 meses desde que Dino 'jogou a primeira bomba' contra as emendas do Congresso e exatamente agora eles confirmaram que vão - e irão armados até os dentes. Eles são injustos quando jogam toda culpa no Dino, porque suas decisões passaram três vezes por plenário e foram aprovadas por unanimidade. Têm de estar bravos com todo Supremo", diz Eliane.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

O ministro do Supremo Tribunal Federal, Flávio Dino, os presidentes da Câmara, Hugo Motta e Senado, Davi Alcolumbre, participam hoje de uma audiência pública sobre as emendas parlamentares impositivas no STF. O magistrado convocou as lideranças por ser tratar de um tema relevante do ponto de vista social, econômico e jurídico. O Giro de Notícias mantém você por dentro das principais informações do Brasil e do mundo. Confira mais atualizações na próxima edição.

Bom dia 247_ Hugo Motta rasga a fantasia e vira o Eduardo Cunha de Lula _26_6_25_ by TV 247

O governo do presidente Lula começou a liberar emendas parlamentares em meio à crise com o Congresso Nacional, mas não conseguiu frear o projeto que derruba o decreto que aumentou o Imposto sobre Operações Financeiras (IOF). Até terça-feira, o governo liberou (empenhou, no jargão técnico) R$ 1,7 bilhão em emendas. A maior parte, um total de mais de R$ 1,5 bilhão, foi no Ministério da Saúde para emendas individuais indicadas por deputados e senadores. "O Governo está totalmente acuado e isolado no Congresso. Se foram três derrotas acachapantes na semana passada, a de ontem, que é mais ainda, mostra que, daqui pra frente, tudo será diferente. Não tem base no Legislativo e está enfrentando um Poder cada vez mais hostil. Até o final do terceiro mandato do presidente, a vida de Lula vai ficar infernizada no Congresso. Além de ser uma derrota, teve detalhes de crueldade. Hugo Motta, presidente da Câmara, está em guerra aberta com o Governo. Davi Alcolumbre, presidente do Senado, que parecia mais disposto a ter uma boa relação com o Executivo, aderiu ao confronto. Motta ainda escolheu como relator um bolsonarista. Quem derrotou o Governo foi o Centrão, cheio de ministérios, e até gente do PT", comenta Eliane.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

No “Estadão Analisa” desta quinta-feira, 26, Carlos Andreazza comenta sobre a votação-surpresa que resultou na derrubada do aumento do IOF, nesta quarta-feira, 25, irritou auxiliares e aliados do presidente Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, que anteveem instabilidade e desconfiança na relação com o presidente da Câmara, Hugo Motta (Republicanos-PB). Governistas não esperavam que fosse votado nesta semana o projeto que derruba o decreto presidencial de aumento do IOF, e relatam que Motta, até a noite de terça-feira, 24, não havia dado sinal algum de que o tema entraria na pauta do dia seguinte. Leia mais: https://www.estadao.com.br/economia/derrota-iof-escancara-relacao-instavel-governo-camara-e-alerta-proximas-votacoes/ Assine por R$1,90/mês e tenha acesso ilimitado ao conteúdo do Estadão. Acesse: https://bit.ly/oferta-estadao O 'Estadão Analisa' é transmitido ao vivo de segunda a sexta-feira, às 7h, no Youtube e redes sociais do Estadão. Também disponível no agregador de podcasts de sua preferência. Apresentação: Carlos AndreazzaEdição/Produção: Jefferson PerlebergCoordenação: Manuella Menezes e Everton OliveiraSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

O governo do presidente Lula começou a liberar emendas parlamentares em meio à crise com o Congresso Nacional, mas não conseguiu frear o projeto que derruba o decreto que aumentou o Imposto sobre Operações Financeiras (IOF). Até terça-feira, o governo liberou (empenhou, no jargão técnico) R$ 1,7 bilhão em emendas. A maior parte, um total de mais de R$ 1,5 bilhão, foi no Ministério da Saúde para emendas individuais indicadas por deputados e senadores. "O Governo está totalmente acuado e isolado no Congresso. Se foram três derrotas acachapantes na semana passada, a de ontem, que é mais ainda, mostra que, daqui pra frente, tudo será diferente. Não tem base no Legislativo e está enfrentando um Poder cada vez mais hostil. Até o final do terceiro mandato do presidente, a vida de Lula vai ficar infernizada no Congresso. Além de ser uma derrota, teve detalhes de crueldade. Hugo Motta, presidente da Câmara, está em guerra aberta com o Governo. Davi Alcolumbre, presidente do Senado, que parecia mais disposto a ter uma boa relação com o Executivo, aderiu ao confronto. Motta ainda escolheu como relator um bolsonarista. Quem derrotou o Governo foi o Centrão, cheio de ministérios, e até gente do PT", comenta Eliane.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Use our link and claim a free LMNT Sample Pack when they make any purchase! The LMNT Sample Pack includes 1 packet of every flavor, no questions asked refunds on all orders – you don't even have to send it back! This offer may be claimed be first-time and returning LMNT customers, ONLY THOUGH OUR LINK! http://drinklmnt.com/WeighingIn Join us on ONLYFANS for FREE! http://OnlyFans.com/WeighingIn Watch WEIGHING IN XTRA here: https://www.youtube.com/c/WEIGHINGINXTRA Listen on iTunes: https://apple.co/37XsRQ9 Listen on Spotify: https://spoti.fi/3jSZSiZ Listen on Google Podcasts: https://bit.ly/3jKXV82 NEW MERCH WEBSITE - https://weighinginmerch.com FOLLOW the team on Twitter and Instagram | @weighingin | @johnmccarthymma | @therealpunk | @podcastdave | @georgeharris48 And Now 00:00 Borroka MMA 00:33 Hill vs Rountree 03:56 Fiziev vs Bahamondes 11:17 Blaydes vs Kuniev 16:45 Musayev vs Orolbia 19:18 Sadykhov vs Motta 21:56 PFL 25:37 39:00 2 fights bishop and Mohamedov BKFC 40:26 Jon Jones Retires 44:22 Conor Punches Fan 58:00 Nate Diaz Callout 1:01:40

Integrantes do União Brasil e do Progressistas são apontados como favoritos para comandar investigação sobre roubo de aposentadorias.Meio-Dia em Brasília traz as principais notícias e análises da política nacional direto   de Brasília.     Com apresentação de José Inácio Pilar e Wilson Lima, o programa aborda os temas mais quentes do cenário político e econômico do Brasil.     Com um olhar atento sobre política, notícias e economia, mantém o público bem informado.   Transmissão ao vivo de segunda a sexta-feira às 12h.   Apoie o jornalismo Vigilante: 10% de desconto para audiência do Meio-Dia em Brasília   https://bit.ly/meiodiaoa   Siga O Antagonista no X:  https://x.com/o_antagonista   Acompanhe O Antagonista no canal do WhatsApp. Boletins diários, conteúdos exclusivos em vídeo e muito mais.  https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Va2SurQHLHQbI5yJN344  Leia mais em www.oantagonista.com.br | www.crusoe.com.br 

Breaking Down The Karen Read Trial From 2 Perspectives With Bob Motta & Tony Brueski In this must‑watch episode of Hidden Killers, veteran defense attorney Bob Motta and true crime host Tony Brueski team up for a rare, civil‑conversation style breakdown of the Karen Read verdict. Motta insists Karen is innocent, pointing to forensic flaws, DNA ambiguity, and a possible blackout memory gap—while Brueski argues it was likely a tragic accident, not manslaughter, and points to injury patterns consistent with an unintended collision. We dive deep into: Legal strategy: Why Motta shifted from “voicemail rage” theory to a psychological blackout defense Forensic details: Spatter, impact analysis, shoe‑DNA, and accident reconstruction Psychological elements: Karen's inconsistent statements, possible dissociation under stress, and mental health triggers True crime hooks: Did the jury buy the deception or the defense's blackout narrative? Twisting mystery: Was John O'Keefe a victim of fate—or did Karen's own narrative betray her? Featuring exclusive verdict analysis, courtroom psychology insights, and a forensic science deep‑dive, this video is essential for anyone fascinated by criminal memory, legal nuance, and justice vs deception. If you're into true crime, fascinated by DNA evidence, or want an unfiltered legal breakdown, this is your go‑to summary of the Karen Read trial aftermath.  Hit  to see both sides finally come together, examine the evidence, and debate the true meaning of manslaughter vs accident. Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?  Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872  

Breaking Down The Karen Read Trial From 2 Perspectives With Bob Motta & Tony Brueski In this must‑watch episode of Hidden Killers, veteran defense attorney Bob Motta and true crime host Tony Brueski team up for a rare, civil‑conversation style breakdown of the Karen Read verdict. Motta insists Karen is innocent, pointing to forensic flaws, DNA ambiguity, and a possible blackout memory gap—while Brueski argues it was likely a tragic accident, not manslaughter, and points to injury patterns consistent with an unintended collision. We dive deep into: Legal strategy: Why Motta shifted from “voicemail rage” theory to a psychological blackout defense Forensic details: Spatter, impact analysis, shoe‑DNA, and accident reconstruction Psychological elements: Karen's inconsistent statements, possible dissociation under stress, and mental health triggers True crime hooks: Did the jury buy the deception or the defense's blackout narrative? Twisting mystery: Was John O'Keefe a victim of fate—or did Karen's own narrative betray her? Featuring exclusive verdict analysis, courtroom psychology insights, and a forensic science deep‑dive, this video is essential for anyone fascinated by criminal memory, legal nuance, and justice vs deception.  If you're into true crime, fascinated by DNA evidence, or want an unfiltered legal breakdown, this is your go‑to summary of the Karen Read trial aftermath.  Hit  to see both sides finally come together, examine the evidence, and debate the true meaning of manslaughter vs accident. Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?  Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872

Breaking Down The Karen Read Trial From 2 Perspectives With Bob Motta & Tony Brueski In this must‑watch episode of Hidden Killers, veteran defense attorney Bob Motta and true crime host Tony Brueski team up for a rare, civil‑conversation style breakdown of the Karen Read verdict. Motta insists Karen is innocent, pointing to forensic flaws, DNA ambiguity, and a possible blackout memory gap—while Brueski argues it was likely a tragic accident, not manslaughter, and points to injury patterns consistent with an unintended collision. We dive deep into: Legal strategy: Why Motta shifted from “voicemail rage” theory to a psychological blackout defense Forensic details: Spatter, impact analysis, shoe‑DNA, and accident reconstruction Psychological elements: Karen's inconsistent statements, possible dissociation under stress, and mental health triggers True crime hooks: Did the jury buy the deception or the defense's blackout narrative? Twisting mystery: Was John O'Keefe a victim of fate—or did Karen's own narrative betray her? Featuring exclusive verdict analysis, courtroom psychology insights, and a forensic science deep‑dive, this video is essential for anyone fascinated by criminal memory, legal nuance, and justice vs deception. If you're into true crime, fascinated by DNA evidence, or want an unfiltered legal breakdown, this is your go‑to summary of the Karen Read trial aftermath.  Hit  to see both sides finally come together, examine the evidence, and debate the true meaning of manslaughter vs accident. Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?  Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872

No podcast ‘Notícia No Seu Tempo’, confira em áudio as principais notícias da edição impressa do jornal ‘O Estado de S.Paulo’ desta quinta-feira (19/06/2025): Em decisão unânime, o Comitê de Política Monetária (Copom) do Banco Central aumentou em 0,25 ponto porcentual a taxa básica de juros do País, que passou de 14,75% para 15% ao ano. Com a inflação ainda acima do teto da meta, o colegiado antecipou que pode interromper o ciclo de alta da Selic na sua próxima reunião, no fim de julho, para avaliar os impactos do ajuste monetário já realizado. Mas frisou que “não hesitará em prosseguir no ciclo de ajuste caso julgue apropriado”. Foi o sétimo aumento consecutivo da taxa desde setembro do ano passado, quando o BC iniciou o atual ciclo de aperto monetário. Desde então, a Selic já subiu 4,5 pontos. Nos EUA, contrariando pressões por baixa do presidente Donald Trump, o Federal Reserve (Fed) manteve as taxas entre 4,25% e 4,5% E mais: Política: Centrão flerta com Tarcísio e pressiona Motta para deixar gestão Lula ‘sangrar’ Metrópole: No RS, as chuvas causam 2 mortes e os rios transbordam nas mesmas regiões de 2024 Internacional: EUA definem plano para entrada na guerra e Irã prevê contra-ataque See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

MMALOTN is back to give you breakdowns and predictions for UFC Baku: Hill vs Rountree Jr. THIS PATREON IS FOR THE FIGHT LINK DATABASE, NOT MY PICKS/BETS/WRITE UPS.

*) Este episódio do Podcast 15 minutos  discute a derrota do governo Lula na Câmara dos Deputados, onde foi aprovada a urgência para um decreto que aumenta o IOF (Imposto sobre Operações Financeiras). Também destaca a força do Centrão e a fragilidade da base governista no Congresso.

Bom dia 247_ Hugo Motta declara guerra a Lula e Haddad _13_6_25_ by TV 247

No “Estadão Analisa” desta sexta-feira, 13, Carlos Andreazza comenta que aliados do presidente da Câmara, Hugo Motta (Republicanos-PB), avaliam que ele resolveu fazer um esforço para perder a pecha de governista que ganhou na Casa e segurar a confiança dos deputados. Líderes partidários ouvidos pela Coluna do Estadão veem a relação de Motta com o Palácio do Planalto no momento como um “morde e assopra”. Leia mais: https://www.estadao.com.br/politica/coluna-do-estadao/aliados-veem-morde-e-assopra-de-hugo-motta-com-planalto-e-esforco-para-perder-pecha-de-governista/ Assine por R$1,90/mês e tenha acesso ilimitado ao conteúdo do Estadão. Acesse: https://bit.ly/oferta-estadao O 'Estadão Analisa' é transmitido ao vivo de segunda a sexta-feira, às 7h, no Youtube e redes sociais do Estadão. Também disponível no agregador de podcasts de sua preferência. Apresentação: Carlos AndreazzaEdição/Produção: Jefferson PerlebergCoordenação: Manuella Menezes e Everton OliveiraSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Motta decide pautar urgência para suspender decreto do IOF. CPI das Bets rejeita indiciar Virginia Fonseca, Deolane e mais 14. E Queda de avião na Índia mata mais de 240 pessoas.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

O deputado André Fernandes (PL) cobrou o presidente da Câmara, Hugo Motta (Republicanos), após o parlamentar ter sinalizado que cumpriria a decisão judicial que determinou a perda de mandato da deputada Carla Zambelli (PL). Fernandes disse, no plenário da Câmara, que o papel de Motta é “defender a Casa” Em resposta a Fernandes, Motta afirmou que vai levar a decisão do STF sobre a perda de mandato de Zambelli ao plenário da Câmara, mas pontuou que “não funciona no grito”.Felipe Moura Brasil, Duda Teixeira e Dennys Xavier comentam:Papo Antagonista é o programa que explica e debate os principais acontecimentos do   dia com análises críticas e aprofundadas sobre a política brasileira e seus bastidores.     Apresentado por Felipe Moura Brasil, o programa traz contexto e opinião sobre os temas mais quentes da atualidade.     Com foco em jornalismo, eleições e debate, é um espaço essencial para quem busca informação de qualidade.     Ao vivo de segunda a sexta-feira às 18h.    Apoie o jornalismo Vigilante: 10% de desconto para audiência do Papo Antagonista  https://bit.ly/papoantagonista  Siga O Antagonista no X:  https://x.com/o_antagonista   Acompanhe O Antagonista no canal do WhatsApp. Boletins diários, conteúdos exclusivos em vídeo e muito mais.  https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Va2SurQHLHQbI5yJN344  Leia mais em www.oantagonista.com.br | www.crusoe.com.br 

Alexandre Garcia comenta estado das contas públicas, bate-boca de Haddad com deputados, e discurso de André Fernandes cobrando Hugo Motta.

Acesse a ContrataPJ agora!https://4soci.al/contratapj-papo-ceo_______No episódio #164 do Papo de CEO, recebemos Arapuan Motta, reitor da UNISUAM, uma das universidades mais inovadoras do Brasil. Arapuan compartilha sua trajetória, desde o início da sua jornada à frente da instituição até as transformações que implementou, com um foco em modernizar o ensino superior e adaptá-lo às tendências globais de aprendizagem.Descubra como a UNISUAM se destacou no cenário educacional, superando desafios e aproveitando novas oportunidades com um modelo de ensino inovador, incluindo o sistema de Preço Fixo e o ensino modular baseado em competências. Esse episódio é essencial para quem deseja entender como a inovação no ensino, aliada à gestão visionária, pode impulsionar o crescimento das instituições educacionais e redefinir o mercado educacional.

No podcast ‘Notícia No Seu Tempo’, confira em áudio as principais notícias da edição impressa do jornal ‘O Estado de S.Paulo’ desta terça-feira (10/06/2025): Setores do Congresso e representantes da construção civil e do agronegócio reagiram à proposta de medidas alternativas ao aumento do IOF apresentada domingo pelo governo. O ministro da Fazenda, Fernando Haddad, anunciou “acordo” para compensar a perda de arrecadação elevando a taxação das bets e tributação de 5% nas Letras de Crédito Imobiliário (LCIs) e nas do Agronegócio (LCAs), hoje isentas. O presidente da Câmara, Hugo Motta (Republicanos-PB), disse que não há o compromisso de aprovação do pacote, que pode ser apresentado por MP. O deputado Pedro Lupion (PP-PR), presidente da Frente Parlamentar da Agropecuária (FPA), afirmou que “eles (governo) sabem que (o Congresso) não tem como aceitar isso”. Entidades do mercado imobiliário alertaram que a taxação das LCIs vai encarecer o crédito. E mais: Economia: Para economista, ‘ou se faz alguma coisa, ou o País vai parar’ Política: Cid afirma que Bolsonaro agiu em minuta do golpe e implica Braga Netto Internacional: Trump chama fuzileiros para conter atos pró-imigrantes na Califórnia Esportes: Com Raphinha, Brasil pode garantir a vaga no MundialSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

No “Estadão Analisa” desta segunda-feira, 09, Carlos Andreazza fala sobre mudanças de impostos e receitas extras no Governo Lula que aumentaram o caixa da União em R$ 170 bilhões em dois anos, mesmo assim Fazenda estuda medidas para conseguir fechar as contas. O valor ultrapassa o orçamento anual do Bolsa Família, que gira em torno de R$ 160 bilhões. O ministro da Fazenda, Fernando Haddad, reuniu-se com os presidentes da Câmara, Hugo Motta, do Senado, Davi Alcolumbre, e com outros líderes partidário. Ontem, o ministro da Fazenda, Fernando Haddad, o presidente da Câmara, Hugo Motta (Republicanos-PB), e o presidente do Senado, Davi Alcolumbre (União-AP), se reuniram na residência oficial de Motta, em Brasília, para discutir alternativas ao aumento do IOF. O resultado foi que as Bets pagarão mais imposto e LCI e LCA deixarão de ser isentos para compensar recuo no IOF. Leia mais: https://www.estadao.com.br/economia/governo-anuncia-mp-com-foco-em-apostas-e-sistema-financeiro-para-viabilizar-a-revisao-do-iof/ Apresentado pelo colunista Carlos Andreazza, programa diário no canal do Estadão no YouTube trará uma curadoria dos temas mais relevantes do noticiário, deixando de lado o que é espuma, para se aprofundar no que é relevante. Assine por R$1,90/mês e tenha acesso ilimitado ao conteúdo do Estadão. Acesse: https://bit.ly/oferta-estadao O 'Estadão Analisa' é transmitido ao vivo de segunda a sexta-feira, às 7h, no Youtube e redes sociais do Estadão. E depois, fica disponível no Spotify, Deezer, Apple Podcasts, Google podcasts, ou no agregador de podcasts de sua preferência. Apresentação: Carlos AndreazzaEdição/Pós-produção: Jefferson PerlebergCoordenação: Manuella Menezes e Everton OliveiraSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Confira nesta edição do JR 24 Horas: O presidente da Câmara dos Deputados, Hugo Motta, disse nesta segunda (9), em um evento em São Paulo, que a Casa vai declarar a perda de mandato de Carla Zambelli. E ainda: Policiais são afastados por operação em Morro do Santo Amaro, no RJ.

Câmara vai declarar perda do mandato de Carla Zambelli, diz Motta: 'Não cabe mais colocar em votação'. Mãe e filha são feitas reféns na Grande Curitiba; negociação durou 10 horas. Áudios mostram policiais, advogados e traficantes negociando para liberar carga de 10 toneladas de maconha. VÍDEO: repórter é atingida por bala de borracha durante entrada ao vivo nos protestos em Los Angeles. Comandante da PM diz que operação do Bope no Santo Amaro ‘não observou os protocolos e os procedimentos da corporação'. Anvisa aprova Mounjaro como tratamento para a perda de peso.

Confira nesta edição do JR 24 Horas: O ministro da Fazenda, Fernando Haddad, se reuniu novamente nesta noite (2) com os presidentes da Câmara, Hugo Motta, e do Senado, Davi Alcolumbre, para tratar do aumento do IOF. A proposta é atuar em duas frentes, uma de curto prazo, com os dois lados cedendo no decreto que aumentou o imposto sobre operações financeiras e garantindo um alívio nas contas públicas neste ano. Ao mesmo tempo, o governo e o Congresso buscam soluções estruturais de longo prazo, como uma reforma administrativa. E ainda: Rio de Janeiro amplia vacinação contra nova variante da Covid-19.

Presidente da República faz afagos ao presidente da Câmara durante encontro nacional do PSB.Meio-Dia em Brasília traz as principais notícias e análises da política nacional direto   de Brasília.     Com apresentação de José Inácio Pilar e Wilson Lima, o programa aborda os temas mais quentes do cenário político e econômico do Brasil.     Com um olhar atento sobre política, notícias e economia, mantém o público bem informado.   Transmissão ao vivo de segunda a sexta-feira às 12h.   Apoie o jornalismo Vigilante: 10% de desconto para audiência do Meio-Dia em Brasília   https://bit.ly/meiodiaoa   Siga O Antagonista no X:  https://x.com/o_antagonista   Acompanhe O Antagonista no canal do WhatsApp. Boletins diários, conteúdos exclusivos em vídeo e muito mais.  https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Va2SurQHLHQbI5yJN344  Leia mais em www.oantagonista.com.br | www.crusoe.com.br 

Neste domingo, GP da Espanha de F1, em Barcelona. Por isso, o Podcast Motorsport.com chega no YouTube com o PÓDIO, no qual Carlos Costa (@ocarlos_costa) e Guilherme Longo (@gglongo) recebem convidados para debater tudo da Catalunha. Reportagens de Isa Fernandes na Mit Cup!Bitcoin e criptomoedas? Invista na Mynt, a plataforma cripto do BTG Pactual: https://bit.ly/425ErVa

O presidente da Câmara dos Deputados, Hugo Motta (Republicanos-PB), falou sobre a possibilidade de cortes em emendas parlamentares diante da novela em torno do aumento do IOF e das críticas aos gastos do governo Lula.Apesar de mencionar a hipótese, Motta fez um aceno a deputados, ao afirmar que “criminalizar a emenda é criminalizar a política”.Felipe Moura Brasil e Duda Teixeira comentam:Papo Antagonista é o programa que explica e debate os principais acontecimentos do   dia com análises críticas e aprofundadas sobre a política brasileira e seus bastidores.     Apresentado por Felipe Moura Brasil, o programa traz contexto e opinião sobre os temas mais quentes da atualidade.     Com foco em jornalismo, eleições e debate, é um espaço essencial para quem busca informação de qualidade.     Ao vivo de segunda a sexta-feira às 18h.    Não espere mais, assine agora e garanta 2 anos com 30% OFF - últimos dias.   2 anos de assinatura do combo O Antagonista e Crusoé com um super desconto de 30% adicional* utilizando o voucher 10A-PROMO30 Use o cupom 10A-PROMO30 e assine agora:  papo-antagonista (https://bit.ly/promo-2anos-papo)   (*) desconto de 30% aplicado sobre os valores promocionais vigentes do Combo anual | Promoções não cumulativas com outras campanhas vigentes. | **Promoção válida só até o dia 31/05 

No “Estadão Analisa” desta sexta-feira, 30, Carlos Andreazza fala sobre ações do Presidente da Câmara, Hugo Motta, que disse querer construir solução com o governo e não ‘colocar fogo no País’; segundo ele, equipe econômica poderá ou não apresentar em dez dias uma alternativa ao aumento do IOF. Mais cedo, em publicação nas redes sociais, Motta afirmou que, na reunião com Haddad e o presidente do Senado, Davi Alcolumbre, na noite de quarta-feira, 28, “ficou combinado” que a equipe econômica terá dez dias para apresentar ao Congresso um “plano alternativo” ao aumento do IOF. Na visão de Motta, tal plano deve ser duradouro, consistente e “evitar gambiarras tributárias só para aumentar arrecadação”. Segundo o presidente da Câmara, após o prazo, ele pode decidir se vai ou não alterar a proposta. Motta destacou em entrevista à imprensa após a reunião de líderes nesta manhã, que, se a proposta não mudar, o Congresso pode sustar a medida com um projeto legislativo. E ressaltou que deixou o cenário claro na reunião de quarta-feira. Leia mais: https://www.estadao.com.br/economia/motta-lula-negociacao-iof-cansados-tantos-impostos/ Apresentado pelo colunista Carlos Andreazza, programa diário no canal do Estadão no YouTube trará uma curadoria dos temas mais relevantes do noticiário, deixando de lado o que é espuma, para se aprofundar no que é relevante. Assine por R$1,90/mês e tenha acesso ilimitado ao conteúdo do Estadão. Acesse: https://bit.ly/oferta-estadao O 'Estadão Analisa' é transmitido ao vivo de segunda a sexta-feira, às 7h, no Youtube e redes sociais do Estadão. E depois, fica disponível no Spotify, Deezer, Apple Podcasts, Google podcasts, ou no agregador de podcasts de sua preferência. Apresentação: Carlos AndreazzaEdição/Pós-produção: Jefferson PerlebergCoordenação: Manuella Menezes e Everton OliveiraSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Juros do crédito consignado disparam em abril. E Tribunal de apelação dos EUA restabelece tarifas de Trump.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Will the Science Prove Karen Read's Innocence? Attorney Bob Motta Thinks So In the premiere segment, Tony Brueski and Bob Motta cut straight to the most decisive element of the Karen Read case: the forensic evidence. According to Motta, this case isn't about drama, hearsay, or even Karen Read's bizarre behavior. It's about whether the physical evidence proves she hit John O'Keefe with her Lexus — and right now, the science says she didn't. Motta places his trust in independent experts — specifically the ARCCA engineers hired by the Department of Justice, who testified that the damage to the Lexus and the injuries to O'Keefe do not match a typical vehicle-pedestrian strike. In other words, no broken bones, no directional wounds, no blood patterns to suggest a hit-and-run. And this testimony, unlike Proctor's or McCabe's, doesn't change. It's science. Tony counters with a key question: what happens if new vehicle data does emerge — like black box logs or OnStar records — that shows a collision at the time of death? Motta admits that would be damning. But he's not holding his breath. If prosecutors had a “smoking gun” like that, he says, they'd have led with it. This episode explores the growing tension between Karen Read's self-incriminating statements and the cold, hard science that seems to contradict them. It's the ultimate courtroom clash: Karen's words vs. the data. Hashtags: #KarenRead #ScienceVsConfession #ForensicEvidence #BobMotta #TrueCrimePodcast #ARCCA #JusticeForJohnOKeefe #BlackBoxData #KarenReadTrial #HiddenKillers Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?  Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872 

Will the Science Prove Karen Read's Innocence? Attorney Bob Motta Thinks So In the premiere segment, Tony Brueski and Bob Motta cut straight to the most decisive element of the Karen Read case: the forensic evidence. According to Motta, this case isn't about drama, hearsay, or even Karen Read's bizarre behavior. It's about whether the physical evidence proves she hit John O'Keefe with her Lexus — and right now, the science says she didn't. Motta places his trust in independent experts — specifically the ARCCA engineers hired by the Department of Justice, who testified that the damage to the Lexus and the injuries to O'Keefe do not match a typical vehicle-pedestrian strike. In other words, no broken bones, no directional wounds, no blood patterns to suggest a hit-and-run. And this testimony, unlike Proctor's or McCabe's, doesn't change. It's science. Tony counters with a key question: what happens if new vehicle data does emerge — like black box logs or OnStar records — that shows a collision at the time of death? Motta admits that would be damning. But he's not holding his breath. If prosecutors had a “smoking gun” like that, he says, they'd have led with it. This episode explores the growing tension between Karen Read's self-incriminating statements and the cold, hard science that seems to contradict them. It's the ultimate courtroom clash: Karen's words vs. the data. Hashtags: #KarenRead #ScienceVsConfession #ForensicEvidence #BobMotta #TrueCrimePodcast #ARCCA #JusticeForJohnOKeefe #BlackBoxData #KarenReadTrial #HiddenKillers Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?  Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872

Will The Jury Understand Michael Proctor's Disdain for Karen Read This Time? Michael Proctor may not be on the prosecution's witness list, but his presence looms large over the Karen Read trial. In this episode, Bob Motta and Tony Brueski analyze the explosive text messages, the professional fallout, and the deep personal contempt Proctor seemed to harbor for Karen Read. The big question: will jurors see his bias for what it is — or will they relate to it? Tony makes a controversial but intriguing point: if the prosecution has already made Karen Read look like a highly unlikable person, then Proctor's attitude may feel relatable to the jury. They may not like how he said it — but they might get why he said it. Motta pushes back, arguing that Proctor is a textbook example of tunnel vision, and that his venomous language (“That bitch is going down”) reflects not passion for justice but prejudice. More importantly, his bias infected the investigation from day one. The two go deep on what it means to be a “hired gun,” how Proctor's credibility was destroyed in the first trial, and why the prosecution would rather let the defense call him than risk their own case imploding. This episode is a masterclass in understanding law enforcement bias, jury psychology, and how a single investigator's ego might jeopardize an entire murder conviction. Hashtags: #KarenRead #MichaelProctor #KarenReadTrial #BobMotta #JuryBias #TunnelVision #HiddenKillersPodcast #JusticeSystem #ProctorTexts #LawEnforcementAccountability Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?  Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872 

Will The Jury Understand Michael Proctor's Disdain for Karen Read This Time? Michael Proctor may not be on the prosecution's witness list, but his presence looms large over the Karen Read trial. In this episode, Bob Motta and Tony Brueski analyze the explosive text messages, the professional fallout, and the deep personal contempt Proctor seemed to harbor for Karen Read. The big question: will jurors see his bias for what it is — or will they relate to it? Tony makes a controversial but intriguing point: if the prosecution has already made Karen Read look like a highly unlikable person, then Proctor's attitude may feel relatable to the jury. They may not like how he said it — but they might get why he said it. Motta pushes back, arguing that Proctor is a textbook example of tunnel vision, and that his venomous language (“That bitch is going down”) reflects not passion for justice but prejudice. More importantly, his bias infected the investigation from day one. The two go deep on what it means to be a “hired gun,” how Proctor's credibility was destroyed in the first trial, and why the prosecution would rather let the defense call him than risk their own case imploding. This episode is a masterclass in understanding law enforcement bias, jury psychology, and how a single investigator's ego might jeopardize an entire murder conviction. Hashtags: #KarenRead #MichaelProctor #KarenReadTrial #BobMotta #JuryBias #TunnelVision #HiddenKillersPodcast #JusticeSystem #ProctorTexts #LawEnforcementAccountability Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?  Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872

Why Did The Alberts Stay Inside While Police Swarmed Their Yard? What would you do if police and paramedics were investigating a possible death just feet from your front door? That's the question Tony Brueski poses as he and Bob Motta explore one of the most baffling parts of the Karen Read case: the silence from the Albert household on the morning of John O'Keefe's death. Despite the chaos unfolding in their front yard — with Read sobbing, paramedics arriving, and police combing for clues — not one person from inside the house came out. Why? Were they asleep? Unaware? Or was it something else? Motta doesn't make accusations — but he does point to how wildly out of the norm this is for police culture. These weren't just civilians inside — these were cops and first responders. If someone collapses in your yard, especially someone you know, you go outside. You check. You help. Unless you're trying to stay hidden. Tony challenges this by acknowledging that weird behavior doesn't prove guilt — but both men agree: the optics are terrible. They also discuss how the lack of initial investigation into the house compounds the problem. The cops didn't go in. They didn't ask to. And now the jury has to make sense of that silence — both literal and investigative. If the prosecution's theory is that Karen dropped John off and drove away, then why didn't anyone in the house see him? Or respond when he was discovered freezing and bleeding out in the yard? This episode dissects the psychological, procedural, and legal ramifications of inaction. Hashtags: #KarenRead #KarenReadTrial #BrianAlbert #TrueCrimePodcast #HiddenKillers #BobMotta #JohnOKeefe #HouseOfSilence #CrimeSceneQuestions #JuryDoubt    Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872 

Why Did The Alberts Stay Inside While Police Swarmed Their Yard? What would you do if police and paramedics were investigating a possible death just feet from your front door? That's the question Tony Brueski poses as he and Bob Motta explore one of the most baffling parts of the Karen Read case: the silence from the Albert household on the morning of John O'Keefe's death. Despite the chaos unfolding in their front yard — with Read sobbing, paramedics arriving, and police combing for clues — not one person from inside the house came out. Why? Were they asleep? Unaware? Or was it something else? Motta doesn't make accusations — but he does point to how wildly out of the norm this is for police culture. These weren't just civilians inside — these were cops and first responders. If someone collapses in your yard, especially someone you know, you go outside. You check. You help. Unless you're trying to stay hidden. Tony challenges this by acknowledging that weird behavior doesn't prove guilt — but both men agree: the optics are terrible. They also discuss how the lack of initial investigation into the house compounds the problem. The cops didn't go in. They didn't ask to. And now the jury has to make sense of that silence — both literal and investigative. If the prosecution's theory is that Karen dropped John off and drove away, then why didn't anyone in the house see him? Or respond when he was discovered freezing and bleeding out in the yard? This episode dissects the psychological, procedural, and legal ramifications of inaction. Hashtags: #KarenRead #KarenReadTrial #BrianAlbert #TrueCrimePodcast #HiddenKillers #BobMotta #JohnOKeefe #HouseOfSilence #CrimeSceneQuestions #JuryDoubt Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?  Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872

Will A Sloppy Investigation Set Karen Read Free? Bob Motta Talks Tony Brueski and Bob Motta tackle the elephant in the courtroom: the sloppy, questionable, and arguably negligent police investigation into the death of John O'Keefe. From the inexplicable failure to request a consent search of the Albert residence — where O'Keefe was allegedly dropped off — to the mishandling of key evidence like clotted blood in Solo cups and a fragmented taillight that appeared only after Proctor revisited the scene, Motta argues that this case is riddled with procedural red flags. Motta explains the legal strategy at play — invoking the Bowden defense — which allows the defense to argue that reasonable doubt stems not from what the state proved, but from what they failed to investigate. If you're prosecuting Karen Read but never checked inside the house she claims O'Keefe entered, did you really do your job? The trial, Motta says, doesn't hinge only on what happened, but on what the government didn't bother to find out. Tony plays devil's advocate, raising the issue of practical challenges like a blizzard burying the crime scene — but Motta maintains: if Proctor hadn't tunnel-visioned on Karen Read from day one, better decisions would've followed. The system didn't just fail Karen Read — it failed John O'Keefe too. This episode breaks down the difference between proving innocence and exposing investigative incompetence — and why the latter just might be enough for a not guilty verdict. Hashtags: #KarenRead #KarenReadTrial #BadInvestigation #BobMotta #ProctorProblem #SoloCups #PoliceAccountability #TrueCrime #BowdenDefense #JusticeForJohnOKeefe    Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872 

 Will A Sloppy Investigation Set Karen Read Free? Bob Motta Talks Tony Brueski and Bob Motta tackle the elephant in the courtroom: the sloppy, questionable, and arguably negligent police investigation into the death of John O'Keefe. From the inexplicable failure to request a consent search of the Albert residence — where O'Keefe was allegedly dropped off — to the mishandling of key evidence like clotted blood in Solo cups and a fragmented taillight that appeared only after Proctor revisited the scene, Motta argues that this case is riddled with procedural red flags. Motta explains the legal strategy at play — invoking the Bowden defense — which allows the defense to argue that reasonable doubt stems not from what the state proved, but from what they failed to investigate. If you're prosecuting Karen Read but never checked inside the house she claims O'Keefe entered, did you really do your job? The trial, Motta says, doesn't hinge only on what happened, but on what the government didn't bother to find out. Tony plays devil's advocate, raising the issue of practical challenges like a blizzard burying the crime scene — but Motta maintains: if Proctor hadn't tunnel-visioned on Karen Read from day one, better decisions would've followed. The system didn't just fail Karen Read — it failed John O'Keefe too. This episode breaks down the difference between proving innocence and exposing investigative incompetence — and why the latter just might be enough for a not guilty verdict. Hashtags: #KarenRead #KarenReadTrial #BadInvestigation #BobMotta #ProctorProblem #SoloCups #PoliceAccountability #TrueCrime #BowdenDefense #JusticeForJohnOKeefe Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?  Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872

Will Karen Read's Multiple Stories Send Her To Prison? Bob Motta Weighs In In this gripping breakdown from Hidden Killers, host Tony Brueski and veteran defense attorney Bob Motta dive deep into one of the most damaging elements in the Karen Read trial: her own ever-changing story. Across months of interviews, voicemails, and secondhand accounts, Karen Read has made conflicting statements about the last time she saw her boyfriend, Boston police officer John O'Keefe. From claiming she saw him go into the house, to saying he was in the general vicinity of the curb, to suggesting she might have clipped him with her car — the versions are endless. Motta takes a nuanced approach, explaining how defense attorneys have to carefully navigate these inconsistencies. Do they try to explain them away? Or do they lean into them as signs of trauma and confusion from a woman who doesn't actually remember what happened? Tony, however, takes a more psychological view — arguing that Read's constant shifting might not stem from confusion, but from manipulation and a fear of losing her image. They debate whether jurors, as emotional and flawed humans, can separate confusing testimony from actual guilt — and whether someone who acts like they have “consciousness of guilt” is more likely to be convicted even if there's no clear proof of intent. Is Karen Read lying to save herself? Or is she a blackout witness to her own worst night? This episode sets the tone for the entire discussion around narrative control, narcissistic traits, and what happens when your own mouth becomes your worst enemy in a murder trial. Hashtags: #KarenRead #KarenReadTrial #BobMotta #HiddenKillers #JohnOKeefe #TrueCrimePodcast #CourtroomDrama #ConflictingStories #ConsciousnessOfGuilt #LegalBreakdown Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?  Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872 

Will Karen Read's Multiple Stories Send Her To Prison? Bob Motta Weighs In In this gripping breakdown from Hidden Killers, host Tony Brueski and veteran defense attorney Bob Motta dive deep into one of the most damaging elements in the Karen Read trial: her own ever-changing story. Across months of interviews, voicemails, and secondhand accounts, Karen Read has made conflicting statements about the last time she saw her boyfriend, Boston police officer John O'Keefe. From claiming she saw him go into the house, to saying he was in the general vicinity of the curb, to suggesting she might have clipped him with her car — the versions are endless. Motta takes a nuanced approach, explaining how defense attorneys have to carefully navigate these inconsistencies. Do they try to explain them away? Or do they lean into them as signs of trauma and confusion from a woman who doesn't actually remember what happened? Tony, however, takes a more psychological view — arguing that Read's constant shifting might not stem from confusion, but from manipulation and a fear of losing her image. They debate whether jurors, as emotional and flawed humans, can separate confusing testimony from actual guilt — and whether someone who acts like they have “consciousness of guilt” is more likely to be convicted even if there's no clear proof of intent. Is Karen Read lying to save herself? Or is she a blackout witness to her own worst night? This episode sets the tone for the entire discussion around narrative control, narcissistic traits, and what happens when your own mouth becomes your worst enemy in a murder trial. Hashtags: #KarenRead #KarenReadTrial #BobMotta #HiddenKillers #JohnOKeefe #TrueCrimePodcast #CourtroomDrama #ConflictingStories #ConsciousnessOfGuilt #LegalBreakdown Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?  Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872

Is the Prosecution Crushing It? The State's Case Against Karen Read Examined What happens when a party ends in death—and a community turns against one of its own? Defense Attorney Bob Motta joins to dissect week two of the Karen Read trial, where the prosecution's pivot has jurors on edge. From conflicting forensic software interpretations to the mysterious 2:27am search, every detail feels engineered to sway doubt or deepen it. Why did the prosecution abandon its original strategy? Is Cellebrite really exposing the truth—or just another layer of interpretation? Motta, host of Defense Diaries, pulls no punches breaking down the courtroom chess moves, especially Brennan's precision with video clips and witness sequencing. As more partygoers take the stand, the narrative of a spontaneous group conspiracy to kill a fellow officer strains belief—but so does the timeline that could exonerate Karen Read. Whether you're convinced of her innocence or not, this case is unraveling in ways no one predicted. #KarenRead #JohnOKeefe #BobMotta #DefenseDiaries #KarenReadTrial #TrueCrimePodcast #CelebriteEvidence #ForensicAnalysis #HiddenKillersPodcast #MassachusettsTrial Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?  Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872

Is the Prosecution Crushing It? The State's Case Against Karen Read Examined What happens when a party ends in death—and a community turns against one of its own? Defense Attorney Bob Motta joins to dissect week two of the Karen Read trial, where the prosecution's pivot has jurors on edge. From conflicting forensic software interpretations to the mysterious 2:27am search, every detail feels engineered to sway doubt or deepen it. Why did the prosecution abandon its original strategy? Is Cellebrite really exposing the truth—or just another layer of interpretation? Motta, host of Defense Diaries, pulls no punches breaking down the courtroom chess moves, especially Brennan's precision with video clips and witness sequencing. As more partygoers take the stand, the narrative of a spontaneous group conspiracy to kill a fellow officer strains belief—but so does the timeline that could exonerate Karen Read. Whether you're convinced of her innocence or not, this case is unraveling in ways no one predicted. #KarenRead #JohnOKeefe #BobMotta #DefenseDiaries #KarenReadTrial #TrueCrimePodcast #CelebriteEvidence #ForensicAnalysis #HiddenKillersPodcast #MassachusettsTrial Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?  Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872

Why Karen Read's Own Words May Be the Most Damaging Evidence Yet What if everything we thought about how John O'Keefe died is wrong? As testimony unfolds in the Karen Read trial, Defense Attorney Bob Motta of the Defense Diaries podcast breaks down a theory that challenges the entire foundation of the prosecution's case. This episode dives into whether a drunken fight—not a cold-blooded conspiracy—might explain what happened that night. Was it a tragic accident inside the house that everyone is too afraid to admit? Or is it truly absurd to believe so many people could stay silent while their friend died in the snow? Motta explores the psychology of bar brawls gone bad, digital breadcrumbs from Karen's phone, and how real-life defense cases mirror the chaos now playing out in court. With careers, reputations, and possible jail time on the line, what really happened between Karen Read, John O'Keefe, and the people inside that house? #KarenRead #JohnOKeefe #BobMotta #DefenseDiaries #KarenReadTrial #HiddenKillersPodcast #TrueCrimePodcast #LegalAnalysis #O'KeefeDeath #BarFightTheory Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?  Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872

Why Karen Read's Own Words May Be the Most Damaging Evidence Yet What if everything we thought about how John O'Keefe died is wrong? As testimony unfolds in the Karen Read trial, Defense Attorney Bob Motta of the Defense Diaries podcast breaks down a theory that challenges the entire foundation of the prosecution's case. This episode dives into whether a drunken fight—not a cold-blooded conspiracy—might explain what happened that night. Was it a tragic accident inside the house that everyone is too afraid to admit? Or is it truly absurd to believe so many people could stay silent while their friend died in the snow? Motta explores the psychology of bar brawls gone bad, digital breadcrumbs from Karen's phone, and how real-life defense cases mirror the chaos now playing out in court. With careers, reputations, and possible jail time on the line, what really happened between Karen Read, John O'Keefe, and the people inside that house? #KarenRead #JohnOKeefe #BobMotta #DefenseDiaries #KarenReadTrial #HiddenKillersPodcast #TrueCrimePodcast #LegalAnalysis #O'KeefeDeath #BarFightTheory Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?  Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872

Can the Defense Recover? Bob Motta on the Risks of Karen Read's Trial Strategy The prosecution in the Karen Read trial has changed course—and it's turning heads. Defense Attorney Bob Motta joins to break down what's happening inside the courtroom. From the courtroom strategy shift led by ADA Brennan to the forensic breakdown of cell phone data by Ian Whiffin, this episode dives deep into the prosecution's evolving case and why it's suddenly more effective. Is Celebrite's software really more accurate than Magnet, or is it all a matter of interpretation? And why did the prosecution drop the “pre-buttle” approach? Motta also explains why he believes the infamous 2:27am “how long to die in cold” search may be a legal dead end, despite how gripping it sounds. If you're following this trial, the details revealed here are absolutely essential. #KarenRead #BobMotta #DefenseDiaries #HiddenKillersPodcast #TonyBruski #CantonCoverUp #IanWhiffin #Cellbrite #ForensicTestimony #TrueCrime2025 Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?  Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872