Podcasts about suing

In today's episode of Reddit Stories Podcast, a wild Karen completely loses it. You won't believe how this one ends! Sit back, relax, and enjoy this binge-worthy Reddit Stories Podcast, featuring Karen freakouts, entitled people stories, and pro revenge tales.

I am Rolf Claessen and my co-host Ken Suzan and I are welcoming you to episode 178 of our podcast IP Fridays! Today's interview guest is Caitlin Byczko, who is partner with Marnes & Thornburg in their IP team. Ken is discussing dupe culture with her. Here is the profile of Caitlin Byczko https://btlaw.com/en/people/caitlin-byczko But before we launch into this very interesting interview, I have some news for you: On August 10th, 2026, Navitas Semiconductor filed suit against Renesas Electronics in the Eastern District of Texas, accusing Renesas of infringing four US patents on gallium nitride semiconductor technology through its SuperGaN product lines. The filing follows a countersuit Renesas brought on July 22nd, 2026, accusing Navitas and two of its employees of misappropriating trade secrets. It shows how patent disputes and trade secret claims between competitors are increasingly being fought on multiple fronts at once, and often as tit for tat. It also emerged on August 12th, 2026, that an EPO Board of Appeal had dismissed an appeal by Atlas Global Technologies and ruled that its WiFi patent, EP 3 353 901, case T 1230/25, could not be maintained in any form at all, even though the original opponents, TP-Link and Vantiva, had already withdrawn their oppositions. That knocked out the basis for several parallel infringement suits at the Unified Patent Court, which were then withdrawn. For suppliers and implementers, the takeaway is that fighting a patent held by a non-practising entity can still be worth it, even once the original opponent has thrown in the towel. On August 10th, 2026, the Unified Patent Court in The Hague fully revoked Maxell’s patent EP 2 061 230, covering technology for handing off content to a second device, and at the same time dismissed Maxell’s infringement claim against several Samsung entities, in cases UPC_CFI_251/2025 and UPC_CFI_769/2025. The judges found the patent to be nothing more than an obvious combination of routine adaptations, with no additional technical effect. And now – let's hear the interview with Ken and Caitlin! A dupe used to be a quiet, slow thing. You’d stand in the cereal aisle, notice the generic box next to the name brand, buy it, tell a friend. Word spread over months. That world is gone. On this episode of IP Fridays, Ken Suzan sat down with Caitlin Byczko, partner at Barnes & Thornburg LLP in Indianapolis, to talk about what’s replaced it: a TikTok-driven economy where a single video can sell out a dupe product within hours, sometimes before the original brand’s own team even knows it exists. Byczko litigates and prosecutes trademarks across retail, fashion, luxury goods, technology, and pharmaceuticals, and she’s watched dupe culture evolve from a marketing footnote into one of the more active battlegrounds in trademark law. Here’s what she told us, and why it matters even if your brand has never heard the word “dupe” used about it. Counterfeit and Dupe Are Not the Same Thing, Legally Byczko opened with what she called the most important distinction in this entire conversation: the difference between a counterfeit and a dupe. A counterfeit uses someone else’s actual trademark. Think of a fake Chanel bag stamped with the interlocking C’s, or a fake Louis Vuitton logo. That’s straightforward infringement, and above certain thresholds, a federal crime. A dupe is different. It mimics the look, feel, or performance of a product without using the name or the logo at all. Elf Cosmetics, Zara, Costco’s Kirkland brand, and Quince have all built parts of their business on exactly this model. No one is pretending to be Chanel. They’re offering something that looks and performs similarly, at a fraction of the price, under their own name. Media and social media use “dupe” and “counterfeit” interchangeably. Legally, that’s sloppy, and it matters, because the two categories trigger completely different legal analyses. If There’s No Logo, What Are Brands Actually Suing Over? This is where trade dress comes in. Trade dress protects the overall look and feel of a product: packaging, color combinations, shape, label design. Byczko pointed out that most of us interact with trade-dress-protected products every day without realizing it. The test is likelihood of confusion. Courts look at how similar the products actually look, how sophisticated the shoppers are, and whether there’s real evidence that people were confused. Byczko flagged one case as a genuine roadmap for this area: Van Leeuwen v. Rebel Creamery, an ice cream trade dress dispute that came out of the Eastern District of New York. In her view, the strength of that case came down to how precisely the brand defined its trade dress for the packaging. That precision, she said, did a lot of the work toward the outcome. She’s also watching Lululemon v. Costco, which she expects to be significant partly because it doesn’t rely on trademark and trade dress alone. Byczko noted that brands are increasingly stacking causes of action together: trademark, patent, false advertising, all pointing at the same product. And she’s tracking Sol de Janeiro v. Macau Beauty, a case she finds notable because it pulls in influencer content and testimonials as evidence, not just packaging and trade dress claims. Macau Beauty, she noted, has already been sued multiple times across different jurisdictions. A note for readers outside the US: trade dress as a distinct doctrine doesn’t exist as such in Germany. The closest tools here are the three-dimensional trademark and, more practically, the wettbewerbsrechtlicher Nachahmungsschutz under Section 4 No. 3 of the German Act Against Unfair Competition (UWG). That provision protects product shape, packaging, and get-up against imitation when the original has wettbewerbliche Eigenart, competitive distinctiveness, and the copy creates avoidable confusion about origin, unfairly exploits the original’s reputation, or was built on dishonestly obtained know-how. It’s a narrower, more fact-specific tool than US trade dress, but the underlying logic Byczko describes, define your product’s distinctive features early and precisely, applies just as much on this side of the Atlantic. Why the Evidence Problem Changed Everything Ken asked what’s actually driving the current wave of disputes, and Byczko’s answer was simple: evidence. Ten or twenty years ago, if you sent a cease-and-desist letter or went to trial, you had almost nothing concrete to show about how consumers actually perceived two products. Now you have TikTok comment sections, influencer testimonials, and entire genres of “dupe content” documenting exactly what shoppers think, in their own words, in real time. In the Sol de Janeiro case, Byczko noted that part of the complaint isn’t just about packaging and trade dress. It’s about what influencers said, what claims they made, and what that content reveals about actual consumer confusion or the absence of it. That’s evidence litigators simply didn’t have access to a decade ago, and it cuts both ways: it can prove confusion, or it can just as easily prove there wasn’t any. Why Dupes Took Off: Economics, Status, and a Generational Shift Byczko was careful to frame this part as her personal read, not a sociologist’s conclusion, but it’s a read shaped by watching these disputes up close. Part of it is straightforward economics. Gen Z is shopping under real affordability pressure, and dupes let them participate in trend cycles without the price tag. Byczko cited a projected $12.6 trillion in Gen Z spending power by 2030, a generation too significant for brands to write off. The other part is cultural. A generation ago, owning a visible logo was the status symbol. Now, for a lot of younger shoppers, being the savvy one, the person who finds the dupe first and tells their followers about it, carries its own status. It’s less “I have the real thing” and more “I outsmarted the markup.” Byczko also pointed to growing public skepticism toward paying five or ten times more for a product purely because of the name on the packaging, particularly in beauty and fashion. The PR Trap: When Enforcement Backfires One of the sharpest points in the conversation was about what happens after a brand decides to enforce. Suing over a dupe can read very differently in public than it does in a courtroom. Byczko put it directly: going after a dupe can easily look, to the public, like a big corporation coming down on a small competitor, or worse, on its own customers, the same people who made the original brand aspirational in the first place. She’s seen this dynamic play out repeatedly in high-profile cases. Her advice: treat enforcement as a communication strategy, not just a legal one. Sometimes the smarter move isn’t a lawsuit at all. It’s a quieter cease-and-desist letter, a takedown request, or doubling down on marketing that explains what actually makes the original worth the price. Charlotte Tilbury has leaned hard into this approach, building campaigns around the idea that the original simply can’t be remade. Olaplex ran a similar play with its “OlaDupe” campaign. Legal and marketing, Byczko said, have to work together on this, not in sequence. What Brands Should Actually Do Byczko laid out three practical layers, all before litigation ever enters the picture. First: register your trademarks, and where a product design is genuinely distinctive, pursue trade dress or design patent protection early, before a dupe exists and before you know whether the product will even take off. That timing problem is real. Brands rarely know in advance which product will become the one worth copying. Her advice was to look at long-standing anchor products, the ones that have quietly carried a brand identity for years, and ask whether they’re actually protected. Second: monitor. A large share of dupe disputes start on social media, not in a courtroom. That means someone needs to be watching hashtags and influencer content, not just from direct competitors, but from adjacent or even unrelated brands that could end up duping a product without anyone noticing until it’s already trending. Third, and the one Byczko clearly considers most underused: consumer education and brand storytelling. “This is the original” is a weak pitch on its own in a market flooded with cheap alternatives. What works better is explaining, specifically, what makes a product different: its formulation, its sourcing, its performance, its longevity. Give people a real reason to pay more, not just a claim to authenticity. Where This Goes Next Byczko doesn’t think dupe culture is a passing trend. Her expectation is closer to “there will eventually be a dupe of everything,” and she’s watching an interesting generational pattern where teenage shoppers are teaching their mothers about dupes, who are in turn teaching their own mothers. On the legal side, she expects more clarity as cases like Van Leeuwen work their way through the system, giving brands a clearer formula for how to define and defend trade dress. On the brand side, she expects less reliance on litigation as the primary weapon and more investment in what’s genuinely hard to copy: real innovation, ingredient transparency, and storytelling that a dupe simply can’t replicate. One data point she raised stuck with us: search interest in the word “craftsmanship” is at its highest point in twenty years. After years of leaning into dupe culture, there are signs some consumers are swinging back toward wanting the original, the real ingredient, the real technique, the thing that can’t be copied to the same quality. For brands sitting on distinctive packaging, a signature shape, or a product identity they’ve never formally registered, that’s less a trend forecast than a to-do list. Here is the full transcript: Ken Suzan: Thank you, Ralf. Our guest today on the IP Friday’s podcast is Caitlin Byczko. Caitlin is a partner with Barnes and Thornburg LLP and is based in Indianapolis, Indiana. Caitlin crafts and defends global brand strategies, protecting intellectual property assets with creative solutions and highly tactical advocacy. She excels in trademark prosecution and litigation before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board and federal district courts, safeguarding trademarks and digital properties for businesses of all sizes and at every stage of the business life cycle. From startups to Fortune 500 companies, Caitlin manages clients’ intellectual property needs across diverse industries. Her experience spans retail, fashion, luxury goods, sports, technology, agriculture, venture capital and pharmaceuticals. Beyond trademark law, Caitlin brings valuable insights from her law school experience with the National Collegiate Athletic Association, NCAA, and her previous work serving in a technology company’s in-house legal department. Her tenacious nature and clever problem-solving skills shine through in complex matters, earning praise from clients and colleagues alike. Caitlin is co-author of “Dupe Culture Meets the Courtroom,” published in Global Cosmetic Industry on March 16, 2026. Welcome, Caitlin, to the IP Friday’s podcast. Caitlin Byczko: Hi, Ken. Thank you so much. I’m very honored to be here. Ken Suzan: Yeah, so Caitlin, today we’re talking about dupe culture, a topic that is rapidly becoming front for many brands around the world. What’s the actual difference between a dupe and a counterfeit? Caitlin Byczko: That is one of my favorite questions. This is the most important distinction to draw when we are talking legally about dupes because the difference, because media and social media often use the words interchangeably and legally they’re very different. A counterfeit is a product that uses someone else’s actual trademark. We often think of a fake Chanel bag with interlocking C’s or a fake Louis Vuitton. It’s relatively straightforward trademark infringement and generally above certain thresholds is a federal crime. A dupe, by contrast, is a product that mimics the look, feel, or performance product without actually using the name or logo. We often think of it in the beauty products, in the fashion space, some brands like Elf Cosmetics, which was in the article you just mentioned, Zara, Costco’s Kirkland brand, Quince, who are all very well known in the dupe space. Ken Suzan: What has led to the rise of dupe culture? I’m reading about it virtually every day. Caitlin Byczko: I feel very strongly about this and I’m always talking about it in my legal and non-legal worlds. It’s a very interesting societal change that I think we’ve seen over the past year. I am a lawyer, I am not a marketer, I am not a sociologist, but in my opinion, social media and influencer culture specifically has really created the kind of rise in dupes that we see today. I don’t think we can talk about modern dupe culture without talking about TikTok specifically. Dupe content is its own genre, essentially on TikTok and on Instagram. There’s a whole vocabulary that people are dupe influencers, where their whole product, everything that they’re doing and selling, all of the content they’re making is dupe related. What’s really changed is the speed, I think, around when other products or when a dupe product comes out, how it can be marketed and how people can find out about it. The speed of commerce itself has increased wildly as a result, in part because of social media. A product used to take months to build a reputation as a good alternative. When we think about things, generic cereal is one thing that I have been talking about with my parents with respect to dupe culture. It was one of the things that there used to be, you would go to the store and there would be the cereal, the name brand cereal, and then there would be the generic version of the cereal, which was usually less expensive. That in a way was a dupe. It took a long time. Your friends knew about the dupe cereal and then you knew about the dupe cereal. Then it all got around. Now a single video can send a dupe product sold out within days, within hours sometimes. Oftentimes, a brand’s own team doesn’t even know about the dupe until it’s already been wildly out. Part of it becomes this legal issue when there are claims coming around the dupe. In the Sol de Janeiro case against Macau Beauty, part of the complaint isn’t just about the trade dress and the packaging, which I think we’ll talk about. It’s about the influencer content and the testimonials and what people are saying about the dupes. There’s so much evidence now and there’s so much content and there’s so much out there regarding dupes on social media, on TikTok, and in other places. Ken Suzan: Yeah, and it’s an ever-evolving story. Every day there’s new social media content, more evidence for a potential gain, right? Caitlin Byczko: Absolutely. Ken Suzan: So if dupes aren’t using a particular brand name, how are companies suing over them at all? Caitlin Byczko: So this is really where trade dress comes in, and trade dress, as most of us know, has been around for a long time. There are a lot of very well-known things that you probably see or use every day that you don’t know are protected by trade dress, but they are. And the trade dress protects the overall kind of look and feel of a product. So if you think about things like packaging, color combinations, shape, label design, when that becomes distinctive enough, right? When consumers see that and kind of immediately understand it has the secondary meaning related to the brand owner, then it can become a protectable trademark. And so the test for trademark infringement is likelihood of confusion. And courts will look at the factors of how similar the products actually look, how sophisticated the shoppers are, whether there’s evidence that people were actually confused. I think one of the big cases in the trade dress space that came out since you and I discussed originally, Ken, is the Van Leeuwen versus Rebel Creamery ice cream case. And so for any of those interested, it’s a very interesting opinion. It just came out of the Eastern District of New York. I think that really helps people, brands specifically, kind of provide a roadmap with respect to how to define a trade dress. I think they did an excellent job there defining what the trade dress was for the packaging. And I think that that had a lot to do with the success. Ken Suzan: Yes. Ken Suzan: Why do you think younger consumers gravitate towards dupes so much more than past generations did? Caitlin Byczko: I think there are a few things that are kind of top of each other. The obvious one is economics. I think younger consumers, especially Gen Z, they’re shopping in an environment where there’s affordability pressure. And I think that dupes let them participate in certain trend cycles without the price tag. Gen Z is a significant demographic behind the growth of dupes. And they have a predicted spending power we saw recently, $12.6 trillion by 2030. Ken Suzan: Wow. That’s incredible. Caitlin Byczko: I think it is really also coupled with more of what I would say is a cultural shift. Again, I am a lawyer and this is just my opinion. But what feels aspirational is really changing, I think. And a generation ago, we saw in the fashion world, there was a really big, people really liked logos. Having a logo, owning a logo was the point. And now for a lot of younger shoppers or even more savvy shoppers, actually being a savvy shopper is the status symbol itself. So for a lot of creators, finding the dupe before anyone else or being the one who tells your followers about the dupe really has its own, and it’s less “I have this real thing” and more, “oh, I outsmarted the markup.” And I think it’s that kind of value. I think younger consumers are more publicly skeptical of the idea that something is worth five or ten times more just because of the name on the packaging. And I think that that becomes the case particularly in beauty and then clothing as well. And so I think it’s coupled with the question of craftsmanship and all of these different things. Like we can’t view anything in a vacuum, which is why I could talk for 500 years about this topic. Ken Suzan: Yeah, definitely. Now brands obviously want to protect themselves. That’s an important thing. But going after a dupe can backfire publicly, particularly on the internet. Can you comment on this possibility and what should brands do? Caitlin Byczko: Sure. I think the biggest thing is what you just said. So I think there’s the legal component. And when we’re assessing this for one of our brand clients, I think we cannot review one without the other. So I think you have to say, do we have this claim? Do we have a protectable trade dress or a look and feel claim? And what is the potential backlash in the public? I think it is also a joint PR concern, because what we see is suing over a dupe can very easily read to the public as, oh, this big brand or big corporation is coming down on a small competitor or on its own customers that made the original brand aspirational. I think that we see this in a lot of the big cases that are out right now. So brands, I think, can start to think about enforcement as a communication strategy first, because sometimes the smarter play isn’t necessarily filing a lawsuit. It’s kind of a quieter cease and desist, a takedown request, or separately, it might be really doubling down on the craftsmanship or on a marketing side of what makes the product worth the price. I think Charlotte Tilbury is a great example of this, who’s really leaned into this kind of “can’t be duped” or “you can’t remake the original” with respect to some of their really core products. And so I think people really need to, or brands really need to, assess: one, how can we define what it is that’s being duped? And again, that’s where I think that Van Leeuwen case, I think, will be really interesting over the next few years, with respect to kind of providing this roadmap to help people say, here is a way that we can try to really define what the trade dress is and then be able to protect it and be able to enforce it. Ken Suzan: Caitlin, are there cases right now, I know we just talked about the Van Leeuwen case, but are there cases right now that you think will actually set the tone for how this area of law develops? Caitlin Byczko: Absolutely. And I think some of the cases probably are even in the works, they’re not even filed yet, which is probably very exciting to us as trademark nerds. I do think the Lululemon versus Costco case will be a big one. It’s not just trademarks and trade dress, as many of them are not. I think a lot of times we see in these cases brands are very smartly using kind of all of the different types of causes of action that they bring: trademark, patent, false advertising, a lot of different things. And so I think that that one is definitely certainly one to watch kind of in the fashion space. And then the Sol de Janeiro versus Macau Beauty. Macau Beauty has been sued multiple times, I think, in various jurisdictions. And so I think part of that one is very interesting to me because I think it’s this, it loops not only trademark protection, but also it brings in false advertising, it brings in influencers, it brings in all of these different things. And so I think, like we had talked about previously, nothing is really viewed in a vacuum. And I think for all of these cases, one really important thing, maybe that we didn’t necessarily have access to 10 years ago, or certainly 20 years ago, is this like just ripe amount of evidence of potential confusion or potential non-confusion. When we go on social media and look at all of these things, and then read the comments and all of this different data that’s out there, it’s fascinating, because if you’re in trial, or if you’re going to trial, you’re sending a cease and desist letter, like there is evidence of what the consumers think right here in front of you, right? And the weight of that evidence obviously depends on what it is. But it’s fascinating the way that you can very quickly identify, you know, is there confusion? Is there not confusion, in a way that you likely could never have even thought to consider 10 to 20 years ago? Ken Suzan: Now beyond litigation, what should brands actually be doing to protect themselves in a dupe-driven market? Caitlin Byczko: I think one of the best things that we can do, right, is starting to register the trademarks. I think that’s an obvious one. And really start to consider where the product is genuinely distinctive. And so if it is genuinely distinctive, pursuing a trade dress or a design patent early, before a dupe exists, before anything happens. And I know that can be difficult, because oftentimes brands don’t know for sure what’s going to take off and what’s not. It can also be a surprise. But I think it’s really pushing brands that when you are innovating and when you are doing something that is truly unique and truly distinctive, or when you’re looking back on your brand assets and saying, this thing has been an anchor brand asset for 10 years, you know, have we sought trade dress protection? Is there a way that we can do that? The second layer really is monitoring, in my mind, because a lot of dupe disputes do start on social media. And I think it is important to have people within a company, if you have a product that you’re really keeping an eye on, or that you’re concerned about being duped or causing confusion, having someone who is keeping eyes on hashtags and influencer content and all of these various things. You know, we’re not watching just your direct competitors, we’re watching other completely different brands, or kind of made-up brands even, who could be duping the product. And then I think the third thing that I see as very important is this kind of consumer education and brand storytelling, which is when we kind of get outside of the purely legal side of it. And, you know, legal and marketing and brand and social kind of all need to work together, right? I think if the only pitch to consumers is “this is the original,” it kind of becomes a weak argument in a market where there are cheap alternatives everywhere. But I think the brands that really explain what actually makes their product different, in its formulation, its sourcing, its performance, its longevity, it really gives people a real reason to say, I want to pay more for this brand because of XYZ, you know, the technology or whatever that is. Charlotte Tilbury is one that I had mentioned. I know Olaplex kind of had a big campaign around “OlaDupe” is what they called it. So I think really unique and interesting marketing also assists with that. Ken Suzan: Caitlin, where do you see dupe culture heading? Is this a trend that plateaus or does it fundamentally change how brands operate? Caitlin Byczko: I think dupe culture itself is here to stay. I mean, I think we are only getting into a world where there is truly going to be a dupe of everything. And it’s not good or bad necessarily. I think it is just where we are in life. And I think, you know, things serve different purposes. And it all depends a lot on how the younger consumers shop. And it’s also changing how older consumers shop. You know, I’ve read a lot about teenage girls teaching their moms about dupes, who are then teaching their grandmothers about dupes, right? So on the legal side, I think we will get clarity eventually. I think right around, you know, all like all of these things, which seem so complex, and we’ll never know the answer. You know, five [years] from now, we will probably have certainly more clarity, because a lot of these cases will move forward. You know, the Van Leeuwen one, which I’ve now talked about multiple times, but I just obviously think it’s very fascinating. I think that that’s one where you have a roadmap, right? And it may be contested, or, you know, everything is very fact-specific in the trademark world. But I think it will open the door to allow people one more aggressive brand enforcement. But it will give people a roadmap proactively to kind of say, if we follow this formula for our trade dress, or, you know, defining our trade dress, then, you know, we have something we can potentially protect. And then I think on the brand side, we’ll likely see less reliance on litigation as the primary weapon and more investment in things that are actually, you know, difficult to dupe: innovation, ingredient transparency, marketing, genuinely interesting brand storytelling is something that we’ve seen. I read this past week that searches for craftsmanship, just like generally the word craftsmanship, and kind of products with craftsmanship, is at an all-time high, than it’s been in like the past 20 years. And so it’s interesting, right, that we have gone from this kind of luxury item or high craftsmanship to this dupe culture that we are in now. But there is some potential shift where people are saying, you know, now, I’ve seen all of this and I have all of these options, but now actually what I do care about is the original, right, the innovation or the ingredient transparency or all of those things that can’t necessarily be copied to the same quality. So it’s why it will just provide us with endless topic of discussion, because I think it will only just keep changing forever. Ken Suzan: That’s right. Caitlin, I want to thank you for spending time with us on the IP Friday’s podcast. This has been very insightful, and I’m sure we’ll be talking about this issue in the months and years to come. Caitlin Byczko: Thank you so much, Ken. I really appreciate it. Ken Suzan: Thank you.

AnyDesk: Get Remote Access Set Up Today at https://anydesk.com/ich DeleteMe: Get 20% off your DeleteMe plan when you go to https://joindeleteme.com/ich and use promo code ICH at checkout. Even Realities: Go to https://evenrealities.bio/icedcoffee and use code ICEDCOFFEE for 10% off Even R1 and/or Even Clip when you add them to your Even G2 order AG1: For a limited time, save 20% on your first subscription order of AG1 Next Gen or AG1 Pro at https://drinkag1.com/ich Follow John Morgan: http://www.forthepeople.com/ Instagram Morgan and Morgan: https://www.instagram.com/forthepeople/?hl=en *

Link Up w/The Morning Sickness Digitally All Over:Instagram: @hms_98_official, @bosskupd, @bretvesely, @dickToledoX/Twitter: @HMSon98, @DickToledo, @bretveselyFacebook: @HMSKUPDYouTube: @hmspodcast9320, @98kupdRequest/Call in/Wakeup Song line:(IN AZ) 602.585.9800More HMS: www.holmbergpodcast.com, www.98kupd.comEmail: dtoledo@98kupd.com, bvesely@98kupd.com, bbogen@98kupd.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Is a story of absurdities that never get old, former GOP congressman Matt Gaetz is preparing to sue the WNBA for not allowing a former NBA star to join, which is discrimination from where he sits. If transgender men are allowed to play, why not someone who SAYS they're a tranny? How far can this go? Independent journalist James O'Keefe travels to the remote Aleutian Islands in Alaska to see if it really is as hard as Senator Lisa Murkowski suggests to register and vote. You'll never guess what O'Keefe discovers (syrupy sarcasm intended.)  

We're talking about the police officer suing an elderly woman for falling off her steps, the Portlanders being accused of using the most water, and a new city audit showing how bad the city is at hiring contract workers. Joining host Claudia Meza are Willamette Week City Hall reporter Sophie Peel and our very own senior producer Giulia Fiaoni. Become a member of City Cast Portland! Join today, and we'll send you some exclusive City Cast Portland swag, while supplies last. Get all the details and sign up here.  Discussed in today's episode: Portland cop came to check on woman's welfare, then fell down her steps. Now he's suing her for $2M [Oregonian] Hydro Hogs [Willamette Week] Portland wasted $650k in tax dollars on contractors who couldn't do the job [KATU 2] Who would you like to hear on City Cast Portland? Shoot us an email at portland@citycast.fm, or leave us a voicemail at 503-208-5448. Want more Portland news? Then make sure to sign up for our morning newsletter and be sure to follow us on Instagram. Looking to advertise on City Cast Portland? Check out our options for podcast and newsletter ads at citycast.fm/advertise. Learn more about the sponsors of this August 21st episode: Salishan Coastal Lodge Stacked Piercing - take 20% off your first booking with code CITYCAST20 PaintCare Grand Central Bakery

Hour 4 of Jake & Ben on August 20, 2026 Live at 5 - Utah Suing Freddie Whittingham is a Bad Look for Everybody Involved Will the Clippers Ever Be Punished For Kawhi Leonard? Redacted

Josh Furlong, who covers the Utes for KSL.com, joined the show to talk about Utah's lawsuit against Freddie Whittingham and other takeaways with Game 1 coming closer. 

ASU beat writer Michelle Gardner University of Utah suing Freddie Whittingham NFL Camp fights

Hour 1 Starting Lineup Cougar Club price gouge  What You May Have Missed Hour 2 NBC Sports Kurt Helin Good, Bad & Ugly Home run review drama in MLB Hour 3 ASU beat writer Michelle Gardner University of Utah suing Freddie Whittingham NFL Camp fights Hour 4 NCAA grants 5th year Sports Roulette Final thoughts

Hour 1 of Jake & Ben on August 20, 2026 The University of Utah is SUING Former Tight Ends Coach Freddie Whittingham Top 3 Stories: What are the Denver Nuggets Doing? BYU Big Man Keiba Keita Entering Transfer Portal. Doctors are Petitioning to Stop Monster's Partnership with Big 12.  Jazz Might Have Some Brutal Losses as a Young, Inconsistent Team

Headlines for August 19, 2026; Trump’s “Authoritarian Takeover” of the Media, ABC Suing FCC & the Meta Trial: Free Press’s Jessica González; “Profoundly Corrupt”: Trump Sued for Selling Early Access to His Truth Social Posts for $100K/Month; Bipartisan Outcry Forces Trump to Pause Border Security Project in Big Bend National Park in Texas; Activist Tree-Sit in Ancient Cottonwood Continues Against Border Wall Construction in Arizona

Headlines for August 19, 2026; Trump’s “Authoritarian Takeover” of the Media, ABC Suing FCC & the Meta Trial: Free Press’s Jessica González; “Profoundly Corrupt”: Trump Sued for Selling Early Access to His Truth Social Posts for $100K/Month; Bipartisan Outcry Forces Trump to Pause Border Security Project in Big Bend National Park in Texas; Activist Tree-Sit in Ancient Cottonwood Continues Against Border Wall Construction in Arizona

The Mincing Rascals this week are John Williams of WGN Radio, Eric Zorn, publisher of The Picayune Sentinel, Steve Bertrand, host of the  Steve Bertrand on Books podcast and proprietor of Steve Bertrand Travel, and award-winning journalist and political pundit Marj Halperin. The Rascals start the podcast talking about the CTU filing a defamation lawsuit against the Illinois Policy Institute (as well as […]

You know about breathing impaired breeds like pugs, bred for looks that beget health issues. And then there are King Charles Cavalier Spaniels. One St. Louis woman is now suing Petland because she doesn't feel she was adequately warned she was buying a dog doomed to illness. The PETA Podcast PETA, the world's largest animal rights organization, is ten million strong and growing.  Hosted by Emil Guillermo.   Music provided by CarbonWorks. Please subscribe, rate, and review wherever you get your podcasts. Thanks for listening to THE PETA PODCAST!  © PETA, All rights reserved. copyright 2026

In this episode, host Lisa Bilyeu is joined by ex-CIA spy Andrew Bustamante and renowned defense attorney Karen Conti for a riveting discussion on the complex interplay between power, money, and justice in high-profile cases. Focusing on Sean "Diddy" Combs, the panel unravels allegations of abuse, manipulation, and the concealed video evidence that has sparked intense debate.Our guests delve into the mechanisms of reputational protection, the ethics and legality of selective video management by hotels, and the broader implications of federal investigations that could ripple through the entertainment and financial sectors. They also touch on the societal idolization of celebrities and the reluctance to believe victims of abuse, especially in racially charged contexts.The conversation does not shy away from the darker aspects of celebrity culture, including the psychological and legal struggles victims face, and the role of powerful networks in perpetuating harmful behavior. Andrew and Karen provide insights into the strategic use of influence and blackmail, comparing Diddy's case to other notorious figures like Jeffrey Epstein and R. Kelly.SHOWNOTES-No charges yet; potential expanded investigation forthcoming.-Suing politicians or celebrities risks scrutiny, safety.-Abusers target easy victims; legal systems complicate.-Questioning celebrity adoration and accountability in society.-Karen Conti: author, radio host, crime expert.FOLLOW LISA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lisabilyeu/Twitter: https://twitter.com/lisabilyeuYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/womenofimpactTik Tok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lisa_bilyeu?lang=enSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

A Local City is Suing Its Own Residents?! | Mundo Clip 8-18-26See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Jason talks with attorney Joe Tamburino about MN AG Keith Ellison suing the state of TX to get them to extradite an ICE Agent who's facing charges here in Minnesota. Does he have a case?

On Tuesday's Drivetime with DeRusha... 3pm Hour: Jason talks about the Governor's executive order to stop mining near the BWCA that was recently reauthorized. Is anybody else tired of MN saying "no" to business? Plus, Rep. Pete Stauber who fought to get that reauthorization joins Jason to react. 4pm Hour: Jason is joined by attorney Joe Tamburino to talk about the MN AG's lawsuit against TX to get them to extradite an ICE Agent who's in their custody and is facing charges back here in Minnesota. Then he's joined by Brenna Bobendrier, farmer relations manager with Midwest Dairy to talk about prepping for the State Fair on DeRusha Eats! 5pm Hour: Jason talks about TPT rebranding to MN PBS and is annoyed that everything in MN has to be named after the whole state. Then he talks about his kids being home before they head back to college - and just how many kids are coming back home AFTER college.

Two hours. One subject. Every documented corruption and abuse of power question about the Trump administration, in order, with the receipts attached and the counterargument stated out loud every single time. John Yoo wrote the torture memos. He is, by a wide margin, the most expansive thinker on presidential power in modern American life. And he looked at a US military strike that killed two unarmed men clinging to wreckage and wrote that it was, quote, simply murder. That is where this episode starts. Here is the thread running through all of it, and it is not the one you are expecting: most of what I cover here is legal. The president is exempt from the conflict of interest law that binds nearly every other federal employee. Blind trusts are a tradition, not a requirement. The pardon power has almost no limits. So the question is not only did he break the law. It is whether any president should be able to do this at all. Enrichment and entrenchment. Using the office to make money, and using it to remove the things that could stop you. Both count. I keep them separate. This is a special edition, and it is only the tip of the iceberg. CHAPTERS 00:00 Cold open 04:40 John Yoo wrote the torture memos 06:05 Why this episode, and what corruption actually means here 11:15 The 927 page disclosure and the 2.2 billion dollar year 13:31 World Liberty Financial and 187 million dollars from Abu Dhabi 17:16 The memecoin, and who lost money on it 19:32 Justin Sun and the SEC case that disappeared 21:45 Nvidia, AMD, and the 15 percent chip fee 23:16 The 400 million dollar ballroom and its anonymous donors 27:01 The enforcement that quietly went away 29:16 Suing the IRS for 10 billion dollars 33:00 The judge who threw the whole thing out 34:32 Blanche confirmed 50 to 49 36:01 The 230 million dollars he asked taxpayers to pay him 37:32 Firing Pam Bondi 39:02 Comey, Letitia James, and a prosecutor who had never tried a case 47:16 1,800 pardons 48:00 January 6th clemency 51:01 Pardoning the 2020 election lawyers 52:32 Binance, crypto, and a very convenient pardon 54:03 The 2 billion dollars owed to victims that vanished 57:01 The honest comparison to Clinton, Biden and Obama 1:00:00 Seventeen inspectors general fired in one night 1:03:46 Closing every channel a whistleblower could use 1:05:17 Firing the person who reports the jobs numbers 1:08:15 The law firms: he lost four for four and it worked anyway 1:12:46 Columbia, Brown, and Harvard 1:15:00 Paramount, CBS, and the merger approval 1:17:18 Subpoenas served on reporters and their families 1:22:30 Trump v. Slaughter and the Election Assistance Commission 1:24:01 Dismantling election security 1:26:16 The mail ballot order now at the Supreme Court 1:28:31 Georgia said no, and why that belongs here 1:30:45 The boat strikes 1:33:01 Venezuela, Greenland, Iran 1:37:31 The steel man: the best case against everything I just said 1:45:46 What I left out, and why that matters 1:49:30 Closing LINKS Podcast website: https://www.purplepoliticalbreakdown.com ALIVE Podcast Network: https://alivepodcastnetwork.com/ Substack: https://open.substack.com/pub/purplepoliticalbreakdown All links: https://linktr.ee/purplepoliticalbreakdown Join the Discord: https://discord.gg/ptPAsZtHC9 THIS WEEK'S RESOURCES Equal Vote Coalition and STAR Voting: voting methods that make every vote count equally, with no wasted votes and no strategic voting. https://www.equal.vote/star Future is Now Coalition: a grassroots movement working to restore democracy through transparency, accountability and technology. https://futureis.org/ Independent Center: resources for independent political thinking and civic engagement. https://www.independentcenter.org/ r/policysolutions: a community for political solutions rather than political noise. https://www.reddit.com/r/policysolutions/ Political Solutions Without Political Bias.

John welcomes New Mexico Attorney General Raul Torrez to discuss his landmark litigation against Meta and his new crusade against the Justice Department over the Epstein files. Torrez explains his recently filed lawsuit against Todd Blanche and the DOJ for obstructing his investigation of sex trafficking at Epstein's Santa Fe outpost, Zorro Ranch; his office's role in drafting a new piece of federal legislation, the Epstein Files Transparency II, introduced last week; and his courtroom victory over Mark Zuckerberg's company, which yielded a nearly $1 billion judgment and may serve as a blueprint for similar cases across the country aimed at holding tech firms liable for harms from their platforms.

Suing over jersey numbers. [1:10]A terrible look for a superstar. Business has never been better. [20:42]The $15 billion teamA college roster for $50 million. (Guess who?) [27:00]Can the biggest spender win a title? See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Hour 4: Josh Brisco Joins, Jayden Daniels Suing LSU, Dram Stadium Location full 2721 Thu, 13 Aug 2026 14:58:34 +0000 SeK6gCdfBwTiBOb07grEAS33igpkNKf5 nfl,mlb,kansas city chiefs,kansas city royals,sports Fescoe & Dusty nfl,mlb,kansas city chiefs,kansas city royals,sports Hour 4: Josh Brisco Joins, Jayden Daniels Suing LSU, Dram Stadium Location Fescoe & Dusty are huge fans of Kansas City sports and the people of Kansas City who make it the great city it is. Start your morning with us from 6-10 as we talk all things Chiefs, Royals, Jayhawks, and more, with plenty of tangents along the way! 2024 © 2021 Audacy, Inc. Sports https://player.amper

Full Show: Jayden Daniels Suing LSU, 13 Seconds Game Haunting 2 Franchises, Ben Maller, More Pressure For OLine or DLine in Week 1, Smash or Pass, Craig Gass, Josh Brisco Joins full 10844 Thu, 13 Aug 2026 15:00:42 +0000 mp5MHXgHho661Zj4Vo9zU6v9CxvNWPgD sports Fescoe & Dusty sports Full Show: Jayden Daniels Suing LSU, 13 Seconds Game Haunting 2 Franchises, Ben Maller, More Pressure For OLine or DLine in Week 1, Smash or Pass, Craig Gass, Josh Brisco Joins Fescoe & Dusty are huge fans of Kansas City sports and the people of Kansas City who make it the great city it is. Start your morning with us from 6-10 as we talk all things Chiefs, Royals, Jayhawks, and more, with plenty of tangents along the way! 2024 © 2021 Audacy, Inc.

It's Thursday, August 13. Here are today's top stories around Central Indiana. Want to go deeper on the stories you hear on WFYI News Now? Visit wfyi.org and follow us on social media to get local news every day. WFYI News Now is hosted by Barb Anguiano and produced by Zach Bundy. Subscribe wherever you get your podcasts.

Andy and Brenden discuss the recent Mark Mitchell court news, plus Calum McAndrew joins the show to talk Mizzou Basketball and Football!

True Crime Today digs into the Lindsay Clancy civil lawsuit and the reason her ex-husband is suing her providers instead of her. According to the complaint filed in Norfolk Superior Court, the people treating Lindsay's postpartum mental illness misprescribed a bevy of powerful medications and stacked new drugs onto old ones without any connecting plan. The civil filings count nine psychiatric medications in her final months, eight of them inside a single three-week stretch, while her criminal defense team counts 13. The suits say Lindsay repeatedly told her providers the medications were causing her worsening symptoms. She went to emergency rooms, called crisis lines, and admitted herself to hospitals. The basic lab work that would have shown how her body was processing the drugs was never done, the filings claim. Lindsay's own separate malpractice suit goes further, naming 11 defendants including McLean Hospital and Women & Infants Hospital. It describes a program staffed by a skeleton crew over a holiday, and it discloses a bipolar diagnosis made after the killings by a Columbia University psychiatrist. Tony breaks down both filings, the difference between what a civil jury and a criminal jury must find, and the collision coming when one verdict arrives before the other. The providers' employers have responded with statements, not specifics, and nothing in either lawsuit has been proven. Lindsay Clancy is presumed innocent in her criminal case, where prosecutors allege the killings were planned and her illness has been overstated. The reason Patrick Clancy went to civil court is written across every page of his complaint, and it points at the same system his ex-wife's defense is blaming at trial. Read the trial through the lawsuit and the whole picture sharpens.END LINKSJoin Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/ Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1 Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodDISCLAIMERThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.HASHTAGS#LindsayClancy #PatrickClancy #TrueCrimeToday #TrueCrime #ClancyLawsuit #WrongfulDeath #MassachusettsNews #TrialCoverage #CrimePodcast #CourtCase

August 12, 2026 ~ Chris Renwick and Lloyd Jackson talk with Reuters Reporter, Diana Novak Jones, about a court ruling that's allowing lawsuits about the addictive nature of social media to proceed against the social media companies Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

**Get Ready for a Wild Ride at Broncos Training Camp** This episode of the podcast is a must-listen for football fans and anyone interested in current events. We are live at Broncos Park, where they're discussing everything from the team's new training facility to the latest news on the data center debate in Aurora. But that's not all - they're also diving into some serious topics, like the controversy surrounding Dr. Fauci's text messages and the importance of being cautious when sharing information about your kids on social media. We are joined by a special guest, Andrew Morris from the New Civil Liberties Alliance, who's suing the state of Colorado over a new recycling program that's got some major issues. They're also talking about the latest news on the Broncos, including the team's purchase of land in the Burnham Yard area and the injury bug that's starting to bite. And, of course, no episode would be complete without some fun and games - this time, it's a trivia question about NFL coaches who've beaten every team in the league. But what really sets this episode apart is the hosts' willingness to tackle tough topics and have real conversations about the issues that matter. From the impact of AI on education to the importance of being mindful about what we share on social media, they're not afraid to dive in and explore the complexities of these issues. So if you're looking for a podcast that's informative, entertaining, and thought-provoking, you're in the right place. Tune in to this episode to hear the us discuss all of these topics and more - and don't forget to listen to the end to find out who wins the trivia question and gets a pair of Broncos preseason tickets!See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A federal appeals court ruled that President Donald Trump cannot continue construction of the proposed White House ballroom without congressional approval, ordering a halt to the project and setting up a likely Supreme Court battle. The California Teamsters union has filed a lawsuit against several state agencies, including the California DMV, seeking to block new regulations that allow the testing and future deployment of autonomous heavy-duty trucks on California roads. The union argues the rules were improperly adopted and could threaten hundreds of thousands of trucking jobs. Please Like, Comment and Follow 'Philip Teresi on KMJ' on all platforms: --- Philip Teresi on KMJ is available on the KMJNOW app, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube or wherever else you listen to podcasts. -- Philip Teresi on KMJ Weekdays 2-6 PM Pacific on News/Talk 580 AM & 105.9 FM KMJ | Website | Facebook | Instagram | X | Podcast | Amazon | - Everything KMJ KMJNOW App | Podcasts | Facebook | X | Instagram See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A federal appeals court ruled that President Donald Trump cannot continue construction of the proposed White House ballroom without congressional approval, ordering a halt to the project and setting up a likely Supreme Court battle. The California Teamsters union has filed a lawsuit against several state agencies, including the California DMV, seeking to block new regulations that allow the testing and future deployment of autonomous heavy-duty trucks on California roads. The union argues the rules were improperly adopted and could threaten hundreds of thousands of trucking jobs. Please Like, Comment and Follow 'Philip Teresi on KMJ' on all platforms: --- Philip Teresi on KMJ is available on the KMJNOW app, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube or wherever else you listen to podcasts. -- Philip Teresi on KMJ Weekdays 2-6 PM Pacific on News/Talk 580 AM & 105.9 FM KMJ | Website | Facebook | Instagram | X | Podcast | Amazon | - Everything KMJ KMJNOW App | Podcasts | Facebook | X | Instagram See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Sports with Rod 8-7-2026 …It was an Entertaining Hall of Fame Game for a change …Mike Tomlin sounded great on NBC …She is suing the Yankees for $10 Million Dollar …Soap Opera Friday

Andy Baskin, Tom Withers and Meredith Kain give you the latest in the sports world with Headlines!

The prosecution's own lead witness walked out of the courtroom and filed a civil lawsuit against the people who were supposed to help his wife. Patrick Clancy is not suing to punish Lindsay. He is suing the doctors. Both he and Lindsay filed separate suits naming the providers who prescribed, adjusted, and failed to monitor seven medications that were in her blood that night.Criminal defense attorney Bob Motta of Defense Diaries examines what the defense extracted from cross-examination — testimony that no provider warned Patrick it was unsafe to leave Lindsay alone with the children despite her ER visits and documented intrusive thoughts. Motta covers the documented fact that Women and Infants Hospital identified overmedication, reached out to her nurse practitioner, and never heard back. He also addresses what it means to ask a jury of non-medical professionals to decide whether someone was sick enough to lack criminal responsibility.Tony Brueski and criminal defense attorney Bob Motta of Defense Diaries.END LINKSJoin Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/ Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1 Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodDISCLAIMERThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.HASHTAGS#LindsayClancy #PatrickClancy #HiddenKillers #BobMotta #DefenseDiaries #PostpartumPsychosis #PlymouthSuperiorCourt #CriminalResponsibility #TrueCrime #HealthcareFailure

Scott Sistek with a wildfire smoke forecast // Peter Charalambous on the New Mexico AG suing the Justice Department over the Epstein Files // Cory Smith on the latest negotiations between the US and Iran // Charlie Harger Commentary on the red flags surrounding the  suspected arsonist in Spokane // Brad Garrett on security threats over water access // Gee Scott on Amazon's attempt to help businesses impacted by the Bite of Seattle shooting

This week on The Business of Watches, Collective Horology co-founder and Chief Executive Asher Rapkin joins us. He brought his lawyer. While Collective is a Ventura, California-based retailer of independent watch brands, including Armin Strom, Czapek, Fears, Ming and J.N. Shapiro, Sara Albrecht is the chairman and CEO of The Liberty Justice Center. That's the non-profit litigation firm that led the legal fight successfully challenging President Trump's initial round of tariffs all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States. They won, in a surprise decision that ruled the President didn't have the authority to impose the levies that boosted the cost of importing goods to the U.S., including Swiss made watches.  The government is now in the process of refunding the approximately $166 billion businesses paid out. Of course, the Trump administration found a work-around and immediately slapped on new tariffs and, on July 24, initiated levies of 10% and 12.5% on imported goods, including Swiss made watches. That's the day that Collective Horology and another importer (dealing in exotic spices), filed a lawsuit against the President and various bodies and individuals in the administration including U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer. Rapkin tells us why his business decided to challenge the tariff laws and take on the President and his government while Albrecht lays out the legal argument driving their case. It's a matter of significant economic importance for U.S. business and the global watch industry.  Show Notes0:46 Lawsuit filed by Collective Horology et. al against President Donald Trump  1:13 Swiss Watch CEOs Plot Next Move As US Tariffs Threaten Industry Sales (Hodinkee)  2:24 Collective Horology website  3:42 Watch Industry Cheers Supreme Court Tariff Ruling But Faces More Uncertainty As Trump Vows Workaround (Hodinkee)  4:57 Liberty Justice Center  7:28 Forced Labour Section 301 (U.S. Trade Representative statement)  10:50 U.S. dollar x Swiss franc (Xe Currency)  11:37 J.N. Shapiro Watches website  11:50 The Watch Switzerland Can't Make - Karel Bachand (Barrelhand) - Openwork podcast  14:53 Rolex And Richemont Executives Among Swiss Business Leaders Meeting With Trump (Hodinkee)  18:31 Swiss-U.S. Trade Relations (SECO)  20:05 U.S. Court of International Trade  21:11 Jamieson Greer (Hodinkee)

Episode 182 opens with CannCon and Ashe in America riffing on boy bands before settling into the serious stuff, including a look at some very professional audience-manipulation research aimed at the 2026 midterms and a Fauci contempt theory involving the Fifth Amendment and the Supremacy Clause. Then New York's own Marly Hornik joins to tell her story, from New York Citizens Audit and Andrew Paquette's peer-reviewed algorithm work to landing in Letitia James's crosshairs under a KKK Act investigation. She walks through her active federal lawsuit against Tish James and the state Board of Elections, why she thinks retaliation against canvassers is a conspiracy against rights, and how it all connects to her viral Mamdani fraud report and a founders-era reading of the Constitution's qualification clause. Expect Tina Peters, voter roll ghosts with impossible registration dates, and one very persistent Streamyard echo.

WE'RE SUING BEN CRUMP & HEAR DEATH THREATS FROM NOLAN WELLS CREW (Ep #1,266)

Attorney Russ Latino announced that his client Bart Edmiston — a former Ocean Springs High School teammate of Nolan Wells — is preparing to file defamation lawsuits against people who accused him of killing Nolan. Latino says Bart fully cooperated with investigators from the beginning, turning over his boat, GPS data, and phone. He flatly denied that Bart killed Nolan or contributed to his death in any way and called the online accusations "wholly fabricated."Bart also received a credible death threat that has been reported to the FBI, state, and local law enforcement.A defamation lawsuit opens the door to discovery — depositions, document production, and testimony under oath. It is the legal mechanism least likely to protect someone with something to hide and most likely to surface the truth.Attorney Gary Bufkin filed subpoenas to Snapchat, TikTok, WhatsApp, Meta, and Life360 requesting login histories, IP addresses, GPS data, and message records from Nolan's accounts. A mutual cell phone inspection has been agreed to by both sides' forensic teams. The answers the internet has been demanding are coming through the legal system, not through viral speculation.The manufactured evidence — a debunked pool photo, an audio recording with a mismatched digital fingerprint, AI fakes of Nolan's mother — made the investigation harder, not easier. Every viral accusation poisons the witness pool. Every death threat pulls resources from the case. The people who turned Nolan Wells' death into content owe his family more than clicks.End LinksJoin Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/ Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1 Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodDisclaimerThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.Hashtags#NolanWells #BartEdmiston #TrueCrimeToday #HornIsland #OceanSprings #Mississippi #TrueCrime #BenCrump #JusticeForNolan #Defamation

Website

Link Up w/The Morning Sickness Digitally All Over:Instagram: @hms_98_official, @bosskupd, @bretvesely, @dickToledoX/Twitter: @HMSon98, @DickToledo, @bretveselyFacebook: @HMSKUPDYouTube: @hmspodcast9320, @98kupdRequest/Call in/Wakeup Song line:(IN AZ) 602.585.9800More HMS: holmbergpodcast.com, 98kupd.comEmail: dtoledo@98kupd.com, bvesely@98kupd.com, bbogen@98kupd.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Link Up w/The Morning Sickness Digitally All Over:Instagram: @hms_98_official, @bosskupd, @bretvesely, @dickToledoX/Twitter: @HMSon98, @DickToledo, @bretveselyFacebook: @HMSKUPDYouTube: @hmspodcast9320, @98kupdRequest/Call in/Wakeup Song line:(IN AZ) 602.585.9800More HMS: holmbergpodcast.com, 98kupd.comEmail: dtoledo@98kupd.com, bvesely@98kupd.com, bbogen@98kupd.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Link Up w/The Morning Sickness Digitally All Over:Instagram: @hms_98_official, @bosskupd, @bretvesely, @dickToledoX/Twitter: @HMSon98, @DickToledo, @bretveselyFacebook: @HMSKUPDYouTube: @hmspodcast9320, @98kupdRequest/Call in/Wakeup Song line:(IN AZ) 602.585.9800More HMS: holmbergpodcast.com, 98kupd.comEmail: dtoledo@98kupd.com, bvesely@98kupd.com, bbogen@98kupd.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Shannon's 8:30 Dirty 7-28-26See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Link Up w/The Morning Sickness Digitally All Over:Instagram: @hms_98_official, @bosskupd, @bretvesely, @dickToledoX/Twitter: @HMSon98, @DickToledo, @bretveselyFacebook: @HMSKUPDYouTube: @hmspodcast9320, @98kupdRequest/Call in/Wakeup Song line:(IN AZ) 602.585.9800More HMS: holmbergpodcast.com, 98kupd.comEmail: dtoledo@98kupd.com, bvesely@98kupd.com, bbogen@98kupd.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Stephen Woldenberg, SVP of Sales for Learning Resources Brands, joins John to talk about how the company filed a lawsuit on Friday over Trump’s new tariffs.

The biggest entertainment story centered on the growing estate dispute involving late actor Chadwick Boseman. The crew discussed reports that his brothers have petitioned a court to remove his widow, Taylor Simone Ledward, as administrator of his estate, alleging that portions of the estate have not been fully distributed years after his passing. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Broadcasting live from the Cincinnati Music Festival, the Rickey Smiley Morning Show brought the energy, laughs, and inspiration as the crew celebrated one of the nation’s biggest celebrations of Black music and culture. This year’s festival features major performers including Mary J. Blige, Nelly, Charlie Wilson, SWV, Trey Songz, and more, drawing thousands of fans to Cincinnati for a weekend of music and community. The show also welcomed gospel superstar Kirk Franklin, who joined the conversation as excitement builds for the upcoming Stellar Gospel Music Awards, where he is set to host a star-studded night honoring gospel music’s biggest names. Meanwhile, the crew shared prayers and encouragement with listeners, creating several heartfelt moments that highlighted the show’s commitment to faith, family, and uplifting the community. The biggest entertainment story centered on the growing estate dispute involving late actor Chadwick Boseman. The crew discussed reports that his brothers have petitioned a court to remove his widow, Taylor Simone Ledward, as administrator of his estate, alleging that portions of the estate have not been fully distributed years after his passing. The show also spotlighted singer Nivea, who recently revealed that she has been undergoing treatment for leukemia and says the diagnosis has strengthened her faith, renewed her gratitude for life, and inspired her return to music. Between celebrity headlines, festival excitement, sports updates, and powerful moments of testimony and encouragement, the episode delivered the perfect blend of entertainment, information, and inspiration. Website: https://www.urban1podcasts.com/rickey-smiley-morning-show See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.