Podcasts about Supreme court

The Department of Justice releases another tranche of Epstein documents. The Supreme Court blocks the Trump administration from deploying National Guard troops to Illinois. Tensions increase between the U.S. and Venezuela as President Trump issues a warning to President Nicolas Maduro. Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) discusses her reasoning for entering the Texas Senate race as she looks to unseat incumbent Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas). Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

First, we talk to The Indian Express' Jay Mazoomdaar about the new definition of the Aravalli hills proposed by the Environment Secretary and approved by the Supreme Court. He shares how this new definition will impact the hills and the activities that are taking place there, like mining and construction. Next, we talk to The Indian Express' Anonna Dutt about the concept of data exclusivity, which if implemented in India, can impact the future of the Indian pharmaceutical industry. She explains what it is, why the Indian government is making efforts towards it and how it will impact the industry. (15:04)Lastly, we speak about the Enforcement Directorate and its efforts towards speedy trials and completing open investigations after receiving criticism. (26:37)Hosted by Niharika Nanda Produced and written by Shashank Bhargava and Niharika Nanda Edited and mixed by Suresh PawarThis episode includes AI-generated content.

Joe Pags takes on the heated debate swirling around Tim Walz, examining his rhetoric and asking why it consistently alienates large swaths of Americans. After JD Vance says people shouldn't have to apologize for who they are, Pags brings the receipts, laying out years of mainstream media narratives that vilified entire groups. Then it's some lighter-but-still-serious fun as a record-setting Powerball jackpot looms—lump sum or annuity? The crew can't agree. Pags also breaks down an awkward moment from Keith Ellison, and finishes by fact-checking a viral claim about the Supreme Court of the United States. Sharp analysis, media accountability, and a can't-miss hour. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:17532056201798502,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-9437-3289"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");pt> Click On Picture To See Larger PictureThe world is moving away from wind and solar, coal demand is up, China was never going along with the green new scam. Trump is moving carefully through the [CB] minefield economy. Gold is on the move. Trump is moving the country out of the old system. The [DS] try to get Trump with the Epstein hoax, now that the information dropped the people can now see what the [DS] was planning. Ship building is coming back to the US. Trump signs the NDAA that has additional protections for the election. Every step of the way Trump is countering the [DS] cheating system. Economy https://twitter.com/KobeissiLetter/status/2003156645388406992?s=20   consumption, or 4.95 billion tonnes. By comparison, US coal demand stands at 410 million tonnes, just ~5% of the world's total. Meanwhile, the IEA projects a gradual decline in demand over the next 5 years, to ~8.60 billion tonnes by 2030. However, past forecasts of peak coal demand have repeatedly proven wrong, as consumption continues to rise. Coal remains in high demand 23 US States Are At High Risk Of (Or In) Recession Currently  In 2025, states responsible for about a third of U.S. GDP are in recession, or face high recession risk. Another third are expanding, including Florida and Utah, based on payrolls, employment, and other key economic data. This graphic, via Visual Capitalist’s Dorothy Neufeld, shows recession risk by state in 2025, based on analysis from Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics. In Recession/High Risk Treading Water Expanding State/District Business Cycle Status Share of U.S. GDP (%) Georgia In Recession/High Risk 3.03 Montana In Recession/High Risk 0.25 Wyoming In Recession/High Risk 0.18 Michigan In Recession/High Risk 2.44 Massachusetts In Recession/High Risk 2.73 Mississippi In Recession/High Risk 0.53 Minnesota In Recession/High Risk 1.70 Kansas In Recession/High Risk 0.80 Rhode Island In Recession/High Risk 0.28 Delaware In Recession/High Risk 0.34 Washington In Recession/High Risk 3.02 Illinois In Recession/High Risk 3.85 West Virginia In Recession/High Risk 0.36 New Hampshire In Recession/High Risk 0.42 Maryland In Recession/High Risk 1.86 Virginia In Recession/High Risk 2.66 South Dakota In Recession/High Risk 0.25 Connecticut In Recession/High Risk 1.27 Oregon In Recession/High Risk 1.14 Iowa In Recession/High Risk 0.86 New Jersey In Recession/High Risk 2.93 Maine In Recession/High Risk 0.33 District of Columbia In Recession/High Risk 0.64 Missouri Treading Water 1.54 Ohio Treading Water 3.14 Hawaii Treading Water 0.39 Arkansas Treading Water 0.65 New Mexico Treading Water 0.49 Tennessee Treading Water 1.87 New York Treading Water 7.92 Vermont Treading Water 0.16 Alaska Treading Water 0.24 Colorado Treading Water 1.92 California Treading Water 14.50 Nevada Treading Water 0.86 South Carolina Expanding 1.18 Texas Expanding 9.41 Oklahoma Expanding 0.92 Idaho Expanding 0.43 Kentucky Expanding 0.99 Alabama Expanding 1.10 Indiana Expanding 1.81 Nebraska Expanding 0.63 North Carolina Expanding 2.86 Louisiana Expanding 1.11 Florida Expanding 5.78 North Dakota Expanding 0.26 Pennsylvania Expanding 3.54 Arizona Expanding 1.88 Wisconsin Expanding 1.53 Utah Expanding 1.02 Currently, many coastal, Northeastern states are facing some of the worst economic conditions. In Maine, for instance, year-over-year GDP growth is just 0.8% as of Q2 2025, compared to the U.S. average of 2.1%. Meanwhile, Washington, D.C.'s unemployment rate was 6.4% in July, significantly higher than the 4.6% U.S. average given sweeping federal cuts. According to Zandi's analysis, New York and California are “Treading Water”, together responsible for driving over 22% of U.S. GDP. In comparison, Texas, which fuels 9.4% of U.S. economic growth is expanding. Unemployment rates of 4.0% in July remain below the U.S. average. Additionally, the Texas economy is growing faster than the nation, while income growth rose 6.3% annually as of Q2 2025, outpacing the national average.   Source: zerohedge.com (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:18510697282300316,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8599-9832"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); https://twitter.com/unseen1_unseen/status/2003254895143461092?s=20   caused by falling home prices while increasing the affordability of homes. Home builders aren’t going to build more homes if they are losing money. Trump can’t force them to build homes. This is where thinking outside the box comes in play and things like the 50 year mortgage, interest rate cuts, lower down-payments, salt taxes etc get proposed. With deportations and the decline of the boomer generation from old age, supply will be increasing. Prices will come down. The trick is not to allow them to go into a free fall and keep demand high enough to soak up a great deal of that supply. Trump’s proposed $2,000 tariff rebate checks depend on Congress   President Donald Trump needs Congress to take action to make good on a proposal to send some Americans $2,000 tariff rebate checks next year. Director of the National Economic Council Kevin Hassett said the U.S. House and Senate will need to take up the matter. “I would expect that in the new year, the president will bring forth a proposal to Congress to make that happen,” Hassett said on “Face the Nation” on Sunday. Details about Trump’s tariff rebate proposal remain sparse. Trump has said he wants to issue the rebate checks and use the rest of the tariff revenue to pay down the nation’s $38 trillion debt, even as the U.S. Supreme Court has not yet determined whether he has the authority to impose tariffs. Source: thecentersquare.com US Industrial Production Rises At Strongest Annual Rate Since Apr 2022 Following the much-stronger-than-expected GDP print, US Industrial Production also surprised to the upside, rising 0.2% MoM in November and pulling the YoY change up to 2.52% – the strongest annual growth since April 2022… Source: zerohedge.com Trump Boom: U.S. Economy Grows 4.3%, Fastest in Two Years, Smashing Expectations The U.S. economy grew this summer at the fastest pace in two years, far outpacing economists' forecasts. The Commerce Department said U.S. gross domestic product—the government's official economic scorecard—rose at a seasonally and inflation-adjusted 4.3 percent annual rate in the third quarter. The report on the July through September period was delayed due to the shutdown. Consumer spending grew much faster than expected, expanding at a seasonally and inflation-adjusted annual rate of 3.5 percent. That's up from 2.5 percent in the second quarter and above the 2.7 percent expected. Source: breitbart.com    FULL steam ahead — “You haven't seen anything yet!” Thank you for your attention to this matter. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! DONALD J. TRUMP PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2003149733158588868?s=20 This list is just the table setting for the coming booming economy. Wait till Trump transforms the entire fiat world debt system. A Golden Age for the world approaches. https://twitter.com/KobeissiLetter/status/2003285919668011147?s=20    good news, the Market went up. Nowadays, when there is good news, the Market goes down, because everybody thinks that Interest Rates will be immediately lifted to take care of “potential” Inflation. That means that, essentially, we can never have a Great Market again, those Markets from the time when our Nation was building up, and becoming great. Strong Markets, even phenomenal Markets, don't cause Inflation, stupidity does! I want my new Fed Chairman to lower Interest Rates if the Market is doing well, not destroy the Market for no reason whatsoever. I want to have a Market the likes of which we haven't had in many decades, a Market that goes up on good news, and down on bad news, the way it should be, and the way it was. Inflation will take care of itself and, if it doesn't, we can always raise Rates at the appropriate time — But the appropriate time is not to kill Rallies, which could lift our Nation by 10, 15, and even 20 GDP points in a year — and maybe even more than that! A Nation can never be Economically GREAT if “eggheads” are allowed to do everything within their power to destroy the upward slope. We are going to be encouraging the Good Market to get better, rather than make it impossible for it to do so. We are going to see numbers that are far more natural, and far better, than they have ever been before. We are going to, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! The United States should be rewarded for SUCCESS, not brought down by it. Anybody that disagrees with me will never be the Fed Chairman! Political/Rights https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/2003309528805470611?s=20 https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/2003266300832038926?s=20 https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/2003271819705389139?s=20   interfere with immigration operations. https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/2003378383862817224?s=20 https://twitter.com/BillMelugin_/status/2002573015142576350?s=20 https://twitter.com/TriciaOhio/status/2002801058897142114?s=20   This was a targeted operation to arrest Fernandez Flores, a criminal illegal alien from Honduras with a criminal conviction for making a false police report. Flores entered the United States illegally at unknown date and location without inspection by an immigration officer. He will remain in ICE custody pending further immigration proceedings. If you come to our country illegally and break our laws, we will find you, we will arrest you, and you will not return. https://twitter.com/DHSgov/status/2003130997198713329?s=20https://twitter.com/MJTruthUltra/status/2003214521419333695?s=20 https://twitter.com/MJTruthUltra/status/2003214521419333695?s=20 WATCH: Justice Department Releases Shocking Recreation Video of Jeffrey Epstein Trying to Kill Himself The Justice Department on Monday released recreation video of Jeffrey Epstein inside of his jail cell trying to kill himself. The video – which was revealed to be computer-generated – is timestamped August 10, 2019 at 4:29 am ET – Epstein was found dead at 6:30 am ET on August 10, 2019. Prosecutors previously said that the two CCTV cameras positioned outside of Epstein's cell had malfunctioned. The 10-second recreation video shows Epstein sitting on the floor of his cell attempting to kill himself. WATCH:  Source: thegatwaypundit.com  https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2003476301970133417?s=20  “a circular line of erythema at the base of the neck” along with other marks of friction and bruising on his knee. Epstein told prison staff he didn't remember what happened but was afraid to return to the Special Housing Unit, saying it was “where he had gotten marks on his neck and he does not know why it happened.” He said he had only slept 30 minutes a night for five days due to noise and stress. His cellmate, ex-cop Nicholas Tartaglione, had reportedly been harassing him, and Epstein claimed “he tried to kill me.” Staff noted Tartaglione had been aggressive and was seen mocking Epstein with a string around his neck. Despite these signs, the incident was labeled a “possible suicide attempt.” https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2003292687835787393?s=20  were actively tracking and attempting to contact 10 individuals connected to Epstein’s crimes. The email references attempts to contact Brunel (modeling agent Jean-Luc Brunel, who later died in prison), Maxwell (Ghislaine, now serving 20 years), and mentions “Ohio contacting Wexner.” Les Wexner is the billionaire L Brands founder who gave Epstein his $77 million NYC mansion and served as his primary financial benefactor for years. A separate confidential document from law firm Debevoise & Plimpton lists SDNY matters they appeared in, including one entry: “Wexner: Epstein investigation.” 10 co-conspirators. Only Maxwell was ever charged. The names behind those black boxes are the real story here. https://twitter.com/MikeBenzCyber/status/2003358231780032675?s=20 https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2003480729624412240?s=20  and his residence as Dammam, Saudi Arabia. Profession listed: “Manager.” It's part of a trove of thousands of Epstein-related files released overnight. https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2003436034709995730?s=20   from Epstein's properties – computers, hard drives, disks, the digital nervous system of the operation. And they can't get it. At one point, frustration boils over into honesty: “The FBI is completely fucking us on this.” That's not a tweet. That's an internal DOJ message. Translation: the prosecutors responsible for bringing cases did not have a clear, reliable accounting of the evidence in the FBI's possession. Not what was seized. Not what was imaged. Not what was searchable. Not what was missing. This isn't incompetence in a vacuum. It's structural. Evidence control is power. Whoever controls the data controls the pace, the scope, and the fallout. And remember: Epstein died before trial. Maxwell was prosecuted narrowly. No broader conspiracy case ever materialized. Prediction: this is why. Not because the evidence didn't exist- but because it never cohered into something prosecutors could safely touch without detonating their own case. The scandal isn't just who was on the tapes. It's that even the feds couldn't tell you where the tapes went. That's not a cover-up movie plot. That's a system quietly eating itself. https://twitter.com/sentdefender/status/2003457025695719784?s=20  and sensationalist claims made against President Trump that were submitted to the FBI right before the 2020 Election. To be clear: the claims are unfounded and false, and if they had a shred of credibility, they certainly would have been weaponized against President Trump already.” New: More Epstein Files Drop, and Donald Trump Appears to Be the Star This Time Around So, what incriminating evidence against President Trump is to be found in this latest drop? Apparently, an email from January 2020 in which a federal prosecutor from New York – of course – to an “undisclosed person” claiming Trump had flown on Jeffrey Epstein’s private plan at least eight times during the 1990s, and one time there was a 20-year-old woman on the flight.  Here’s more: The email, which was sent in January 2020 from a federal prosecutor in New York to an undisclosed person, says, “For your situational awareness, wanted to let you know that the flight records we received yesterday reflect that Donald Trump traveled on Epstein's private jet many more times than previously has been reported (or that we were aware), including during the period we would expect to charge in a [Ghislaine] Maxwell case.”  This big revelation is that Trump traveled a few more times than we previously knew, although this was during a time period that the president has already acknowledged having had an association with Epstein. Note the timing of the email – January 2020 is when the presidential election would be kicking into full swing. This anonymous federal prosecutor clearly thought they had a gotcha moment, but there’s a pesky little detail that puts things in perspective: “[Trump] is listed as having traveled with, among others and at various times, Marla Maples, his daughter Tiffany, and his son Eric.”  Source: redstate.com The specific document you’re referring to appears to be the complaint filed in the 2020 civil lawsuit Doe v. Indyke et al. (Case No. 1:20-cv-00484, S.D.N.Y.), which was part of the recently released Epstein files by the U.S. Department of Justice.  This lawsuit was brought by an anonymous plaintiff (“Jane Doe”) against the executors of Jeffrey Epstein’s estate (Darren Indyke and Richard Kahn) and Ghislaine Maxwell, seeking compensation for alleged sexual abuse and trafficking by Epstein.How Trump’s Name Appears in the DocumentOn page 4 of the complaint, the plaintiff alleges that during one of her encounters with Epstein (around the 1990s), he took her to Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida when she was 14 years old. Epstein reportedly introduced her to Donald Trump (then the owner of Mar-a-Lago), elbowed him playfully, and asked, referring to the girl, “This is a good one, right?” Trump is described as smiling and nodding in agreement, after which they both chuckled. The plaintiff states she felt uncomfortable but was too young to understand why at the time. The document does not accuse Trump of any criminal wrongdoing or involvement in Epstein’s abuse; it frames this as part of the broader context of her grooming and exploitation by Epstein.How the Name Got Into the DocumentTrump’s name was included as part of the plaintiff’s personal allegations detailing her experiences with Epstein. The complaint is a legal filing where the victim recounts specific incidents to support her claims against Epstein’s estate and associates. It reflects her firsthand account, not a court-verified fact or evidence from other sources.  There is no mention of independent corroboration (e.g., witnesses, photos, or records) in the filing itself, and it has not been adjudicated in court as true.Source of the AllegationThe source is the anonymous plaintiff (“Jane Doe”), who claims to be a victim of Epstein’s abuse starting from age 13 or 14.  She was reportedly recruited at a summer camp in Michigan and alleges ongoing grooming and assaults by Epstein over several years. This Doe is distinct from other known accusers like Virginia Giuffre, though a similar incident (Epstein introducing a 14-year-old to Trump at Mar-a-Lago without the “good one” comment) was testified to by another accuser (“Jane”) during Ghislaine Maxwell’s 2021 criminal trial.  https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/2003236602374713557?s=20 DOGE Geopolitical https://twitter.com/BreannaMorello/status/2003196698974191914?s=20   that are protected under the Constitution. Under D.C. law, anyone wishing to own a firearm must register it with the MPD. However, the D.C. Code imposes a sweeping ban on the registration—and thus the legal possession—of a wide range of firearms. This broad prohibition, the Justice Department argues, infringes on the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens who seek to keep and bear commonly owned firearms for lawful purposes. Trump's DOJ Sues Washington, D.C. Police Department Over Unconstitutional Ban on Semi-Automatic Firearms The Department of Justice has filed a lawsuit against the District of Columbia's Metropolitan Police Department for enforcing a ban on semi-automatic firearms in violation of the Second Amendment. The lawsuit alleges that D.C.'s gun laws require registration of all firearms with the MPD; however, the D.C. Code imposes a sweeping ban on numerous protected weapons, making it legally impossible for residents to own them for self-defense or other lawful purposes. The DOJ said in a press release announcing the lawsuit: “MPD's current pattern and practice of refusing to register protected firearms is forcing residents to sue to protect their rights and to risk facing wrongful arrest for lawfully possessing protected firearms.” “Today's action from the Department of Justice's new Second Amendment Section underscores our ironclad commitment to protecting the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi. Bondi continued, “Washington, DC's ban on some of America's most popular firearms is an unconstitutional infringement on the Second Amendment — living in our nation's capital should not preclude law-abiding citizens from exercising their fundamental constitutional right to keep and bear arms.” Echoing this sentiment, Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Civil Rights Division added, “This Civil Rights Division will defend American citizens from unconstitutional restrictions of commonly used firearms, in violation of their Second Amendment rights. The newly established Second Amendment Section filed this lawsuit to ensure that the very rights D.C. resident Mr. Heller secured 17 years ago are enforced today — and that all law-abiding citizens seeking to own protected firearms for lawful purposes may do so.” The case draws directly from the landmark 2008 Supreme Court decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, where the Court affirmed that the Second Amendment protects the right of law-abiding citizens to own semi-automatic weapons in their homes for self-defense. Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/CynicalPublius/status/2003192220753723840?s=20 https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/2003238094057955337?s=20 War/Peace https://twitter.com/WarClandestine/status/2003334956479558072?s=20 there will be no escalation into broader conflict, and the decision has already been made. However, precision air strikes on cartel assets seems like a probable outcome. Trump is neutralizing Deep State assets around the globe, and South/Central American drug cartels are assets of the Deep State. They are transnational criminal organizations responsible for the drug, weapon, and human trafficking of the Western hemisphere, and their racket feeds the Deep State machine. My guess is, that cartel drug factories and assets are going to get smoked by the US MIL via precision air strikes, and the other powerful leaders of the world have already agreed to some sort of deal with Trump and no one will interfere. Just like Iran and Syria. I think most of the leaders/nations of the world agree with Trump that these transnational criminal organizations must be eradicated, and stability must be brought to the world. President Unveils ‘Trump Class’ Of Warships, Huntington Ingalls Shares Jump    build two new “Trump-class” battleships, to acquire 20-25 of these ships in the coming years.   In his address, the President noted these 30,000-40,000 ton ships will carry a large quantity of missiles, including hypersonic missiles, and will also be outfitted with electromagnetic rail guns and directed energy lasers. Trump-class battleships will also carry nuclear-armed sea launched cruise missiles (currently under development) adding an additional element of nuclear deterrence to the Navy. Trump-class destroyers appear to be designed as the center of enhanced command and control networks at sea, as the Navy looks to field more autonomous assets and traditional vessels in the coming years.   The first “Trump-class” battleship will be named USS Defiant, and it will be even longer than the Iowa-class battleships of the World War II era. However, at 35,000 tons, it will only weigh about half as much, and have a smaller crew of between 650 and 850 sailors; the Iowa had some 2,700 sailors. The new ships — which are being called “guided missile battleships” —  are part of larger vision for a “Golden Fleet.” The Navy has rolled out a website to promote that concept. Sources tell AP that construction of the Defiant is expected to start in the early 2030’s, with another 19 to 24 Trump-class ships to follow.   Source: zerohedge.com https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2003231263520379120?s=20   that kind of money, they HAVE to build quickly!”   “We want the dividends to go into the creation of production facilities. We’ll be talking about CapEx, dividends and the pay.” “Also, buybacks…they want to buy back their stock. I want them to put their money in plants and equipment! So they can build these planes FAST, like, IMMEDIATELY!” Medical/False Flags https://twitter.com/FBIDirectorKash/status/2003224842078675311?s=20  of American institutions or threats to our food supply, economy, or public safety. Protecting the homeland means vigilance: every time, no exceptions. https://twitter.com/ThomasMoreSoc/status/2003262595566850541?s=20  precedent-setting victory, a federal court has permanently blocked California AG Rob Bonta and the CA Dept. of Education from forcing teachers to lie to parents about their own children’s secret gender transitions—declaring parents have a constitutional right to know and teachers have a constitutional right to share the truth. [DS] Agenda https://twitter.com/CynicalPublius/status/2003205278796501397?s=20  larger scale. Don't forget that the Malthusians are antihuman and that they believe that 7 out of every 8 human lives on the planet must be terminated in order to save the world. Nearly 100 Minnesota Mayors Send Panicked Letter to Lawmakers Complaining About Fraud Scandal and the Leadership of Tim Walz Almost 100 mayors in the state of Minnesota have sent a letter to state lawmakers complaining about the fraud scandal and how it is going to impact the communities they serve. They are clearly not happy with the leadership of Governor Tim Walz and his connections to the fraud scandal that has rocked the state in recent weeks. The scandal is still unfolding and it's unclear what the final tally will be, but it's looking like something in the tens of billions. FOX News reports:  You can see the full letter here. These mayors should have demanded that Tim Walz resign. Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/2002771316345327905?s=20 Our crooked politicians have set up the biggest money laundering operation in the world and that 38 trillion in debt is almost all tied to fraud. this is the tip of the iceberg. Buckle up, its all being exposed. Your harder earned money was used to support a criminal syndicate.  President Trump's Plan  https://twitter.com/DcLidstone/status/2003338615917806050?s=20 John Brennan Lawyers Confirm Their Client is a “Target” of a Grand Jury Investigation Lawfare lawyer Kenneth Wainstein representing former CIA Director John Brennan confirmed in a proactive litigation letter to Chief Judge Cecilia M. Altonaga of the Federal District Court for the Southern District of Florida, their client is a “target” of a grand jury investigation. The word “target” is important here, because the letter specifically outlines how Brennan has received subpoenas for documents and information surrounding his construct of the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment. The letter notes that prosecutors from the Office of the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, Jason Reding Quiñones, have advised Mr. Brennan that he is “a target” of a grand jury investigation.   [SOURCE] Pay attention to the footnotes being cited by Brennan's lawyers as they begin to pull in some of the commentary by voices who have publicly given opinion about the overall Trump targeting operation.  Mike Davis name appears frequently in this letter, as the Brennan defense team begins to frame the conspiratorial nature of some claims against their client. In essence, the Brennan legal team are attempting to refute the evidence by pointing to the blanket of some crazy commentary that covers it. This is exactly what I have been cautioning about {SEE HERE}. Source: theconservativetreehouse.com https://twitter.com/TheStormRedux/status/2003448097930662069?s=20  Cannon's courtroom. FANTASTIC. https://twitter.com/amuse/status/2003133420021424297?s=20   Thune objected the president would be able to adjourn Congress for ten days and get his full team on the field. https://twitter.com/DavidShafer/status/2002953961595449763?s=20 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Contains Hidden Election Integrity Gem – Could Have Huge Implications for Voting Machines    With the National Defense Authorization Act signed by President Donald Trump on December 18th, 2025, a little-known section was snuck into the 3000+ page bill:  Section 6805. Requiring Penetration Testing As Part Of The Testing And Certification of Voting Systems. This section amends the Help America Vote Act of 2002 by adding a “Required Penetration Testing” section that “provides for the conduct of penetration testing as part of the testing, certification, decertification, and recertification of voting system hardware and software” by an accredited laboratory. The amendment now requires the penetration testing as a condition of certification from the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) and allows consultation with the National Institute of Standards and Technology or any other federal agency on “lab selection criteria” and “other aspects of the program.” While this is still short of a legitimate attempt at ensuring election integrity, it is an effort toward scrutinizing the voting systems by finally requiring cybersecurity experts to do what Clay Parikh was restricted from doing during his time as a VSTL contractor. Hand-marked paper ballots hand-counted at the precinct level, is being utilized in Dallas County, TX for the 2026 midterm primaries, and is still the ultimate goal of the election integrity community to ensure free and fair elections in the United States. Source: thegatewaypundit.com Penetration testing, often abbreviated as “pen testing,” is a cybersecurity practice where authorized experts simulate real-world cyberattacks on a computer system, network, or application to identify and exploit vulnerabilities before malicious actors can do so. The goal is to uncover weaknesses in security measures, such as software flaws, misconfigurations, or inadequate defenses, and provide recommendations for remediation. It typically involves several stages: Planning and reconnaissance: Gathering information about the target system. Scanning: Using tools to probe for potential entry points. Gaining access: Attempting to exploit vulnerabilities to breach the system. Maintaining access: Testing how long access can be sustained without detection. Analysis and reporting: Documenting findings, risks, and fixes. In the context of Section 6805 of the Fiscal Year 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which incorporates provisions from the SECURE IT Act (H.R. 6315), penetration testing is mandated as part of the testing, certification, decertification, and recertification process for voting system hardware and software. The Election Assistance Commission (EAC) must implement this requirement within 180 days of enactment, with accreditation of testing entities handled through recommendations from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). This ensures that voting systems used in federal elections undergo rigorous cybersecurity assessments to detect and mitigate vulnerabilities, enhancing election security Poll: Trump's Approval Rating Lands at 50 Percent, 9 Points Above Water President Donald Trump enjoys a 50 percent approval rating, with a net approval rating of plus 9 points, according to the latest polling from InsiderAdvantage.  Source: breitbart.com (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:13499335648425062,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-7164-1323"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.customads.co/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

The highly anticipated release of the Epstein files dropped last Friday with a muted thump, as redactions were abundant and files were held back. Mary and Andrew begin there, with the Justice Department's failure to comply with the “Epstein Files Transparency Act”, a congressional law compelling the release of "all unclassified records" with a few exceptions. They break down what the law requires, why the DOJ's redactions raise some concerns, and what new revelations surfaced around Jeffrey Epstein's 2008 plea deal. Turning to several federal cases on their radar, the co-hosts unpack the news that prosecutors had tried but failed to add a third felony charge against Letitia James and the split jury verdict of Wisconsin state court Judge Hannah Dugan. And before wrapping up, Mary and Andrew examine a unanimous DC Circuit decision allowing the National Guard deployment in the city to proceed, emphasizing D.C.'s unique non-state status.Further reading: Read DC Circuit Panel Decision on National Guard deployment HEREAnd a note to our listeners: As Mary and Andrew mentioned, they plan to record a new episode next Tuesday if the news warrants it. Otherwise, they'll take some time to enjoy the holiday season and will be back with a new episode on January 6th. Sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts to listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads. You'll also get exclusive bonus content from this and other shows. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In breaking news, a 6-3 Supreme Court, including 3 of the MAGA right wing, have ruled AGAINST Trump and his method to federalize and take over Blue State national guard troops, and have found, in essence, that unless he uses the Insurrection Act, and then uses the US armed forces first to quell violence, he won't be able to breach state sovereignty and take over state militias and put them to his own use. Michael Popok also takes a close look at Justice Kavanaugh's “concurrence” that not only reads like a dissent, but also trolls the American people with a rewrite of the history of the Jan6 attack on the Capitol to suit his pro-president/Trump jurisprudence. Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast⁠ Legal AF: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af⁠ MissTrial: ⁠https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial⁠ The PoliticsGirl Podcast: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast⁠ Cult Conversations: The Influence Continuum with Dr. Steve Hassan: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan⁠ Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/mea-culpa-with-michael-cohen⁠ The Weekend Show: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show⁠ Burn the Boats: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats⁠ Majority 54: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54⁠ Political Beatdown: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/political-beatdown⁠ On Democracy with FP Wellman: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman⁠ Uncovered: ⁠https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Trump Mentioned in ANOTHER Big Batch of Epstein Files, Flew on ‘Lolita Express,' PLUS…Supreme Court Denies Emergency Request by Trump to Deploy National Guard to Chicago

The U.S. Department of Justice has strongly urged the Supreme Court to reject Ghislaine Maxwell's petition, which seeks to overturn her 20‑year sex‑trafficking conviction by invoking the 2007 non‑prosecution agreement (NPA) Jeffrey Epstein secured with Florida federal prosecutors. Maxwell argued that a co‑conspirator clause in that agreement should shield her from prosecution in New York—but both the district court and the Second Circuit found that the NPA bound only the Southern District of Florida, and explicitly did not extend immunity to unnamed co‑conspirators in other jurisdictions.In its response, the DOJ emphasized that Maxwell's reading of the NPA is legally flawed and unsupported by the facts. Prosecutors maintained that Maxwell was not explicitly named in the agreement and that there was never any indication the Florida office intended to extend immunity to her. Moreover, the DOJ noted that only high-ranking Justice Department officials—not local prosecutors—could authorize an agreement with nationwide binding effect, which never occurred in this case. They argued Maxwell's petition does not present any new legal questions or conflicts among federal courts that would warrant Supreme Court intervention, and therefore, her conviction should stand without further review.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:DOJ urges Supreme Court to turn away Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell's appeal - ABC News

For the members of a Northern California tribe, salmon are the lifeblood of the people—a vital source of food, income, and cultural identity. When a catastrophic fish kill devastates the river, Amy Bowers Cordalis is propelled into action, reigniting her family's 170-year battle against the U.S. government. In a moving and engrossing blend of memoir and history, Bowers Cordalis propels readers through generations of her family's struggle, where she learns that the fight for survival is not only about fishing—it's about protecting a way of life and the right of a species and river to exist. Her great-uncle's landmark Supreme Court case reaffirming her Nation's rights to land, water, fish, and sovereignty, her great-grandmother's defiant resistance during the Salmon Wars, and her family's ongoing battles against government overreach shape the deep commitment to justice that drives Bowers Cordalis forward. When the source of the fish kill is revealed, Bowers Cordalis steps up as General Counsel for the Yurok Tribe to hold powerful corporate interests accountable, and to spearhead the largest river restoration project in history. The Water Remembers: My Indigenous Family's Fight to Save a River and a Way of Life (Little, Brown and Company, 2025) is a testament to the enduring power of Indigenous knowledge, family legacy, and the determination to ensure that future generations remember what it means to live in balance with the earth. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

For the members of a Northern California tribe, salmon are the lifeblood of the people—a vital source of food, income, and cultural identity. When a catastrophic fish kill devastates the river, Amy Bowers Cordalis is propelled into action, reigniting her family's 170-year battle against the U.S. government. In a moving and engrossing blend of memoir and history, Bowers Cordalis propels readers through generations of her family's struggle, where she learns that the fight for survival is not only about fishing—it's about protecting a way of life and the right of a species and river to exist. Her great-uncle's landmark Supreme Court case reaffirming her Nation's rights to land, water, fish, and sovereignty, her great-grandmother's defiant resistance during the Salmon Wars, and her family's ongoing battles against government overreach shape the deep commitment to justice that drives Bowers Cordalis forward. When the source of the fish kill is revealed, Bowers Cordalis steps up as General Counsel for the Yurok Tribe to hold powerful corporate interests accountable, and to spearhead the largest river restoration project in history. The Water Remembers: My Indigenous Family's Fight to Save a River and a Way of Life (Little, Brown and Company, 2025) is a testament to the enduring power of Indigenous knowledge, family legacy, and the determination to ensure that future generations remember what it means to live in balance with the earth. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/native-american-studies

On this 2A Tuesday segment, Mark Walters from Armed American Radio discusses ongoing Second Amendment issues, including the DOJ suing Washington D.C. over delays in registering firearms and efforts to uphold gun rights in blue states. Walters emphasizes the importance of compliance with Supreme Court decisions and highlights cases like the Virgin Islands' gun restrictions. He also shares practical advice for travelers carrying firearms, warning against mixing range bags and travel luggage to avoid hefty fines or legal trouble, drawing on personal and anecdotal examples. The segment underscores both the legal and practical challenges faced by gun owners nationwide.

@nigeriasbest and @phoenix_agenda were joined by @Tex_the_LawThey discussed:Supreme Court ruling on State of Emergency suitAlleged changes to Tax Law after passage by National AssemblyReactions to Omole book on BuhariUS issues visa ban on Nigeria and other countries, cite visa overstay, insecurity and inability to verify applicants as reasons

Contentious laws on the table after the Bondi terror attack look set for a Supreme Court challenge.

For the members of a Northern California tribe, salmon are the lifeblood of the people—a vital source of food, income, and cultural identity. When a catastrophic fish kill devastates the river, Amy Bowers Cordalis is propelled into action, reigniting her family's 170-year battle against the U.S. government. In a moving and engrossing blend of memoir and history, Bowers Cordalis propels readers through generations of her family's struggle, where she learns that the fight for survival is not only about fishing—it's about protecting a way of life and the right of a species and river to exist. Her great-uncle's landmark Supreme Court case reaffirming her Nation's rights to land, water, fish, and sovereignty, her great-grandmother's defiant resistance during the Salmon Wars, and her family's ongoing battles against government overreach shape the deep commitment to justice that drives Bowers Cordalis forward. When the source of the fish kill is revealed, Bowers Cordalis steps up as General Counsel for the Yurok Tribe to hold powerful corporate interests accountable, and to spearhead the largest river restoration project in history. The Water Remembers: My Indigenous Family's Fight to Save a River and a Way of Life (Little, Brown and Company, 2025) is a testament to the enduring power of Indigenous knowledge, family legacy, and the determination to ensure that future generations remember what it means to live in balance with the earth. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/biography

Renee and Susan discuss the ongoing Leandro Case. In this episode of Advocacy Bites, hosts Renee Sekel and Susan Book confront a sobering question: What is the value of a constitutional right if it cannot be enforced? Sparked by national conversations with education advocates and legal experts, this episode delivers an unflinching examination of how justice is delayed—and effectively denied—in North Carolina's public education system. Renee revisits the Leandro case, focusing on the 2022 Supreme Court decision and the years of inaction that followed after a partisan shift in the North Carolina Supreme Court. The discussion unpacks separation of powers, judicial authority, and how courts are increasingly using delay as a political tool, leaving students without the constitutionally guaranteed right to a sound basic education. Susan connects the legal failures to real-world consequences: chronic underfunding, teacher shortages, rising classroom instability, special education breakdowns, and the growing risk as federal education oversight is dismantled. Together, they examine why counties are being wrongly blamed for failures that are constitutionally the state's responsibility—and why upcoming primaries and judicial elections may be the most consequential in years. The episode closes with a direct call for civic engagement, ethical leadership, and basic human decency—reminding listeners that advocacy is not abstract, and language, elections, and accountability all matter.

For the members of a Northern California tribe, salmon are the lifeblood of the people—a vital source of food, income, and cultural identity. When a catastrophic fish kill devastates the river, Amy Bowers Cordalis is propelled into action, reigniting her family's 170-year battle against the U.S. government. In a moving and engrossing blend of memoir and history, Bowers Cordalis propels readers through generations of her family's struggle, where she learns that the fight for survival is not only about fishing—it's about protecting a way of life and the right of a species and river to exist. Her great-uncle's landmark Supreme Court case reaffirming her Nation's rights to land, water, fish, and sovereignty, her great-grandmother's defiant resistance during the Salmon Wars, and her family's ongoing battles against government overreach shape the deep commitment to justice that drives Bowers Cordalis forward. When the source of the fish kill is revealed, Bowers Cordalis steps up as General Counsel for the Yurok Tribe to hold powerful corporate interests accountable, and to spearhead the largest river restoration project in history. The Water Remembers: My Indigenous Family's Fight to Save a River and a Way of Life (Little, Brown and Company, 2025) is a testament to the enduring power of Indigenous knowledge, family legacy, and the determination to ensure that future generations remember what it means to live in balance with the earth. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/environmental-studies

It's that time of year when Leah, Melissa, and Kate put on their influencer hats and recommend the things that made their days a little brighter in 2025. This year, they're joined by two special guests: rockstar Strict Scrutiny intern Jordan Thomas to share some of his picks, and former Chair of the Federal Election Commission Ellen Weintraub to discuss two of democracy's favorite things—independent agencies and the regulation of money in politics. Favorite things: WANTLeah: Cozy Earth Bubble Cuddle Blanket, Jones Road Just Enough Tinted MoisturizerKate: Aventura electric scooter, Grüns Superfood Greens GummiesMelissa: True Botanicals, e.l.f. Camo Liquid BlushJordan: Tea Tree Leave-In Conditioner, Pink Oil Moisturizer,  NEEDLeah: Peloton stretching classes, Farmhounds dog treats; Badlands Ranch dog foodKate: custom bobbleheads & action figures, Lilly Allen's tour, Strict Scrutiny's upcoming West Coast tourMelissa: Caddis readers, Blackwing Matte pencils, As Ever RoséJordan: 2026 Evanescence and Korn tours, these headphones WEARLeah: Forme Power Bra, Argent, TheRealRealKate: Strict Scrutiny onesies, Cozy Earth Studio Wide Leg PantMelissa: Quince yak wool sweaters, Uniqlo White T-Shirt, Clearly Collective Collegiate Scarves, WaySoft Cashmere BeanieJordan: Crooked Con Merch, Mavi jeans READLeah: The Wedding People, Alison Espach; Julie Anne Long's Pennyroyal Green series; Lisa Kleypas' Wallflowers series; These Summer Storms, Sarah MacLean; Bury Our Bones in the Midnight Soil, V. E. Schwab; The God of the Woods, Liz Moore; Book of the MonthKate: The Power Broker, Robert Caro; Who Is Government? Michael Lewis; Character Limit: How Elon Musk Destroyed Twitter, Kate Conger & Ryan Mac; The Radical Fund, John Fabian Witt; Isola, Allegra Goodman; Heart the Lover, Lily King; Martyr! Kaveh Akbar; The History of Sound, Ben ShattuckMelissa: Matriarch, Tina Knowles; Black in Blues: How a Color Tells the Story of My People, Imani Perry; Jane Austen's Bookshelf, Rebecca Romney; Atmosphere, Taylor Jenkins Reid; The Book Club for Troublesome Women, Marie Bostwick; The Loneliness of Sonia and Sunny, Kiran DesaiJordan: Lawless, Leah Litman; The Sirens' Call, Chris Hayes; Bad Law, Elie Mystal; Charles Sumner: Conscience of a Nation, Zaakir Tameez; Just Shine! How to Be a Better You, Sonia SotomayorEllen: Deanna Raybourn's Veronica Speedwell Mysteries; Everyone in My Family Has Killed Someone, Benjamin Stevenson; The Black Wolf, Louise Penny; Shakespeare: The Man Who Pays the Rent, Judi Dench; This Is Happiness, Niall Williams; Elizabeth Strout; Amor Towles Get tickets for STRICT SCRUTINY LIVE – The Bad Decisions Tour 2025! 3/6/26 – San Francisco3/7/26 – Los AngelesLearn more: http://crooked.com/eventsOrder your copy of Leah's book, Lawless: How the Supreme Court Runs on Conservative Grievance, Fringe Theories, and Bad VibesFollow us on Instagram, Threads, and Bluesky Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The Republican Susan Collins has held one of Maine's Senate seats for nearly thirty years, and Democrats, in trying to take it away from her, have a lot at stake. Graham Platner, a combat veteran, political activist, and small-business owner who has never served in office, seemed to check many boxes for a progressive upstart. Platner, who says he and his wife earn sixty thousand dollars a year, has spoken passionately about affordability, and has called universal health care a  “moral imperative.” He seemed like a rising star, but then some of his past comments online directed against police, L.G.B.T.Q. people, sexual-assault survivors, Black people, and rural whites surfaced. A photo was published of a tattoo that he got in the Marines, which resembles a Nazi symbol, though Platner says he didn't realize it. He apologized, but will Democrats embrace him, despite ugly views in his past? “As uncomfortable as it is, and personally unenjoyable, to have to talk about stupid things I said on the internet,” he told David Remnick, “it also allows me to publicly model something I think is really important. . . . You can change your language, change the way you think about stuff.” In fact, he frames his candidacy in a way that might appeal to disappointed Trump voters: “You should be able to be proud of the fact that you can turn into a different kind of person. You can think about the world in a different way.” The Political Scene draws on the reporting and analysis found in The New Yorker for lively conversations about the big questions in American politics. Join the magazine's writers and editors as they put into context the latest news—about elections, the economy, the White House, the Supreme Court, and much more. New episodes are available three times a week. Tune in to The Political Scene wherever you get your podcasts. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Join Jim and Greg for the Monday 3 Martini Lunch as they break down growing tensions on the right following a heated Turning Point USA event, Rep. Elise Stefanik's abrupt exit from the New York governor's race, and a Michigan U.S. Senate candidate fantasizing about assaulting U.S. Supreme Court justices.First, they react to Ben Shapiro's speech on how politics and journalism should be conducted, including his sharp criticism of Tucker Carlson for platforming figures like Nick Fuentes without challenging their views. Carlson then returned verbal fire and accused his critics of trying to divide people. Jim says the right is not well-served by tolerating conspiracy theories and playing footsie with anti-Semitism.Next, they dig into why New York Rep. Elise Stefanik decided to pull the plug on her campaign for governor. They also examine how the year started with President Trump choosing Stefanik to be his ambassador to the United Nations and ended with Trump refusing to endorse her run for governor.Finally, they get a glimpse of another unhinged Democrat running for U.S. Senate in Michigan, as State Senator Mallory McMorrow says she heard Supreme Court Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh attended a tailgate at her alma mater of Notre Dame University. McMorrow suggests she would have thrown beer in their faces. But the rest of the Democrats running are also really bad.Please visit our great sponsors:Go to https://OmahaSteaks.com and use code 3ML at checkout for an extra $35 off. Minimum purchase may apply. See site for details. A big thanks to our advertiser, Omaha Steaks!Listeners can start a new tradition this December with 10% off at BetterHelp—visit https://BetterHelp.com/3ML to get started.New episodes every weekday. 

New York prosecutors are asking the Supreme Court to reinstate Pedro Hernandez's murder conviction in the 1979 disappearance of 6-year-old Etan Patz, after a federal appeals court overturned the verdict over a jury instruction issue, potentially avoiding a third trial in the decades-old case. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Join Jim and Greg for the Monday 3 Martini Lunch as they break down growing tensions on the right following a heated Turning Point USA event, Rep. Elise Stefanik's abrupt exit from the New York governor's race, and a Michigan U.S. Senate candidate fantasizing about assaulting U.S. Supreme Court justices. First, they react to Ben Shapiro's […]

In this gripping episode of Gangland Wire, host Gary Jenkins sits down with Robert “Bob” Cooley, the Chicago lawyer whose extraordinary journey took him from deep inside the Outfit's criminal operations to becoming one of the federal government's most valuable witnesses against organized crime. Cooley pulls back the curtain on the hidden machinery of Chicago's underworld, describing how corruption, bribery, and violence shaped the Chicago Outfit's power in the 1970s and beyond. As a lawyer, gambler, and trusted insider, Cooley saw firsthand how mob influence tilted the scales of justice—often in open daylight. Inside the “Chicago Method” of Courtroom Corruption Cooley explains the notorious system of judicial bribery he once helped facilitate—what he calls the “Chicago Method.” He walks listeners through: How defense attorneys worked directly with Outfit associates to buy favorable rulings. The process of approaching and bribing judges. Why weak forensic standards of the era made witness discrediting the key mob strategy. His personal involvement in the infamous Harry Aleman murder case, where clear guilt was erased by corruption. Life in the Outfit: Gambling, Debt, and Mob Justice Cooley recounts his early days gambling with Chicago Outfit associates, including Marco D'Amico, Jackie Cerrone, and John DeFranzo. Notable stories include: The violent implications of unpaid gambling debts in mob circles. Tense interactions with bookmaker Hal Smith and the chaotic fallout of a bounced check involving mobster Eddie Corrado. How D'Amico often stepped in—sometimes with intimidation—to shield Cooley from harm. These stories reflect the daily volatility of life inside the Outfit, where money, fear, and loyalty intersect constantly. Bob Cooley has a great book titled When Corruption Was King where he goes into even greater detail and has many more stories from his life inside the Chicago Mob. Hit me up on Venmo for a cup of coffee or a shot and a beer @ganglandwire Click here to “buy me a cup of coffee” Subscribe to the website for weekly notifications about updates and other Mob information. To go to the store or make a donation or rent Ballot Theft: Burglary, Murder, Coverup, click here To rent ‘Brothers against Brothers’ or ‘Gangland Wire,’ the documentaries click here.  To purchase one of my books, click here. 0:06 Introduction to Bob Cooley 1:32 Life as an Outfit Gambler 2:00 My Relationship with Marco D’Amico 10:40 The Story of Hal Smith 11:05 A Dangerous Encounter 20:21 Meeting Sally D 22:23 A Contract on My Life 22:37 The Harry Alleman Case 34:47 Inside the Courtroom 51:08 The Verdict 52:26 Warning the Judge 53:49 The Case Against the Policewoman 58:36 Navigating the Legal Maze 1:08:14 The Outcome and Its Consequences 1:11:39 The Decision to Flip 1:24:38 A Father’s Influence 1:33:57 The Corruption Revealed 1:50:12 Political Connections 2:02:07 The Setup for Robbery 2:20:29 Consequences of Loyalty transcript [0:00] Hey, guys, my guest today is a former Chicago outfit associate named Robert Bob Cooley. He has a book out there titled When Corruption Was King. I highly recommend you get it if you want to look inside the Chicago outfit of the 1970s. Now, Bob’s going to tell us about his life as an outfit gambler, lawyer, and I use payoff to judges to get many, many not guilty verdicts. Now, I always call this the Chicago method. This happened for, I know, for Harry Ailman, a case we’re going to talk about, Tony Spolatro got one of these not-guilties. Now, the outfit member associate who is blessed to get this fix put in for him may be charged with a crime, even up to murder. And he gets a lawyer, a connected lawyer, and they’ll demand a bench trial. That means that only a judge makes the decision. A lawyer, like my guest, who worked with a political fixer named Pat Marcy. [0:53] They’ll work together and they’ll get a friendly judge assigned to that case and then they’ll bribe the judge. And all that judge needs is some kind of alibi witnesses and any kind of information to discredit any prosecution witnesses. Now, this is back in the olden days before you had all this DNA and all that kind of thing. So physical evidence was not really a part of it. Mainly, it was from witnesses. And they just have to discredit any prosecution witness. Then the judge can say, well, state hadn’t really proven their case beyond a reasonable doubt and issue a not guilty verdict and walk away. Now, our guest, Bob Cooley, is going to take us inside this world. [1:29] And it’s a world of beatings, murders, bribes, and other kinds of plots. He was a member of the Elmwood Park crew. He was a big gambler. He was a big loan shark. And he worked for a guy named Marco D’Amico, who was their gambling boss and loan shark in that crew. Among other bosses in this powerful crew were Jackie Cerrone, who will go on and become the underboss and eventually the boss for a short [1:55] period of time. and John no-nose DeFranzo, who will also go on to become the boss eventually. What was your relationship with Marco D’Amico? I talked about when I first came into the 18th district, when I came into work there, and they put me back in uniform, the first person I met was Rick Borelli. Rick Borelli, he was Marco’s cousin. [2:23] When I started gambling right away with Rick, within a couple of days, I’m being his face, and I’m calling and making bets. There was a restaurant across the street where every Wednesday and sometimes a couple days a week, I would meet with Ricky. And one of the first people he brought in there was Marco. Was Marco. And Marco would usually be with a person or two. And I thought they were just bookmakers. [2:55] And I started being friendly with him, meeting him there. Then I started having card games Up in my apartment And, Because now I’m making, in the very beginning, I’m making first $100 extra a week. And within a couple of weeks, I’m making $500, $600 extra a week. And within about a month, I’m making $1,000, sometimes more than that. So now I’m having card games, relatively big card games, because I’ve got a bankroll. I’ve got probably about $5,000, $6,000, which seemed like a lot of money to me. Initially uh and after a while that was a daily that was a daily deal but uh so we we started having card games up there and then we started socializing we started now he’d be at these nightclubs all the time when when i’d go to make my payoffs he was part of the main group there he was one of the call he was right he was right under jack right under at that time originally Jackie Cerrone, and then he was right under Johnny DeFranco. [4:07] But he was… And we became real good friends. We would double date and we spent a lot of time together. And we had these big card games. And that’s when I realized how powerful these people were. Because after one of the card games, there was somebody that was brought in, a guy named Corrado. I’m pretty sure his name was I can’t think of his first name, but Corrado was this person that somebody brought into the game. And after we finished playing cards, and I won all the time. I mean, I was a real good card player, and I wouldn’t drink. I’d supply liquor and food and everything, but I wouldn’t drink. And as the others drank, they were the same as at my office. After we finish up, this guy says, you want to play some? We can play maybe some gin. just human being. And he was there with another friend of his who just sat there and watched. So we played, not gin, but blackjack. We played and passed cards back and forth when you win. Then you’re the dealer and back and forth. And I lost, I think I lost about $4,000 or $13,000 to him. [5:26] I lost the cash that I had. I had cash about $5,000 or $6,000. And I gave him a check for the rest. You know, but everything I was doing was wrong, you know. Yeah, one of those nights. It’s in there. And it’s funny because you asked about Marco. [5:47] And I thought, you know, oh, well, and whatever. And I gave him a check. I said, no, it’s a good check. And it was. It was for my office. It was an office check that I gave him. And that next morning, I’m meeting with Ricky and with Marco at this restaurant across from the station before I go in and to work. And I said, son of a B. I said, you know, they had a bad night first ever. Marco wasn’t at that game, at that particular game. And what happened? I said, I blew about 12,000. Okay, but you? Wow. And I said, yeah, I said, one of the guys at the game played some, I played some blackjack with somebody. What was his name? Eddie, Eddie Corrado. Eddie Corrado. He said, that mother, he said, stop payment on the check. He said, stop payment on the check. He said, because it wasn’t nine o’clock. It was only like, you know, seven, you know, seven 30 or whatever. He said, and when he gets ahold of you, arrange to have him come to your house. Tell him you’ll have the money for him at your house. So that’s what I, that’s what I do. So I stopped payment on it probably about five after nine. I get a call from, from Mr. Corrado. You mother fucker. [7:17] I said, no, no. I said, there wasn’t enough money in the account. I said, I’m sorry. I said, all right, then I’ll be over. I said, no, no, no. I said, I’m in court right now. I said, I’m in court. I said, I’m going to be tied up all day. I’ll meet you at my place. I’ll meet you back there. Well, I’ll be there. You better have that. I want cash and you better have it. Okay. Oh, I’m sorry. I’m sorry. I’m at home. Marco comes in. And he was there with Tony and Tony was there and Ricky was there. And Ricky was there. And they come over a little ahead of time and he comes in. I live on the 27th floor. The doorbell rings. Up he comes with some big mustache. [8:00] I open the door. You better have the fucking money and whatever. And I try to look nervous. I try to look real nervous. and when you walk into my apartment you walk in and you see the kitchen right in front of you and to the left to the left you’ve got an area away and you’ve got the the kitchen wall blocking what’s behind it over there and these three guys are standing marco and you are standing right there alongside of it and and when he walks in behind me, He sees Marco and all but shit in his pants. When he sees Marco, he goes, and Marco, you motherfucker. And, you know, oh, I’m sorry. I’m sorry. I didn’t know he was with you. He says, how much money you got me right now? And, you know, he says, pull your pockets out. He had about, he had about three or 4,000 with him. [9:02] And he says, you give him that. He says, you, he says, you, and he says, you give him that right now. And you apologize to him. Oh, and he says, he says, and I may give you a number. I want you to call. He says, we can put you to work. Apparently this guy had done the same thing to them a few years before and got the beating of his life somebody brought him into one of their card games, did he have a technique a cheating technique or had some marked cards no it was a card mechanic he could play games with cards they call him a mechanic and, in fact the guy was great at it because he had his own plane and everything else. But again, he had moved from Chicago and had just come back in the area. And they mounted. And so anyhow, he leaves. And he leaves then, and Marco took the money. Marco took the money. Marco took the money. Typical Bob guy, man. [10:19] And I says, what about the cash I lost to him? He says, well, you lost that. He says, you lost that. That’s when I realized how powerful. That’s when I realized how powerful that [10:35] he was part of the mob, not only a part of it, but one of the operational. Yeah, important part of it. That brings to mind another unbelievable situation that occurred. [10:49] The, uh, this is probably the, we’ll know the year by when it happened. There was a bookmaker named Hal Smith. Oh yeah. I remember that name. He got, tell us about Hal Smith. [11:05] Well, Hal Smith was a, he was a big guy too. A real, a real big guy. I met him on Rush street. He knew I was a gambler. He knew that I was a big gambler and I started gambling with him. Thank you. And I was with him probably for about maybe five or six months. And I’d win with him. I’d lose with him. And he would take big places. He would take $5,000 a game for me. And as they say, so the numbers were big. At the end of the week, we were sometimes $60,000, $70,000. [11:42] They were big numbers back and forth. And he was always good for the money. I was always good for the money. And one particular week, it was about $30,000. And I was waiting for money. Somebody else was supposed to give me even more than that. And the person put me off. And it was a good friend of mine. And I knew the money would be there. But a lot of times, these guys are going to collect it at a certain time. And then they’re expecting to give it to somebody else. Well, he was short. So I said, look, I don’t have it right now, but I’ll have it tomorrow, I said, because I’m meeting somebody. Well, okay, it better be there. [12:31] And look, it’ll be there, okay? Not a problem. So the next day, the person I’m supposed to get it from says, I’ll have it in a couple of hours. I don’t have it right now, but I’ll have it by late this afternoon. And I’m in my office when Hale Smith calls me and I said, I’ll have it a little bit later. And he slams the phone bell. I’m downstairs in Counselor’s Row. In fact, I’m meeting with Butchie and Harry. We’re in a booth talking about something. They had just sent me some business or whatever, but I’m talking about something. And George, the owner of the restaurant, comes over and he says, somebody is asking who you are and they want to talk to you. And they point out this guy. It was a guy I had seen before, because a lot of times at two in the morning, I would go down on West Street, and they had entertainment upstairs. And there was this big English guy. He was an English guy, as you could tell by his accent, a real loud guy. And when I walk up to talk to him, and he’s talking loud enough so people can hear him, and he says, you better have that. I’m here for it. You better have that. You better have that money. [13:51] Bob Hellsmith sent me, you get the money and you better have that money or there’s going to be a problem or whatever. And I said, well, the money will be there, but people can hear what this guy, this guy talking that shit. And he leaves. And he leaves. He’s going to call me back. And he leaves. I said, I’m busy right now. I says, give me a call back when I’m in the office and I’ll meet with you. So Butch, he goes, what was that all about? And I said, you know, it’s somebody I owe some money to. Well, who is he? Who is he with? I said, Harold Smith. And he said, who’s Harold Smith? You don’t pay him anything. He said, you don’t pay him anything. And he calls, when he calls back, he says, you will arrange to meet him. And I said, you know, I said, well, where? [14:44] And they knew where I lived. They’d been to my place at that time. I’m living in Newberry Plaza and they said, there’s a, there’s a Walgreens drugstore in Chicago Avenue. Tell him you’ll meet him there at Walgreens, and we’ll take it. And he says, and we’ll take it from there. When he does call me, I said, look, I said, I’ll meet you tomorrow morning for sure at Walgreens. I’ll have the cash. I said, I’ll have the cash, and I’ll have all of it. I said, but, you know, I’m tied up on some things. I said, I’ll go to my own bank when I’m finished here and whatever, and I’ll see you tomorrow morning for sure at 9 o’clock tomorrow morning. Okay. I sit down with them and they just said, I said, they said, go there and go meet them. And we’ll take care of it. The Walgreens is a store right in the corner of Michigan Avenue and Chicago Avenue, south side of the street. And it’s all windows. Huge windows here. Huge windows here. And a bus stop, a bus stop over here. When I get there, I park in the bus stop and I’m looking to my right and here he is sitting in a booth by himself, right by the window. And I look around and I don’t see anybody. I mean, with a lot of people, I don’t see Butchie. [16:06] Uh or red or anybody around but i i go in there anyhow and uh sit down and i uh sit down in the booth across from him and he’s eating breakfast he’s got some food in front of him and uh the girl comes by right away the girl comes by and i says you know just get me a coke and and he says have you got the money and i said yes and why i got i got a lot i got a lot of money in my pocket but not the, whatever it was he wanted, not the 27 or 28,000. There’s nobody there. And, uh, so we’re talking for no more than about two or three minutes. They had a telephone on the counter. I hear the phone ring and the waitress, the waitress is on the phone. And then she comes walking over and she says, it’s a call for you. And, and when I go get in the phone, I woke up and there’s a phone booth there. And here’s Butchie in the phone booth. And he’s there with a couple of other people. I hang the phone up. I walk over and I had my appointment booked. And I walk over and I just pick up the book. And as I’m walking out there, walking in, we pass each other. And so now when I get in my car and he’s looking at me in my car and right next to him is Butchie. And across from him was a red old male and Fat Herbie. [17:34] Herbie Blitzstein? Herbie Blitzstein? No, it wasn’t Herbie. This is another one. That’s one thing of Herbie. We called Herbie Fat. It was Fat Herbie. And the third guy is like sitting facing him. This is like, that weighs about 300 pounds. Oh, Sarno. Make Mike Sarno. Mike Sarno. That was it. And that’s, that’s, that’s who it was. You know, and I, I drive off, go to my office and go about my business. I get a call later that day from, uh, Hale Smith. Where’s my money? Where’s my money? I said, I gave it to your guy. You what? I gave it to him. I met him at nine o’clock this morning and I gave him the money. You did. And I said, yeah. Um, okay. And he hangs, and he hangs up. I don’t hear anything for a while. I never saw him again. I saw Hale a couple of times because he was always in one of the other restaurants. I lived in Newberry right across from there, but he never talked to me. I never talked to him, never said anything. It was about maybe it had to be a good couple of months later, When I read about Hale, Hale’s no longer with us. [18:52] That’s obviously how they found out about him. I never saw the other guy again. I’m hoping they didn’t kill him, but I’m assuming that’s what probably happened to him. In a public place like that, they probably just scared him off. He probably said, you know, I’m way over my head. I’m out of here. [19:15] They didn’t kill him in the public place he wouldn’t have been in the newspapers my little thought is like with the three guys they took him for a ride, I don’t know they just told him to leave town and he realized what it was and he did Hal didn’t get a chance to leave town Hal had other problems if I remember right I’d have to look it back up but he had other problems with the outfit what I found out later what they had done, was they had gotten one of their guys connected with him to find out who his customers were. In other words, one of the other people that he didn’t realize, that Hale didn’t realize was with them, they got him connected with them where he’s the one who’s doing his collecting and finding out who the customers were because they wanted to get all his customers as well as his money. It turns out he was He was a huge bookmaker for years. That’s what happened to him. And they just took his book. Yeah, I remember something about that story because I killed him in his house, I believe. Yeah, Sally D. [20:22] Sally D, yeah. Sally D was one. When I first met Sally D, he was with Marco’s Fruit, too. [20:30] He owned a pizza place up on the north side, north shore, and I broke him. I was betting with him and beating him week after week. And one of the last times I played with him, he couldn’t come up with the money. It took him an extra couple of weeks to get the cash to pay me. But we were real close friends with him. He’s a bizarre character because he was a totally low level at that time. Yeah. When he then connected up with the Cicero crew, with Rocky and Felice, with Rocky and those people, he became a boss with them. It turns out it was after they killed Al Smith. He was part of all that. That’s Salih De Laurentiis. He’s supposed to be a boss. He moved on up after the Family Secrets trial. He didn’t go down with that, I believe, and he kind of moved on up after that. I don’t know what happened to him. What was so funny about that, when he would come into the club, Marco’s club, Bobby Abinati. [21:42] Who was strictly a very low-level player, although we indicted him with the Gambia star. He’s the one who set up the robbery. Would that have been great if that would have gone through? He’s the one who set up that robbery in Wisconsin. He’d be making fun of Salihide all the time. [22:03] When Salihide would come in, he would make fun of him and joke about him and talk about what a loser he was. This is when he’s a boss of that crew. I mean, just a strange, I mean, nobody talked to bosses like that, especially when, when you’re, when you’re what they call Bobby, you know, what was Marco’s nickname for Bobby Knucklehead? [22:23] That was his nickname, Knucklehead. Pat Marcy, uh, contacted me about, you know, handling me in the only own case. [22:32] I couldn’t have been happier because that was a short time after they put a contract on me. So now i realized if they’re going to be making money you know they finally stopped because for good six seven months when i when i came back to chicago uh i was checking under my car every day in case there was a bomb i moved i moved from uh from a place that i own in the suburbs into an apartment complex so i wouldn’t be living on the first floor yeah it’d be impossible to somebody to break into my, you know, took them thrashing into my place. I changed my whole life around in that sense. [23:10] And when I drove everywhere I went, you know, I would go on the highway and then jump over. I would do all, I wanted to make absolutes. Even though nobody came around, I wasn’t taking any chances for a long period of time. And that was too when it cost me a fortune because that’s when I stopped dealing with the bookmakers because I wasn’t going to be in a position where I had to go meet somebody at any time to collect my money and whatever. [23:39] So what had happened, though, was somebody came to see me. And when I was practicing, there’s a lot of things I wouldn’t do. I set my own rules. I would not get involved. After the Harry Alleman case, I never got involved anymore myself fixing certain cases. But even prior to that, I wouldn’t fix certain cases. I wouldn’t get involved in certain cases, especially involving the police, because my father was such a terrific policeman, and I felt I was too in a lot of sentences. I loved the police. I disliked some of the crooked cops that I knew, but on the surface, I’d be friendly with them, etc. Harry Ailman was a prolific hitman for the Elmwood Park crew. He killed a teamster who wouldn’t help set up trucks for the outfit, a guy named Billy Logan. He was just a regular guy. He’s going to take us right into the meeting with the judge. He’ll take us into a counselor’s row restaurant where these cases were fixed. Now, Bob will give us a seat right at Pat Marcy’s table. Now, Pat Marcy was the first ward fixture, and he’s going to take us into the hallway with Pat Marcy where they made the payoffs. [24:57] Now, Bob, can you take us inside the famous Harry Aileman murder case? I know you fixed it. And tell us, you know, and I know there was a human toll that this took on that corrupt judge, Frank Wilson. Okay. The Harry Aileman case was, it was not long after I became partners with Johnny DeArco. I get a call from, I’m in Counselor’s Row at the restaurant. Whenever I was in there now, my spot was the first ward table. Nobody was allowed to sit there day or night. That was reserved for first ward connected people and only the top group of people. [25:40] I’m sitting there at the table and Johnny DeArco Sr. Tells me, you know, Pat wants to talk to you. About something. And I said, you know, sure. Not long afterwards, Pat comes downstairs. We go out. We go out in the hall because we never talk at the table. And he tells me, have you got somebody that can handle the Harry Alleman case? I had seen in the news, he was front page news. He was one of the main mob hitmen. He was partners with Butchie Petrucelli. But it was common knowledge that he was a hitman. He looked like one. He dressed like one. He acted like one. And whatever. And he was one. In fact, he was the one that used to go to New York. And I know he also went to Arizona to do some hits and whatever. He traveled around the country. I said to Pat, they thought the case was a mob hit on a team street. a teamster. I assumed that it was just that. It was people doing what they do. But I said to Pat, I said, well, get me the file. Get me the file. Let me see what the case looks like. Because I would never put a judge in a bad spot. That was my nature. [27:06] When I had cases, a lot of these judges were personal friends of mine. What I would do, if I wanted to have a case, if I wanted to fix a case to save all the time of having to go to a damn long trial, I would make sure that it was a case that was winnable, easily winnable. When I got the file, when I got the file from Pat, he got me the file the next day. The next morning, when he came in, he gave me the file. I looked at the file. It was a throw-out case. When I say throw-out case, absolutely a nothing case. [27:46] The records in the file showed that a car drove up down the street. Suddenly somebody with a shotgun blasted a guy named Billy Logan in front of his house and drove away. They were contacted by a neighbor, this guy, Bobby Lowe. Was it Bobby Lowe? Yeah, I’m pretty sure Bobby Lowe. Who indicated that he opened the door and let his dog run out. And when he looked, he saw somebody. He saw a car, and he gave a description of the car. And he saw somebody pull up, and he saw him shoot with a shotgun. And then he saw the person get out of the car and shoot him with a .45, and shoot him with a .45. And then the car sped away. That was pretty much the case. Some other people heard some noise, looked out, and saw a car driving away. A period of time after that, it had to be about a year or so after that, somebody was arrested driving to Pennsylvania to kill somebody. There was a guy who stopped. [29:16] Louie Almeida was his name. Louie Almeida was stopped in his car. He was on the way to Pennsylvania. And in front of his car, he had shotguns. And he winds up, when he gets arrested, he winds up telling the authorities that he can tell them about a mob murder back in Chicago and winds up cooperating with them. He indicates what happened. He indicated that, you know, he was asked to, you know, or he got involved in it. He got the car and whatever. They did this. They did that. And he pulled up alongside Billy and wound up shooting the victim as he came out of the house. [30:09] Now, I look at some other reports in there, some reports that were made out, new reports. They talk about the Louis Almeida. They talk about the witness that gave the first statement. and they said that they found, or he’s giving us a new statement now where he says he’s walking his dog. He hears a shotgun. His dog runs towards the car where the shooting was coming from. He saw Harry get out of the car and walk over and shoot him, walk over and shoot the victim, and he was looking at him, And then he jumped in the bushes and the car drove away. A complete new story. Yeah. A complete new story. And. I looked at the reports, and this is an easy winner. And so I told Pat, you know, I’ll take it. You know, I’m sure I can handle it. I said, I’m sure I can handle it, but, you know, I’ll let you know. [31:21] That’s when I contacted, I met my restaurant, Greco’s, and I had Frank Wilson there a lot. Well, I called Frank Wilson, invited him and his wife to come to the restaurant. I had done that many times before. When he gets there, I tell him, I have the case. You know, I told him I was contacted on this case, I said. And I said, it’s an easy winner, I said. And I explained to him what it was. I told him, you know, it’s the driver of the car who’s doing this to help himself. And this other guy, Bobby Lowe, that gave a complete new story from the original story that he gave. And I indicated, you know, can you handle the case? And he tells me, I can’t handle the case, he said, because I was SOJ’d. In Chicago, Illinois, they have a rule that makes it easy for people to fool around because for no reason at all you can ask to have a judge moved off the case. And you can name a second judge that you don’t want to handle the case. [32:34] Frank Wilson’s reputation was as such that the lawyer that turned out to be a judge later on, Tom Maloney, who had the case, named him in the SOJ. It was assigned to somebody else, and he indicated he wanted any other judge except Frank Wilson. Frank Wilson on the case. And this was Harry Aileman’s lawyer. Yeah. Okay. And who Tom Maloney, who then ends up being the judge years later. But yeah. Well, because we knew he was going to be a judge. Yeah. We knew ahead of time. I knew at that time. That’s what makes the story so unbelievably interesting. Yeah. Anyhow, he says, I can’t do it because… In Chicago, in Chicago, it’s supposed to keep it honest. I love this. To keep it honest. Yeah. To keep it honest, each judge is supposed to be picked by computer. [33:33] Same thing they’re doing to this day. Trump wondered why the same judge kept getting all his cases. Because they’re doing the same thing we did, some of us could do in Chicago. He was the chief judge in the area. he said to me, I don’t think I can get the case. I don’t think I can’t get the case. I said, I’ll get the case to you. I said, I’ll get, because I already, I, in fact, through Pat Marcy, anytime I wanted a case to go anywhere, I would contact Pat and I’d give him a thousand dollars and he would get me any judge I wanted. Uh, I said, well, I think I can. I said, I said, And I gave him $1,000. [34:16] I said, here, this is yours. And if I can’t get the case to you, you keep it. If I can’t get, I never said to him, will you fix it? Will you this or that? I mean, he understood what it was. I didn’t know how he would react to it. When I asked him, would you handle it? Were the words I used. I had never fixed anything with him before. [34:43] In case he was, you know, he would want to report it to somebody. I wasn’t worried because Frank had a reputation as being a big drinker. After I got the Harry Elliman file, Pat tells me, I’m going to have somebody come and talk to you. Who comes? And we meet in the first ward office, and then we go downstairs into the special room they had for conversations. It’s Mike Ficarro. He’s the head of the organized crime section. He’s the one who prosecutes all the criminals. He’s one of the many prosecutors in Chicago. That’s why there were over 1,000 mob murders and never a conviction from the time of Al Capone. Not a single conviction with over 1,000 mob murders because they controlled absolutely everything. He’s the boss. [35:35] I knew him. I didn’t like him. He had an attitude about him. You know, when I would see him at parties and when I’d see him at other places, and I’d walk by and say, hi, he just seemed coldish. [35:47] I found out later why. He was jealous of the relationship I had with all these people. [35:54] He says, I’ll help you any way I can, anything you need, whatever. So the prosecutors on the Harry Olliman case were our people. That’s who’s prosecuting the case anyhow. But they couldn’t get one of their judges apparently who would handle the case. So, but anyhow, uh, so, uh, when we, um, when we go, when we, when we go to trial, um. [36:25] Before to help me out, I told Pat, I’ll get somebody else to handle the case. I’ll have somebody else. I said, I won’t go in there. I won’t go in there because everybody knows I’m close to Frank, very close to Frank. I said, so I won’t go in there. I’ll get somebody. He says, no, no. He said, I’ll get somebody. And so he gets a guy named Frank Whalen, who I didn’t know at the time. He was a retired lawyer from Chicago. He was one of the mob lawyers. [37:00] He was one of the mob lawyers. And he lived in Florida. He lived in Miami. I think it was, no, Lauderdale. He lived in the Lauderdale area. He was practicing there. So I fly out. I fly out to meet him. I i do all the investigating in the case the i’m using an investigator that harry alleman got from me in fact he was the same investigator that got in trouble in in uh in in hollywood for what for a lot of stuff i can’t think of his name right now but he’s the one who got indicted in hollywood eventually for you know wiretapping people and whatever it was the same one. And he got me information on Bobby on this Bobby Lowe. He found out Bobby Lowe, Bobby Lowe was a drug addict. [37:59] When the FBI got a hold of him, Bobby Lowe was living out in the street because he had been fired from his first job. He had a job in some kind of an ice cream company where they made ice cream, and he got fired there for stealing. And then he had a job after that in a gas station, and he faked a robbery there. Apparently, what he did was he called the police and said he had been robbed. This is before they had cameras and all the rest of that stuff. He said he had been robbed. And somebody happened to have been in the gas station getting gas. It was a big place, apparently. [38:45] And when the police talked to him, he said, I didn’t see anything strange. He said, I saw the attendant walk out to the back about 10, 15 minutes ago. I saw him walk out to the back of the place and then come back in. And so they go out, and he had his car parked behind it, and they found the money that was supposed to have been stolen in the car. So not the best witness, in other words. Well, that’s an understatement, because that was why… That was why now he suddenly shows up, and they know all this. The FBI agents that obviously know all this, that’s their witness. That’s their case. To me, it’s an airtight, you know. Yeah. Anyhow, I developed the defense. I went back to see Frank a second time. I flew out to Florida a second time, gave him all this information. [39:48] I had talked to some other people to a number of people that were going to indicate that Harry played golf with them that day see how they remembered not golf but he was at a driving range with them with about five people they remember what they were three or four years three or four years before that what I also found out now, and I didn’t know and it changed my whole attitude on that this wasn’t a mob killing you, This guy that he killed was married to his, I think it was his cousin or some relation was married. I’m pretty sure it was to his cousin. She had told Harry, I got this from Butchie, Butchie Petrosselli, who had become a close friend of mine after I got involved with Harry’s case, his partner. And that was why he killed them, because apparently the sister, his sister-in-law, whatever she was, had told him, you know, when he was beating her up, she had said, well, my Harry Alameda won’t be happy about this. And he said, supposedly, he said, fuck that, Kenny. [41:02] And that’s why the shooting took place. Wow. This changed me. You know, I’m in the middle of it. There’s no getting out of it now. Yeah, they’ll turn it back. And by now, I’m running around all the time with Butch and Mary at night. I’m meeting them at dinner. They’re coming to one of my places where I have dinners all the time. You know, I’m becoming like close friends, close friends with both of them. Yeah. So anyhow, but anyhow, the lawyer that he got, Frank Whalen, who was supposed to be sharp, turned out like he was not in his, let’s just say he was not in his prime. [41:46] Charitable. And when he went in, you know, while the trial was going on, you know, while the trial was going on, I get a call from Frank. From Frank Wilson, because I told him, you don’t come back into the restaurant now. You don’t come back into the restaurant. I used his office as my office all the time, along with a bunch of other judges. I had a phone, but it cost about a dollar a minute to talk on my phone. I had to talk on my phone. So when I’d be at 26th Street in the courthouse, even though no lawyers are allowed back there in the chamber, so I’m back there sitting at his desk using the phone taking care of my own other business. I stopped going in there while the trial was going on. [42:35] So, anyhow, he calls me, and he wants to meet me at a restaurant over on Western Avenue. And, okay, he called me from one of the pay phones out there in front of the courthouse, and I go to meet him. What did he want? Was he complaining about the lawyer, Waylon? What was he complaining about, Waylon? and I was screwing it up. [42:59] When I meet him, I said, you know, he’s like, you know, he said, you know, we go into the bathroom and he and he said he’s all shooken up. He says, this is going to cost me my job. He said, he said, you know, they’re burying him. You’re burying him. You know, because I had given this information on the two witnesses. And he says, Frank Whalen, he said, isn’t doing a thing and cross-examining these people and whatever. [43:32] And he says, and he’s all upset. And I said, Frank, no, I’m shook up one of the few times in my life where it’s something I can’t handle. He had never told me, you know, I’ll fix the case, never. And I said to him, and I said, Frank, I said, if something goes wrong, I said, I’m sure they’re going to kill me, is what I said to him. Yeah. I said, if something goes wrong, I’m sure they’re going to kill me. And I left. I left the bathroom. Now, I have no idea what’s going on in his mind and whatever. Yeah. I see Pat the next day. And by something goes wrong in this case, you mean if he gets found guilty, that’d be what would go wrong and you would get killed. Is that that’s what you mean? Well, no question, because when I met, I didn’t go into that. I met with Harry Alleman. I get a call after I got involved in the case. A couple days later, I get a call from Markle. Meet me at one of the nightclubs where I was all the time at night with these people. [44:47] Above it, you’ve got a motel, a bunch of hotel rooms. I get a call from Markle. The reason everybody loved me and the mob, I never discussed what I was doing with anybody or any of the other dozens of mobsters I run with that I was involved in Harry’s case. Never said a word to anybody about any of this. That was my nature, and that’s why all these people love me. I never talked about one thing with anybody else or whatever. He says, I want to meet you. When I get over there, he says, let’s go upstairs. Somebody wants to talk to you. And we go upstairs, and there’s Harry Alleman. And Harry, how you doing? How are you? [45:27] And he says, listen, you’re sure about this? And I said, yeah. I said, I’m sure. And he said, well, if something goes wrong, you’re going to have a problem. Those were his words to me. You’re going to have a problem. And I said, you know, he says, because this judge, he says, this judge is a straight judge. And he said, Tom, you mean Tom Maloney. He says, and Tom wants to handle my case. And he tells me he’s going to be named a judge by the Supreme Court real soon. And he wants to handle and he wants to handle my case before he… Uh, you know, before he becomes a Supreme court, before he becomes a judge, I knew the moment he told me that I knew for sure that was the case because we control everything, including the Supreme court. I said, you know, I said, don’t, you know, don’t worry about it. I lied to him. And I said, uh, I said, yeah, the judge is going to, I said, yeah, he’s going to throw it out. He knows, I said, he knows what’ll happen if he doesn’t. That’s what I told Harry. I want to keep him happy. [46:34] I’m going to keep him happy probably for a few hours I’m a little nervous and then that’s all behind me like so many other problems I got in the middle of oh my god talking about walking a tightrope so now the lawyer came into Chicago he was in Chicago I met him when he came in he was staying at the Bismarck was at the Bismarck Hotel right around the corner from you know where Counselor’s Row was that’s where he was staying in the in the hotel right there by the first board office and there was a way to go in there without being seen and there was a, You go through another restaurant and you go through the alley and go up there. And I wouldn’t, I didn’t want to be seen walking into there because I know the FBI are probably, are probably watching and whatever. When he comes into town, they handle the case. So I go upstairs to see him. You know, I said, what the hell’s going on in court? He says, I’m going, it’s going great. It’s going great. I said, it’s going great. I just, you know, I just got a call last night. I had to go meet the judge. And he said, you’re not doing any cross-examining. Oh, I’m doing a great job. You know, I’m doing a great job. So after a few minutes of, I leave. Yeah. [47:52] That’s when I saw Pat Marcy, too. And I said, Pat, I said, the judge is upset about whatever’s going on. I said, maybe we should give him some more because I agreed to give him $10,000. And he said, you know, what a piece of work he is. You know, he said $10,000, and that’s all he’s going to get, not a nickel more or whatever. So now to say I’m nervous again is an ultra statement. The case, I walked over, and I wouldn’t go in the room, but I wanted to just be around that room for some reason. FBI agents all over the place. [48:30] FBI agents all over the place. And so now I’m at home and I’m packed. I’ve got my bags packed because if he finds it, I don’t know what he’s going to do. I’m worried he might find him guilty because of all that had happened. He, when the trial ended a given night, and the next day he was going to give the result. In fact, I didn’t go out and play that night. I was a little nervous, and I stayed home, and I packed up my bags. I packed up my bags, and about 9 o’clock, I got in the car, and I started driving. And by the time he gave the ruling, I was probably about 100, maybe 150 miles away. And I hear on the radio, you know, found him not guilty, found him not guilty. So I turn around. Hit the next exit, turn around and come back. I turn around. Northbound on I-55. [49:27] Probably a couple hours later, here I am parked in my parking spot. My parking spot was in front of my office, right across from City Hall. And I parked in the mayor’s spot when she wasn’t there. And drove probably to drive her crazy. But that was where I parked. That was my parking spot. We’d see my big car with the RJC license plates parked in the bus stop. And so here I am. I parked the car and I go in. I go in. [50:01] And I’m sure Pat told some people, probably not, but I’m sure they told all the mobsters, all the top mobsters, because these guys all wanted to meet me afterwards and get the restaurant. I go in to see them. We walked into the janitor’s closet. You walk out of Counselor’s Row. You go to the left. It goes into the 100 North Building. Now, you’ve got the elevators to the right. And behind that, you’ve got a closet where the janitors keep all their stuff. And you’ve got some stairs leading up to the, there was a, what do you call it? There was an office there where the commodities, big commodity exchange was right there. that there was a stairway leading up to where the offices were with some doors with bars and everything on it. And Pat is standing on those stairs, about two or three stairs. You know, I said, wow. I said, you know, everybody’s going nuts. And he goes, well, you know, you did a good job. And he gives me an envelope. He gives me an envelope. And, you know, I put the money in my pocket. [51:09] We said we had some more. We said a couple other words about, you know, this and that. And then I just go in there. I go back in the counselor’s. [51:21] Now, after the feds started getting indictments, did you try and warn the Aleman case judge, Frank Wilson? Why did you do that? And when I went to see Frank Wilson, I went to help him. I said, Frank, I said, look, I said, I was contacted by, I said, I was contacted by the, by the, by the FBI. They were investigating the Harry Aleman case. I said to him, I said, they, they feel the case was fixed. I said, when they come to see me, I said, you know, I said, I’m not going to talk to them. I said, I’m not going to talk to them. I’m going to take the fifth. And in your case, you can do the same thing. When they, if they come to talk to you, you just take the fifth amendment. If they give you immunity, I said, you know, then you, then you testify, but you tell them the truth. I said, don’t worry about me. Tell them the truth. This is how I talk to him. When I’m talking to him like that, it’s almost like he’s trying to run away from me. [52:27] We’re at a restaurant in a big complex. It was in one of those resorts in Arizona. He’s all but running away from me. I was trying to help him. What I said to him was, Frank, I said, the statute of limitations ran on all this. It’s been more than five years. There’s nothing they can do to you or to me, I said, because the statute ran. I said, so don’t lie to them. What the feds were concerned about, and I don’t know why, that he would deny ever fixing the case when it went through. I don’t know why they’re worried about that, but they were, and I didn’t want to see him get in trouble. [53:13] That’s why I went there to protect him. Hey, Bob, you were asked to represent an outfit associate or an outfit associate’s son who was accused of breaking the jaw of a Chicago policewoman. And you know, when a cop is injured in a fight with somebody, the cops follow that case. And I do not want to see any shenanigans going on. So, so tell us about how you walked that line. And I bet those cops were, were not happy with you in the end. Some people think this is a reason you flipped. Take us inside that case, will you? [53:45] And the reason I mentioned that it had a lot to do with what I eventually did. Now we’ll get back to what made me do what I was going to do. When I was practicing law now, and now I have been away from all this for years, I was out of town a lot because I’m representing the Chinese all around the country. I’m their main lawyer right now. [54:10] And I get a call from Lenny Colella. And he says, my son, he said, my son is in trouble. I want to come in and I want to talk to you about handling his case. This was a heater case, too. This was a front page case because he was charged with aggravated battery and attempted murder. Supposedly, he had beat up a policewoman and it was all over the place. He was a drug addict and whatever, supposedly he did all this. And when he came into the office with his dad, he was high. When I talked to him, he’s got his kid with him. And the kid is a smart aleck. As we’re talking, the kid, and I asked the kid, well, whatever. The kid was a smart aleck. And I just said to him, I said, Len, I can’t help you. I said, get him out of here. I want nothing to do with him. I said, I can’t help you. You didn’t take cases that were involved with cops anyhow, for the most part. No. I didn’t know what had happened in this case. I know what I saw in the paper. I didn’t know what the facts or anything were or whatever. I mean, if it turned out that if I felt when I talked to him that he had done it, whatever, I would not have taken the case anyhow. [55:26] I mean, I would not have. That’s why I say, too, that may be, too, why I was as quick and as rude as I was when he came in there and was acting and was a little bit high. I just wanted nothing to do with him, period. I said to his dad, his father said, you know, if I get him cleaned up, you know, I said, well, if you get him cleaned up, then we’ll talk again. I said, but I can’t help him, and I can’t help him. [55:54] And off he goes. the father re-contacted me about a week later. And he said, I had him in rehab and he straightened out and whatever. And he brought him back in and it was a new person. And when he told me the facts of the case, when he told me what happened, because he was a big, tough kid. He was a big, you know, he was a weightlifter, but he was a big, tough looking kid. [56:19] And it’s a little police woman. When he told me what happened, I believed him. Because I’ve been out in the street and whatever. And he says, you know, he told me what happened, that he had gotten stopped. He was out there talking to her. And when she said, you’re under arrest for DUI, he just walked. He says, I walked. I was going to get in my car and drive away. And she grabbed me and was pulling me or whatever. And I hear all these sirens coming. And within a few minutes, there’s all kinds of police. There’s about half a dozen police there. He says, and then they started jumping on me. He said, she was under me. He was all beaten up. He was all bloody and whatever. And she apparently had her jaw broken. And there’s no doubt in my mind when he’s telling me that, you know, when they were hit with his clubs or with this thing that they claimed he had without his fingerprints, it was a metal bar. Right, a slapper. A chunk of lead covered by leather. Everybody used to carry a slapper. How about you carry a slapper? They claimed, but there was no cloth on this. It was just the metal itself. Yeah, oh really? [57:45] Anyhow, that makes it interesting during the trial when they flat out lied. No, he had no blood. I got the hospital reports. They wouldn’t take him in the station because he was too badly beaten up. But anyhow, he also had two other charges. He had been involved in a fight in a bar. And he had been involved in another situation with the police. And he was charged with resisting arrest and battery on a policeman out in Cicero. So he had these three cases. So I gave the father a fee on handling, you know, the one, I was going to, I gave him a fee one case at a time. I said, you know, first thing we’ll do, I want to get rid of those other two cases. I’ll take them to juries, I said. [58:36] I’ll take them to juries because I wasn’t going to put them. I knew both the judges on those cases, but I wasn’t going to put them in a position on a case like that. I take the first case to trial. And I get him a not guilty. That was the fight in the bar. [58:54] That was out in one of the suburbs. That was out in, I’m not sure which suburb, in the northwest side. After we get that case over with, before that case, I get a call from Pat Marcy. Pat Marcy, I hadn’t seen him probably even for a couple months, but I hadn’t talked to him for quite a long period of time. And he says to me, you got a case that just came in. He said, we’re going to handle it. And I said, there’s no need, Pat. I said, I can win these cases. I said, there’s no need. I can win these cases. And he said, we’re going to handle this. The case is going to go to Judge Passarella, he said, and we’ll take care of it. I said, Pat, there’s no need to. I said, I can win these cases. I said, they’re all jury trials, but I know I can win them all. And he says, you do as you’re told. Pat had never talked to me like that before. [59:54] Powerful as he was and crazy as I am, And he never, you know, you never demand that I do anything or whatever. We had a different type relationship. And although I hadn’t broken away from them by now, it’s been years. I had broken away from them for about, you know, two, three years. And he says, you know, take the case to trial. I said, well, he’s got some other cases, too, and I’m going to take the one. And she says, I’ll take it to a jury, and I’ll win it. You’ll see how I win it. I take her to trial, and I get her not guilty. The second case was set for trial about a month after that. Not even, yeah, about a month or so after that. And during that time, a couple of times I’m in counselors, and Pat says, when are you going to take the case to trial? I said, well, Pat, you know, I won the one case. I got the other case on trial, and it was before Judge Stillo. He was a judge that we eventually indicted. [1:00:51] Stillo was very, very well connected to the first ward. He’s one of the old-time judges out in Maywood. And I told him, you know, when I came in there, he assumed I’d take it to trial and he’d throw it out. And I said, no, no, no, there’s no need to. I says, I’m going to take the jury on this one. Number one, I had stopped fixing things long before this. And, but he was, to make money, he was willing that he would have thrown the case out. It was a battery with a Cicero policeman. And I says, no, no, I’ll take it. I’ll take it to, you know, I’ll take the jury. I said, I don’t want to put you in that pursuit. Oh, don’t worry about me. I take that one to trial and I win that one too. Now Pat calls me, when the hell are you going to take the case to trial? And that’s the original case with the police woman. That’s the main one. The main one. Okay, go ahead. [1:01:44] When are you going to take it to trial? And I don’t want to take it to trial. In fact. I had talked to the prosecutor, and I said, look, I said, because he was charged with, he was charged with, you know, attempted murder and arrest. I said, if you’ll reduce it, the prosecutor was an idiot. He knew me, should have realized that, you know, that I never lose cases. Yeah. You know, but I want to work out something. He was a special prosecutor on it. He said, we’re not going to reduce it. We said, you know, if you want to work out a plea, we went five years, we went five to ten or whatever in the penitentiary. And I said, well, that’s not going to happen. I said, well, then we’ll just have to go to trial. So now, while I’m at Counselor’s Row, on one of my many occasions, because I was still having some card games over there at somebody else’s other lawyer’s office, because I had had big card games going on there for years. I’m sitting at the counselor’s row table, and Judge Passarella comes in. There’s just him and me there, and when he comes in, I say, Oh, you’re here to see Pat? [1:02:56] And he goes, Pat, who? No more conversation. Who the fuck? No more. The guy’s treating me like I’m some kind of a fool or whatever. And I developed an instant disliking to him. I had never seen him around that much or whatever before that. So now, after the second case, you’re going to go to, you know. So I talked to Lenny. When Lenny came in, Lenny came in with him when we were starting to get prepared for the case. And, oh, this is before this is before I talked to the prosecutor. And I said, Lenny, I said, I says, if I can get it reduced to a misdemeanor, to a misdemeanor. I said, you know, can we work with, you know, and work out a plea, let’s say, for maybe a month or two, you know, a month or two. Is that OK with you? Oh, sure. He says, oh, sure. [1:03:57] Now, this Lenny, this was the kid’s dad, your client’s dad. This is his dad. Now, explain who he was, who Lenny was. His dad was. What’s his last name? Yeah, Karela. Karela, okay. Lenny Karela, I’m pretty sure was his name. He owned a big bakery out there in Elmwood Park area. Okay. And he was friendly with all the mobsters. Okay, all right. I got you. For all I knew, he may have been a mobster himself, but I mean, he may have been because we had thousands of people that were connected. He was a connected guy. All right, go ahead. I’m sorry. And he said, oh, yeah, sure, no, not a problem because the papers are meant, they’re still, after a year, they’re still mentioning that case will be going to trial soon and every so often. [1:04:43] What I had also done, I tried to make contact with the policewoman, not with her, but I put the word out and I knew a lot of police and I got a hold of somebody that did know her. And I said, look, I said, no, the case is fixed if I want it. Yeah. But I don’t want it. Even though I know that, you know, that it’s all BS, you know, I said, look, I said, get a hold of her and get a hold of her lawyer and tell them if they want to file a lawsuit, you know, you know, we can, they can get themselves some money on it. Uh, you know, he’ll indicate, you know, he’ll, he’ll, he’ll indicate that, you know, he, he was guilty or whatever, but I wanted to get her some money. The word I get back is tell him that piece of shit, meaning me to drop dead, to drop dead. You know, we’re going to put this guy in prison and that’s where he should be too. When the case now, now when the case goes to trial. [1:05:48] The coppers lied like hell and talk about stupid. I’ve got the police reports there. When they took him into the police station, they wouldn’t take him. The station said take him to a hospital. He goes to the hospital and the reports, you know, bleeding here, bleeding there, and, you know, marks here, marks there. They beat the hell out of him. [1:06:10] You know, nobody touched him. You know, nobody touched him. Nobody touched him. Was he bleeding? No, no, he wasn’t. He wasn’t bleeding. Didn’t have any, you know, along with, you know, along with everything else. Flat out lied. How many policemen were there? There were two or three. There were about 10 by the time it’s over. But it’s an absolute throwout. Any fingerprints on that metal? Well, we had some fingerprints, but not his. And on and on it went. It’s a throwout case to start with. The courtroom now where the case was, was very interesting. You walk in there, and when you walk in there, there’s about 20 people that can sit. And then there’s, it’s the only courtroom in the building where you have a wall, a glass wall, all the way up, all the way up. Covering in the door, opens up and goes in there. You go in there. It’s a big courtroom. A bunch of benches now in there. You go to the left, and here’s the judge’s chambers. You come out of the chambers, and you walk up about four steps. And here the desk is on like a podium. And it’s not where all the others are, you know, where you look straight forward. It’s over on the side. It’s over, you know, to the left as you walk out of his chambers. [1:07:40] When the judge listens to the case he goes in there I’ll come up back with my ruling he comes out about 10 minutes later he walks up the steps, And now he turns off the microphone. Somebody turns off the microphone so the people in the back can’t hear anything. The ones inside there can, you know, can hear. The one back there can’t hear anything because it’s all enclosed. [1:08:11] That’s why they got the microphone back there. Somebody shut it off. He says, basically, I’m not guilty in a real strange voice. And all but runs off the all but run and don’t ask me why this is what he did all but runs off all but runs off into the into his chambers, you know he’s afraid all those cops out in the audience were going to come and charge the stand I guess and put a whack on him. [1:08:43] But think about it this is Chicago he’s with the bad guys but I’m just saying I don’t know why he did all that, but that’s what he did. And so now, as I come walking out with Mike, and they’re all in uniform, and most of them are in uniform, and then you’ve got the press and all kinds of cameras and whatever there. And as I come walking out along with him, some of these guys I know, and these jerk-offs are like calling me names and whatever. I go, I go see Pat. [1:09:23] And when I go back into Counselor’s Row now, he’s there at the table. And when I come in, it’s a repeat of the Harry Allerman thing. He walks out. He walks directly. And I’m following him, and he walks in. He goes back into the same janitor’s closet and stands on the same steps just above me, you know, talking to me. And I said to him I said this judge is going to have a problem, I said, he’s going to have a problem. I said, what if he says something? And he said to me, nobody would dare. He said, nobody would dare cooperate against us. They know what would happen. Or words to that effect. And don’t ask me why. So many other things had happened before this. But now I’m looking at him and I’m thinking, you know, somebody’s got to stop this craziness. All this stuff. I’m thinking that at the moment, but then I’m worried for some reason, I think he can read my mind. [1:10:34] Stupid as all of this seems, I’m afraid to think that anymore. I’m almost, you know, cause Pat’s such a powerful person and every sense I know, I know his power, but anyhow, so I leave. And like I say, 10, 15 minutes later, that’s all forgotten about. He paid me the rest of the money I was supposed to get from them. [1:10:56] Obviously, he wanted to do it because he was probably charging a lot of money. That’s why he didn’t want me to take things. He wanted to collect the money because while the case was going on too, he puts me in touch with the head of the probation department because he was able to help in some way. He knew some of the, you know, some of the, some of the policemen involved in the thing had been contacted too. Yeah. But they were contacted and they messed up by, you know, they messed up by lying about all that. Yeah. When there’s police reports saying, oh, no, but anyhow, that was that particular case. Tell us why you decided to flip. [1:11:38] These had been your friends. You knew you had explosive information. You knew as a lawyer, you knew what you had to say would send these people to prison for many, many years. if not life. It had to be hard. As other things happened, why did I commit the, Probably two or three other times things happened. But the most important thing was to think when my dad was dying, and I was very close to my dad. When my dad was dyi

Richie is joined by author and criminologist Stuart Waiton. Did you know that the UK's Supreme Court recently declared that in Scotland, men who stand accused of sexual offences against women cannot receive a fair trial? It's a national scandal and yet the press and broadcast media won't touch it. Why? Stuart shares his thoughts. The guys also discuss the Labour government's plan to limit jury trials in the UK and social engineering in UK schools. Don't miss this.https://www.jimsscotland.org/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ks7qpxxD9FI

At the precipice of a new year, Bob Stein discusses the implications of a probable new Fed Chair, the possibility of a Supreme Court ruling against tariff policies, and the odds for mid-term elections.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Subscribe Here to the ROI Podcast & other First Trust Market News Website: First Trust PortfoliosConnect with us on LinkedIn: First Trust LinkedInFollow us on X: First Trust on XSubscribe to the First Trust YouTube ChannelSubscribe to the ROI Podcast YouTube Channel

Hans von Spakovsky joins Marc to dissect the release of the Epstein files, dismissing left-wing outrage over redactions as necessary to protect victims, not Trump. He slams Georgia officials for admitting—five years late—that 315,000 ballots were illegally certified in the 2020 election, calling it a severe breach of election integrity. Hans also previews a looming Supreme Court decision that could bar states from accepting mail-in ballots after Election Day, arguing that such extensions violate federal law and open the door to fraud. #Hashtags: #HansVonSp

Show Notes: Noah Feldman,  Harvard Law professor, author, and ethical advisor talks about his career in constitutional law and his experiences in Iraq and Tunisia, sharing stories from his time guiding, and in some cases, establishing, the law of countries in turmoil or collapse. He also talks about the themes explored in his books  and current pursuits. Real World Projects in Constitutional Law Noah describes his academic journey, starting from his early love for school and his decision to pursue academia full-time, with brief interruptions for real-world projects. He shares his experiences as a law clerk for the late Justice David Souter and his role as the senior constitutional advisor to the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq. Noah discusses his involvement in drafting the Iraqi constitution, starting from scratch, and the unique opportunity it provided to apply his academic knowledge in a real-world scenario. He recounts his work in Tunisia after the Arab Spring, advising the Constituent Assembly on constitutional design.  Oversight on Facebook After writing his book about James Madison, Noah's next step was unexpected involvement with Facebook's Oversight Board, which was inspired by a conversation with Sheryl Sandberg and Mark Zuckerberg. He was in California giving a talk at Stanford. He was thinking about writing a book on free speech in the era of social media. He explained to Sheryl how he had the idea that Facebook would benefit from having a kind of private Supreme Court. And the idea was that all of the companies privately made content moderation decisions could actually be made in a more public and transparent way, according to principles and the doing so would add to the legitimacy of their decision-making process. She loved the idea and introduced him to Mark Zuckerberg, and the outcome was the Oversight Board. Noah explains his ongoing work advising tech companies on governance issues and the complexities of balancing free expression and ethics in the tech industry. A Sideline in Journalism and a Focus on Writing Noah mentions his sideline in journalism, starting with a recommendation from Michael Ignatieff to write for the New York Times. He shares his experience of writing for Bloomberg's opinion section for over a decade. Noah talks about his podcast, Deep Background, which he hosted for three years, and his plans to relaunch it in a slightly different format. He discusses his current book project, The Importance of Being Human, which explores the value of human relationships in the age of AI and technology. Noah elaborates on his book project, focusing on the importance of human relationships in various aspects of life, including work, family, and politics. He expresses his open-mindedness about the potential value of romantic relationships with AI, despite initially holding a different view. Following a Theme of Constitutions When asked about his book choices, Noah explains his organizing theme of constitutions, focusing on Middle Eastern and US constitutional history. Noah outlines his planned book series on the history of the US Constitution, emphasizing the narrative throughline of the people who shaped it. He shares his experiences in Iraq, describing the chaotic and disorganized environment he encountered and the challenges of creating a functioning legal system in the midst of civil disorder. He shares the biggest lesson learned, the importance of order and law, arguing that without de facto control on the ground, it is difficult to establish a functioning legal or constitutional system. He also talks about how militias were formed. Noah discusses his work in Tunisia, highlighting the successful transition to democracy and the role of Islamist political parties in the democratic process. He reflects on the importance of norms and conventions in maintaining a functional constitutional system, using the example of Tunisia's failed Constitutional Court. Norms and Conventions in Maintaining a Constitutional System Noah emphasizes the significance of norms and conventions in the functioning of institutions, including legal systems and constitutional orders. He discusses the role of norms in the US constitutional system, using the example of the impeachment of Donald Trump to illustrate how norms can be changed by actions that challenge them. Noah reflects on the importance of understanding and respecting norms and conventions in maintaining the integrity of legal and constitutional systems. He highlights the need for clear and effective checks and balances to prevent the abuse of power and ensure the rule of law. The Importance of Family Noah shares details about his personal life, including his recent marriage to Julia Allison and his two children, Jamin and Mina, who are pursuing careers in the arts. He describes his relationship with his ex-wife, Jeannie Suk Gerson, and her husband, Jake Gerson, and how they maintain a good working relationship despite being colleagues.Noah reflects on the importance of family and personal relationships in his life, noting the support and encouragement he receives from his family.  Harvard Reflections Noah reminisces about his time at Harvard, highlighting the impact of his mentors and the courses he took. He talks about his mentorship with Robert Nozick and the influence of his work on his current thinking, medieval Islamic and Jewish Studies and his professors there Isadore Turski, Bernard Septimus, and Mohsen Madi. he also mentions Richard Primus, Constitutional Law with H.W. Perry. Noah discusses his involvement with the Program on Jewish and Israeli Law at Harvard Law School and the importance of medieval Jewish and Islamic Studies in his work. He reflects on the value of response papers in developing his skills as a journalist and opinion writer. Timestamps: 03:58: Involvement in Real-World Projects 07:52 Journalism and Media Engagement  13:07: Research and Personal Insights  23:51: Lessons from Iraq and Tunisia  37:46: Impact of Norms and Conventions  42:04: Personal Life and Family  45:08: Influences and Mentorship  Links: Website: https://www.noahfeldman.com/ Email: noah_feldman@harvard.edu @professornoahfeldman Linktree Featured Non-profit The featured non-profit of this week's episode  is brought to you by Anastasia Fernand who reports: "Hi. I'm Anastasia Fernand, class of 1992. The featured non-profit of this episode of the 1992 report is the Rebecca H. Rhodes African Inclusive Literacy Research prize. The African inclusive literacy Research Fund supports African scholars and practitioners undertaking research to identify the best ways of helping children with disabilities become literate as a critical step in reaching their full potential. Rebecca was my roommate throughout college and a member of our class of 1992 Rebecca spent her career proving that every child can learn. Let's make sure her prize keeps proving it for generations to come. And now here is Will Bachman with this week's episode." To learn more about their work, visit: https://www.adeanet.org

A coalition of privacy defenders led by Lex Lumina and the Electronic Frontier Foundation filed a lawsuit on February 11 asking a federal court to stop the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) from disclosing millions of Americans' private, sensitive information to Elon Musk and his “Department of Government Efficiency” (DOGE). As the federal government is the nation's largest employer, the records held by OPM represent one of the largest collections of sensitive personal data in the country.Is this a big deal? Should we care? Joining Pam today is Stanford Law Professor Mark Lemley, an expert in intellectual property, patent law, trademark law, antitrust, the law of robotics and AI, video game law, and remedies. Lemley is of counsel with the law firm Lex Lumina and closely involved in the DOGE case. In this episode, Lemley overviews urgent privacy concerns that led to this lawsuit, laws such as the Privacy Act, and legal next steps for this case. The conversation shifts to the current political landscape, highlighting the unprecedented influence of Silicon Valley, particularly under the Musk administration. Lemley contrasts the agile, authoritative management style of Silicon Valley billionaires with the traditionally slow-moving federal bureaucracy, raising concerns about legality and procedural adherence. The conversation also touches on the demise of the Chevron doctrine and the possible rise of an imperial presidency, drawing parallels between the Supreme Court's and the executive branch's power grabs—and how Lemley's 2022 paper, "The Imperial Supreme Court," predicted the Court's trend towards consolidating power. This episode offers a compelling examination of how technological and corporate ideologies are influencing American law.Links:Mark Lemley >>> Stanford Law page“The Imperial Supreme Court” >>> Stanford Law publication pageConnect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Lawyer Magazine >>> Twitter/X(00:00:00) The Rise of Executive Power(00:07:22) Concerns About Data Handling and Privacy(00:08:41) The Impact of Silicon Valley's Ethos on Government(00:14:01) The Musk Administration's Approach(00:18:01) The Role of the Supreme Court(00:24:43) Silicon Valley's Influence on Washington Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Trump's relentless assault on the DOJ's credibility has lead to Grand Juries, Juries, Judges and law students all rejecting the DOJ leading to pile up of losses. Trump's criminal defense team masquerading as the DOJ leadership are also moving closer to possible criminal prosecution and indictment related to the continued obstruction around the Epstein Files coverup and the coverup of the coverup. Federal Judges are ramping up the pace of their blistering orders against the Trump DOJ at a record pace. Public support for lawsuits against the Trump Administration is contributing mightily to Trump's loss record. As the lower courts are “holding the line” against Trump's lawlessness, the need for Supreme Court reform in the next Administration is laid bare for all the Voters to see. And the Legal AF Youtube channel likely gets its ONE MILLIONTH SUBSCRIBER this weekend! All this and so much more as Ben and Popok take the controls tonight of the top rated Legal AF podcast. Support Our Sponsors: Corn Bread Hemp: Head to https://cornbreadhemp.com/LEGALAF and use code LEGALAF to get holiday BOGO savings. Miracle Made: Upgrade your sleep with Miracle Made! Go to https://TryMiracle.com/LEGALAF and use the code LEGLAF to claim your FREE 3 PIECE TOWEL SET and SAVE over 40% OFF. Aura Frames: Visit https://AuraFrames.com and get $45 OFF their BEST-SELLING Carver Mat frames with promo code: LEGALAF Udacity: For 40% off your order, head to https://Udacity.com/LEGALAF and use code LEGALAF Learn more about the Popok Firm: https://thepopokfirm.com Subscribe to Legal AF Substack: https://substack.com/@legalaf Check out the Popok Firm: https://thepopokfirm.com Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast Cult Conversations: The Influence Continuum with Dr. Steve Hassan: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/mea-culpa-with-michael-cohen The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show Burn the Boats: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 Political Beatdown: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/political-beatdown On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In March 1994, the quiet suburb of Carmel, Indiana was shattered by the brutal murders of siblings Lisa and Nick Allemenos, and their family friend Chris James. What began as a seemingly ordinary evening spiraled into one of Hamilton County's most savage crimes—three young lives cut short in a chilling act of betrayal and violence. In this episode, we unravel the events leading up to that night, the shocking details of the crime, and the trial that followed. Through court records, survivor accounts, and community reflections, we explore how a senseless decision over drugs and money left a lasting scar on an entire town.   Join Patreon here to binge bonus content! Crime Curious is creating a kick-ass exclusive listener experience | Patreon Want to just donate to the show? You can do so here: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/crimecurious Music By: Michael Drzewiecki Cover Art By: Charnell   Nicholas George “Nick” Allemenos (1976-1994) - Find a Grave Memorial Lisa Nicole Allemenos (1980-1994) - Find a Grave Memorial Christopher Edward “Chris” James (1970-1994) - Find a Grave Memorial Kofi Modibo Ajabu Seeks Clemency for 240-Year Sentence - Capital B News Kofi Modibo Ajabu v. State of Indiana :: 1998 :: Supreme Court of Indiana Decisions :: Indiana Case Law :: Indiana Law :: U.S. Law :: Justia IM Crime Files: Deadly Decisions - Indianapolis Monthly 25 years later: 1994 Carmel triple murder tore families apart, brought unlikely friends together Convicted killer suspected in attack on prison guard | wthr.com

Episode 269- The Nightmare Before Christmas Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode 269 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Second Amendment, New Jersey Democrats, gun laws, machine gun conversion devices, digital instructions, firearm components, gun owner gulag, cash bail, pre-trial detention, carry killer bill, sensitive places, gun rights, constitutional rights, gun lawyer. SPEAKERS Evan Nappen, Speaker 2, Teddy Nappen Evan Nappen 00:15 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:17 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:19 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, the New Jersey Democrats are going to give gun owners a Nightmare Before Christmas. What they are doing is pushing a package of Second Amendment oppression upon us, and they decided that the perfect time to do it is right before Christmas. On Monday, December 22, the Senate will be having a voting session. They’re going to be looking at bills that we’re going to talk about right now, and you need to take action. You know, you need to let the legislators know that you oppose this. Hopefully you belong to the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs. If not, you need to join. That’s anjrpc.org. They send out the news releases where you can immediately take action and let the legislature know your feelings on their oppression of our Second Amendment rights as they continue to attack them. Evan Nappen 01:33 Now, we have some very problematic laws that they’re going to be trying to jam through, and I want to make sure that you’re aware of what they are and what they mean. So, we have what is A-4974, and its companion in the Senate is S-3893. (https://www.njleg.state.nj.us/bill-search/2024/S3893) This bill establishes criminal penalties for sale and possession of machine gun conversion devices. Now, of course, these things are already banned. They’re already banned under federal law and state law, but New Jersey just can’t ban something enough, right? So, they’re just duplicating here even more bans upon bans. This is supposedly addressing so-called Glock triggers, but New Jersey usually finds a way to expand it to all kinds of other nonsense. We’ve seen these things lead off into false charges over devices that are not designed to convert to machine guns, but instead designed to simply improve accuracy and a trigger or those kind of things. So, these things are just problematic, and they’re just putting bans on top of bans. And they just want to make sure their name is on a piece of law where they’re “doing something about it”. You know, to sell red meat to their base. So, we have that to deal with. Page – 1 – of 10Evan Nappen 03:16 Additionally, we have A-4975 and the Senate companion bill is S-3894. (https://www.njleg.state.nj.us/bill-search/2024/A3894) This bill establishes a crime of possessing digital instructions to illegally manufacture firearms and firearm components. Now, keep in mind, back in 2018 Murphy signed a law banning the use and sale these digital files already, but this bill is even worse. The mere possession of the files will result in incredibly harsh penalties, even if you unknowingly possess them on a long forgotten computer, etc. So, New Jersey is turning firearm information, pure firearm digital information, into the equivalent of possessing child pornography. Simple possession of the digital file itself. Evan Nappen 04:20 It doesn’t matter that you never had any intention to actually build a firearm, but this gun information is itself being turned into contraband. Now, of course, this brings in First Amendment issues as well as Second Amendment issues, and I’m sure this will as well be subject to challenge. But nonetheless, it puts gun owners at risk that utilize internet and such for downloads of different things. Strictly for informational purposes. Even though you had no intent to 3D print a gun or not, or to use it with a CNC machine to make guns or even gun parts. So, this bill is another oppression of Second Amendment rights, and this time an oppression of First Amendment rights. But since when do Democrats care about rights? So, you need to oppose this as well. Evan Nappen 05:25 There is another bill, Assembly 4978, and the Senate companion is 3897. (https://pub.njleg.gov/Bills/2024/S4000/3897_I1.HTM) Now, this bill requires the Attorney General to report data regarding shootings that did not result in bodily injury. This type of data accumulation is used so then they can twist it into political fodder to further pass other Second Amendment oppression laws. This is their game. So, this is a step in, you know, focusing on the potential discharge law, making accidents into crimes, and using it to become automatic licensing disqualifiers, what become essentially per se felonies. This is how their evil works. This is what they do. This is their machinations, and this is the beginnings of them laying the groundwork to do that very thing. We’ve seen this playbook before, as they put data together that they then abuse in the manner that suits their purposes. So, of course, we have to fight this. Evan Nappen 06:53 Another incredibly serious other bill that’s in the Nightmare Before Christmas is Assembly 4981. The companion is S-3900. (https://www.njleg.state.nj.us/bill-search/2024/A4981) Now, this bill is a Gun Owner Gulag enhancement bill. This law will take the Gun Owner Gulag and make it even worse. So, as you should be familiar, but I want to make sure you are, New Jersey has the Gun Owner Gulag, which is New Jersey’s elimination of cash bail. In getting rid of cash bails, like so many progressive blue states took those actions to do that in the specifically during the, you know, defund police movement and all that. You normally hear about the cashless bails being utilized, where actual criminals, bona fide bad guys, you know, rapists, murders, etc, are put in a revolving door and released very quickly out in the street, particularly if they have other characteristics that the Left is favoring, such as being, you Page – 2 – of 10know, illegally in the country and things like that. They want those people out fast. So, it gets used in that way. Evan Nappen 08:15 But when it comes to weaponization of it against gun owners, well, that’s a different story. They want to imprison us. Okay? So they want to make sure that any gun owner that has a problem, well, they’re going to be subject to the Gulag, where they’re going to be held without bail until their trial, because there is no more bail in New Jersey. And what happens is the prosecutor seeks what is called pre-trial detention. And if pre-trial detention is granted, you’re going to sit in jail, having been proven guilty of nothing, until your trial, and that can be months or years. So, this is the Gulag, and that’s how it operates. Well, that’s bad enough. We fight these Gulag cases all the time, trying to get gun owners out because just about any gun offense is a felony level. New Jersey calls them crimes, and they’re normally warrant offenses. You get arrested and then you’re put through the Gulag where you’re held for 48 hours while the prosecutor decides whether to seek pre-trial detention or not. Evan Nappen 09:20 And their policies are, generally, in every gun case, they seek the Gulag, which is to hold you without bail. So, you’re going to be held at least, normally, another five days before your hearing, where your attorney will finally get to argue to get you out. And if your attorney is not successful in doing that, you are staying in with no bail. Well, this bill is an enhancement to that. It will allow the court to take even more time on any firearm offense where they get to hold you for yet another seven days, so that an operability report can somehow be provided regarding the operability of a firearm, which is often irrelevant to the criminal charge, especially in New Jersey. Operability is not even necessarily required for a firearm conviction, but here the abuse of it will be added into the Gulag’s initial holding of the gun owner. So, now you’re going to be arrested on the warrant charge on whatever the allegation of the firearm offense is, even though you’re innocent, it won’t matter. It’s a gun offense. So, the 48 hours, the prosecutor by way of their policy is going to hold you seeking pre-trial detention. Then that pre-trial detention hearing has to get scheduled within, arguably, five days, and normally it’s about that, five days, before you have the hearing. Evan Nappen 10:57 But if we get to that hearing and they say, oh no, we want another seven days, at least, here the seven days to get an operability report. So, now you’re going to be in jail for approximately two weeks, two weeks, without bail, because there is no bail. And that’s just to get you to the hearing so your attorney can try to argue to defeat the prosecutor’s motion for pre-trial detention. And they’re going to now throw this into the mix. So, you can figure with any gun arrest, you know, you’re falsely accused of being in a “sensitive place” or you’re falsely accused of possession of an assault firearm, or you’re falsely accused of unlawful possession of your handgun. You know all kind of false charges and gun rights oppression that I deal with all the time in practice. Well, you’re going to be at least two weeks in jail now before we can even get you out so we can fight the charge that will eventually get you acquitted of. Isn’t that cute? And that’s if your attorney knows how to get you out and succeeds in doing so. Because if not, you’ll just sit in jail until your trial to finally prove that. So, this is the just horrible addition to the Gun Owner Gulag. Page – 3 – of 10Evan Nappen 12:20 These bills need to be fought, and they need to be fought vigorously. Make sure you make your voices heard. Make sure you belong to ANJRPC, the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs. They have a full-time paid lobbyist. They have a vigorous process here trying to fight this, but of course, we’re dealing with a state where it is a tremendous battle for the forces of constitutional rights protection. Here to succeed, it’s a difficult, challenging environment, but we have to keep up the fight. We have to make our voices known, and we can make changes. As a matter of fact, that Gulag bill, the Association was able to change the original form where it was an indefinite amount of time until they finally got the report. At least it’s been modified to a mere seven days extra. So, now it’s only two weeks in jail, guilty of nothing. Simply because you lawfully exercised your rights in New Jersey. So, these laws are terrible. They are more oppression from our oppressors. We need to fight it and make sure you do. Evan Nappen 13:44 Now, on a little bit of a Christmas gift here, despite the nightmare that the New Jersey Democrats are placing upon us. I do want to mention that thanks to President Trump and his appointment of judges throughout the land, not the least of which, of course, is the Supreme Court, getting three conservative constitutionalist judges there. But also his ability to add to the judges of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. And because of President Trump particularly adding the last two judges that are constitutional judges that understand the significance of the Second Amendment, the full panel of 14 judges has agreed to hear the appeal in the Siegel versus Platkin, which is the Carry Killer lawsuit that challenges all these sensitive places and the other onerous restrictions that were put forward in the Carry Killer bill. And as you may know, the initial appeal with the three-judge panel, the three-judge panel that had ruled not tremendously in our favor, has been wiped out, wiped out. Now, the full panel of 14 judges are going to hear and decide the Carry Killer bill. This is very good news for us. Evan Nappen 15:26 This is something that makes me cautiously optimistic that we’re going to see some protection and our Second Amendment rights enforced, and it’s very, very important. Of course, New Jersey fought tooth and nail to try to stop the full panel from granting the en banc full panel, but the Association, particularly my good friend and colleague, Dan Schmutter, was successful here in having that full panel take the case. So, this will also bode well, because by getting a decision that knocks out most, if not all, of the Carry Killer bill, it’ll also lay the groundwork for the Supreme Court of the United States. If we start getting split decisions in the circuits over these sensitive place gambit that the Second Amendment oppressionists have pulled after Bruen to try to limit our rights, we may, in fact, see even a national case killing it permanently for the country. But here in New Jersey, we stand in good stead at the moment. Evan Nappen 16:47 Keep in mind that, at the moment, where can you carry and what are the categories where you can and can’t carry right now, at the current state. Remember, you cannot lawfully carry, even with a New Jersey carry permit, within 100 feet of a public gathering, demonstration or event requiring a Government permit. You’re still barred from zoos, parks, beaches, recreational facilities or areas owned or controlled by the state, county or local government unit designated as a gun-free zone. Publicly Page – 4 – of 10owned or leased libraries or museums. Bars or restaurants where alcohol is served and any other sites or facilities where alcohol is sold for consumption on the premises. Entertainment facilities. Casinos and related facilities. And healthcare facilities. Evan Nappen 17:41 Now you currently can lawfully carry with a New Jersey carry permit, of course, while this appeal is not resolved. These things are still blocked, though, and you’re able to carry, and this isn’t a complete list. But essentially in vehicles. As you may recall, the carjacker protection law that was built into the Carry Killer law, saying that you couldn’t have your loaded gun on your person in your vehicle. That is still blocked, and we are, we may carry in our vehicle, in that manner. Private property open to the public is no longer and still is not a sensitive place. In public film locations, we are able to carry. Additionally, the ruling is still in effect blocking the insurance requirement. As you may recall, at some point, Murphy issued an Executive Order banning the sale of so-called murder insurance, where you had gun owner protection programs, and then proceeded in the Carry Killer bill to mandate by law that you get actual murder insurance. Meaning insurance if someone commits an intentional act with a firearm, essentially murdering somebody. That’s been blocked. So, we don’t have to have insurance to have a carry license. And blocking certain permit procedures and requirements that were more administrative in nature. Evan Nappen 19:23 So, this is where we’re standing. But the good news is, with the full panel reviewing it, I’m very excited to see that outcome, and so should you. So, there is still hope. There is hope that the judiciary is going to speak for our rights, and that same full panel will be also considering New Jersey’s magazine ban and so-called assault firearm ban. So we are hopeful for some very good outcomes here, and we’ll keep you informed here on Gun Lawyer. Evan Nappen 20:07 Let me also mention our good friends at WeShoot. That’s where Teddy and I both shoot and where we get our training. And you will love WeShoot. WeShoot is a great indoor range right in Lakewood, conveniently off the Parkway. They constantly run great sales, and they have great service, a fantastic pro shop and a state of the art range, great training. I really can’t give it high enough praise. We love WeShoot, and so will you. Check out WeShoot at weshootusa.com. They have a great website with beautiful photographs. And you don’t want to miss the WeShoot girls that are there posing with some of the finest guns that you will ever see. So, make sure you go to WeShoot and take advantage of that fantastic resource for gun owners, right in New Jersey. Evan Nappen 21:11 And let me also shamelessly plug my book, which is New Jersey Gun Law, the Bible of New Jersey gun law. Make sure you get the book, folks. You need this book. It is the guidebook to keeping you safe, out of jail and not committing GOFUs in New Jersey. It’s 120 topics, all question and answer. It fills you in so you will know what the law is. It is the guidebook used by thousands and thousands of gun owners throughout New Jersey. You can get your copy today by going to EvanNappen.com. EvanNappen.com. Hey, Teddy, what do you have for us today? Page – 5 – of 10Teddy Nappen 21:56 Well, one of the things you know, it’s the holidays, Christmas, and everything’s coming along, and all the wins that have been coming through, and all the crazy insanity that you’ve described. I always think back to the show that you introduced me to, Paladin. There’s a particular episode, I think it was even the Christmas episode where Paladin is there. It’s a whole deal with the fan, like, there’s a small, I think it’s like a house living out there. And the ending line to the whole episode is, it’s Christmas. He’s saying to the guy, it’s Christmas. This is the, this is the one day of the year where we pretend there’s no evil. And that kind of sticks with me in the idea of this is supposed to be the time spent with family, and particularly, we can pretend and not think about all the anti-gun jerks and the gun rights oppressors. This is the time to enjoy Christmas movies, particular ones that involve firearms. So, as I was scanning through the internet, I saw one, I love this article, the top 10 Christmas movies with guns. (https://blog.cheaperthandirt.com/top-10-christmas-movies-with-guns/) Hey. Evan Nappen 23:17 So, that is what Christmas should be about. Guns. Teddy Nappen 23:22 Yeah, exactly. And to start things off, of course, they go with the most controversial one, which is Die Hard. Evan Nappen 23:31 Which we will agree is a Christmas movie. Teddy Nappen 23:35 Correct. I’ve heard all the debates. Evan Nappen 23:37 Ho, ho, ho. I have a machine gun. How does it get any less Christmas than that. Teddy Nappen 23:42 And quite simply, it’s not Christmas without Hans Gruber falling off the Nakatomi building. Evan Nappen 23:49 Yeah, and you know what gun he had, right? Teddy Nappen 23:55 So, well, you had Bruce Willis with his Beretta 92 with the focus. Evan Nappen 24:01 Of course. Teddy Nappen 24:02 But there’s also the MP 5. Page – 6 – of 10Evan Nappen 24:05 Yippie IA, Yippie Ki A. Teddy Nappen 24:08 And the P7 M13s. Evan Nappen 24:12 P7 that what Hans there, I believe, had. Teddy Nappen 24:17 Correct. And it was very good gun play in that part, where he’s no bullets, and it tricks him. The next one, this is actually, it’s one of those where it’s like, what the heck is this movie? I had to watch it, though. I think you were there when we watched Fat Man. Evan Nappen 24:36 Oh god, yeah. Teddy Nappen 24:37 It is probably the funniest, like, weirdest film you could watch. We have Mel Gibson and is this whole plot to murder Santa Claus. It’s him fighting, fighting Boyd Crowder from Justified. Walter Goggins. Crazy gun play between a 1911 and the fat man using a Colt Walker. Evan Nappen 25:06 Yep, definitely. It’s an entertaining film. Teddy Nappen 25:12 Yeah, it’s just one of those. I was like, okay, interesting. Now, this is technically Kiss, Kiss, Bang, Bang, which is a Christmas heist of a film. I don’t know if you ever saw it. With Robert Downey, Jr. Evan Nappen 25:26 I may have. Teddy Nappen 25:27 Kind of an action comedy. They’re carrying their Vector CP One. Evan Nappen 25:34 Oh, Vectors are in it. Huh, okay. Teddy Nappen 25:35 Yeah. And, of course, another HK P7. It’s kind of one of one of those, you kind of spot there. But I was like, I didn’t realize it involved Christmas. Page – 7 – of 10Teddy Nappen 25:44 The one I will highlight, though I always thought was funny, he put on Home Alone, one and two. Here’s the reason. Because, remember, the kid, he plays that clip, the black and white movie where he keeps. Evan Nappen 25:44 Well, you know, the P7 used to be the pistol of the New Jersey State Police, but they had over 40 accidental discharges with it, and they gave it up. And that’s because, although it was marketed as being one of the safest guns, the problem is, it’s a front squeeze that cocks the gun, when you squeeze the front. Unlike a 1911 that has a safety on the back, this squeeze cocks from the front. And the problem is, if you, if you’re not practiced and trained well enough, when you draw the gun out of a holster, you’re cocking it as you pull it out, and that creates a situation that is not exactly the safest situation to be in. There were numerous ADs with that gun. So, something to keep in mind. I think they’re cool and a very interesting design, but I remember seeing Superintendent Pagano talking about it. And he basically said, hey, look, it’s not the gun’s fault. He’s blaming his men. How nice of him. Yeah, right. So that was that episode of the gun, in theory, seeming like it may have been one of the safest guns, but in reality, it was prone to needing a lot of training to make sure that you didn’t cock it until you were ready to. So, there you go. Evan Nappen 27:36 Oh yeah. Teddy Nappen 27:36 The bad guys, oh yeah, yeah. Well, I believe you, but my tommy gun don’t. And it’s like, you’ve been smooching with everybody. Snuffy, Dale, Leo, Little Mo with the gimpy leg, Bony Bob, Cliff, and the guy thinks he’s actually like sleeping with all these individuals. Evan Nappen 27:58 Great. Teddy Nappen 27:59 Yeah. The Thompson 1921 AC sub machine gun. The actual movie is Angel With Filthy Souls. Evan Nappen 28:08 Hmm huh. Okay. Teddy Nappen 28:11 Yeah. Evan Nappen 28:11 So, that was actually a clip from an actual movie? Teddy Nappen 28:14 Yeah, that was funny. And, of course, The Christmas Story with the Red Ryder BB gun. Page – 8 – of 10Evan Nappen 28:20 Oh, the classic of all classics. And in New Jersey, that’s a firearm. It’s not a BB, you know? It’s not just a little old BB gun. There it is, bona fide, defined as a firearm. Teddy Nappen 28:32 Yeah. And they threw in some honorable mentions, like White Christmas. Where it takes, the start is at the Battle of the Bulge. So, you have the M1 Garand coming into play of that. And then. Evan Nappen 28:46 As Patton said, the greatest battle rifle ever devised. Teddy Nappen 28:51 I’d agree. And then you have Scrooged with Santa wielding the XM 556 mini gun. Evan Nappen 29:00 Okay. Teddy Nappen 29:02 And then also Bill Murray with his, remember, he had a stainless snub nose revolver because he’s freaking out that a ghost is there. Evan Nappen 29:10 Okay, yeah. Teddy Nappen 29:12 They couldn’t determine that. Evan Nappen 29:14 He didn’t do much with him and guns, but yeah. Unless it’s some gun for taking out ghosts, right? Ghost Busters. Teddy Nappen 29:22 Oh, and of course, our Majesty’s Secret Service, James Bond and Christmas, what more could you want? With his Walther PPK. Evan Nappen 29:33 Oh yeah, James Bond sometimes had some screwy gun stuff. I remember in one of them where he has an AR7, and the guy’s talking about. And it’s a 25 caliber AR. I’m like, it’s not 25. It’s 22. But hey, what do they know? Teddy Nappen 29:52 Yeah, it’s, this is just a fun list, and it’s something I just kind of like, wow, I didn’t really consider some of these as, like, Chrismas movies. But I guess so. Page – 9 – of 10Evan Nappen 30:03 Well, as long as it has guns in it, we’ll declare them to be Christmas movies. Teddy Nappen 30:08 Fair enough. If it has a gun and it’s a Christmas movie, that’s it. Evan Nappen 30:11 That’s it. That’s the standard from now on. From now on, that’s the standard. Teddy Nappen 30:16 There you go. Evan Nappen 30:17 Oh, that’s good stuff, Teddy. And soon we’ll be enjoying Christmas guns. That’s the deal. That’s the deal. Hey, it is very important that we discuss this week’s GOFU, which is the Gun Owner Fuck Up. These are mistakes that actual clients make that causes them problems, expensive problems. You get to learn for free. And this week’s GOFU is about printing. And I don’t mean printing with your computer printer. I mean about your gun showing when you’re carrying concealed. Now, in New Jersey, it’s not illegal to print. Believe it or not. A gun has to be concealed, but it doesn’t address printing while concealed. However, in New Jersey, you don’t want to print. Because not only do we need to carry concealed, but you want to keep that concealment private and secret. Evan Nappen 31:20 New Jersey is loaded with all kinds of people that are scared of guns, aren’t used to guns, and they can end up calling police because they think someone’s carrying a gun. And next thing you know, even though you’re legal to carry. You also give away tactical advantage, if people can make you as carrying. And this is an issue where individuals can make false accusations against you if they believe that you’re carrying. So, you want to make sure you don’t print when you conceal carry in Jersey. Make sure you are as discrete as possible. Also, you don’t want to inadvertently end up in a sensitive place and have a gun identified on you because you’re printing. You shouldn’t be in a sensitive place, but if you’re printing and in a sensitive place, then you’re going to have a bigger problem. So, be very conscientious when you carry, whether or not you’re printing, or whether your method of carry allows for inadvertent display of your firearm, even for a moment, because you want to stay discrete. You want your concealed carry to be concealed carry, and ultimately that gives you, if nothing else, a tactical advantage of surprise should you need your gun. Evan Nappen 32:51 This is Evan Nappen and Teddy Nappen reminding you that gun laws don’t protect honest citizens from criminals. They protect criminals from honest citizens. Speaker 2 33:01 Gun Lawyer is a CounterThink Media production. The music used in this broadcast was managed by Cosmo Music, New York, New York. Reach us by emailing Evan@gun.lawyer. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state. Page – 10 – of 10 Downloadable PDF TranscriptGun Lawyer S3 E269_Transcript About The HostEvan Nappen, Esq.Known as “America's Gun Lawyer,” Evan Nappen is above all a tireless defender of justice. Author of eight bestselling books and countless articles on firearms, knives, and weapons history and the law, a certified Firearms Instructor, and avid weapons collector and historian with a vast collection that spans almost five decades — it's no wonder he's become the trusted, go-to expert for local, industry and national media outlets. Regularly called on by radio, television and online news media for his commentary and expertise on breaking news Evan has appeared countless shows including Fox News – Judge Jeanine, CNN – Lou Dobbs, Court TV, Real Talk on WOR, It's Your Call with Lyn Doyle, Tom Gresham's Gun Talk, and Cam & Company/NRA News. As a creative arts consultant, he also lends his weapons law and historical expertise to an elite, discerning cadre of movie and television producers and directors, and novelists. He also provides expert testimony and consultations for defense attorneys across America. Email Evan Your Comments and Questions  talkback@gun.lawyer Join Evan's InnerCircleHere's your chance to join an elite group of the Savviest gun and knife owners in America.  Membership is totally FREE and Strictly CONFIDENTIAL.  Just enter your email to start receiving insider news, tips, and other valuable membership benefits.   Email (required) *First Name *Select list(s) to subscribe toInnerCircle Membership Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)Constant Contact Use. Please leave this field blank.var ajaxurl = "https://gun.lawyer/wp-admin/admin-ajax.php";

I step into the studio knowing that, for many listeners, the Donald Trump court saga feels endless. So let's get right to where things stand in the past few days.Across the country, Donald Trump is still juggling fallout from his earlier criminal and civil cases while his administration fights a new wave of lawsuits over how his Justice Department, Homeland Security, and other agencies are using federal power. Lawfare's Trump Administration Litigation Tracker describes a sprawling map of challenges, from immigration crackdowns to fights over federal workers and independent agencies, all feeding into a sense that the courtroom has become a second West Wing for this presidency.One of the biggest developments in the last few days comes from the Supreme Court and the immigration judges' free‑speech case. According to SCOTUSblog, the justices just rejected the Trump administration's request for emergency relief in a dispute over whether immigration judges can challenge speech restrictions in federal court. Commentator and law professor Stephen Vladeck called it the administration's first real loss at the Supreme Court since April, a rare sign that even this Court has limits on how far it will go on Trump's emergency asks. The order does leave the door open for the administration to come back if the trial court pushes into discovery, but for now, Trump's lawyers will have to keep fighting on the merits.At nearly the same time, another federal courtroom dealt the administration a blow on immigration detention. The ACLU of Massachusetts reports that a federal judge in Boston ruled that the Trump administration acted unlawfully when it denied bond hearings to people arrested by ICE in New England and then misclassified them to keep them in mandatory, no‑bond detention. The court granted partial summary judgment and held that, under the immigration statutes, these detainees must have access to a bond hearing. For thousands of people in New England lockups, that decision is not abstract law; it is the difference between indefinite confinement and a chance to argue for release.Overlay these fresh rulings on top of Trump's personal legal history and the picture sharpens. Outlets such as WABE have tracked how civil judgments for defamation and sexual abuse, as well as criminal convictions for falsifying business records in New York and the federal election‑interference and documents cases, have moved through appeals. A federal appeals court has already upheld one major civil jury verdict against Trump and declined to revisit it, locking in both damages and factual findings about his conduct. That appellate resistance puts real weight behind the idea that some of Trump's legal problems are no longer just allegations; they are affirmed findings of liability.And yet, while Trump personally appeals past losses, his administration simultaneously racks up wins and losses in real time. The Brennan Center and Lawfare both note that, since his return to the White House, the Supreme Court has often sided with the Trump administration on emergency applications involving immigration enforcement, federal workforce cuts, and control over independent agencies. Those shadow‑docket victories have let the administration move fast, even while lower courts probe legality. But the immigration judges' case and the Boston bond‑hearing ruling show that trial courts and, occasionally, the justices themselves are willing to draw constitutional and statutory lines.So when you hear about “Trump's trials” this week, it is not just one courtroom, one jury, or even one former president. It is Donald Trump the criminal defendant and civil litigant, and Donald Trump the sitting president whose policies are on trial in federal courts from Massachusetts to Washington.Thanks for tuning in, and come back next week for more. This has been a Quiet Please production, and for more, check out QuietPlease dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

Send us a textCannabis Legalization: Industry Updates and Future ProjectionsIn this episode of Cannabis Legalization News, the hosts discuss an array of topics impacting the cannabis industry. They highlight a significant recent executive order from Donald Trump aimed at reclassifying marijuana as a Schedule III drug. The discussion covers the potential impacts of this reclassification on the cannabis industry, including changes in regulation, the importance of API integration in point-of-sale systems, and the ongoing battle against synthetic cannabinoids sourced from China. The show features Kyle Sherman of Flowhub, who shares his journey in cannabis tech, his efforts in compliance solutions, and the industry's evolution. They also discuss the potential improvement in state regulations and examples of successful dispensary operations. The episode concludes with plans for the upcoming Pekin local dispensary and thoughts on the future of cannabis legalization in the United States.

PROGRESSIVE ELITES AND CONSTITUTIONAL SUBVERSION Colleague Victor Davis Hanson. Hansoncharacterizes progressive elites as "evolutionaries" who seek to bypass Constitutional checks like the Electoral Collegeand the Senate's structure because these systems no longer favor their political dominance. He warns that threats to "pack the Supreme Court" and the practice of ignoring treaty ratification processes are destroying the Founders' design, which was intended to slow down radical change. These efforts aim to replace the deliberative republican model with one that allows for rapid, majoritarian rule by coastal elites. NUMBER 5

SHOW 12-19-25 THE SHOW BEGINS WITH DOUBTS ABOUTGAVIN NNEWSOM  ON THE AMPAIGN TRAIL FOR 2028... LA 1900 WEST COAST WEATHER AND PORTLAND'S DECLINE Colleague Jeff Bliss, Pacific Watch. Jeff Bliss reports that Nordstrom Rack is leaving downtown Portland, citing high vacancy rates, crime, and homelessness. He also details a massive atmospheric river bringing heavy rain to the West Coast and dangerous Tule fog in California, while analyzing Gavin Newsom's presidential prospects amidst state economic struggles. NUMBER 1 CHINA'S CHIP THEFT AND AI WARFARE RISKS Colleague Brandon Weichert, The National Interest. Weichert discusses China's attempts to upgrade older ASML machines and reverse-engineer chips to bypass sanctions. They also review 2025 lessons, noting that AI in military war games tends to escalate conflicts aggressively toward nuclear options, warning that China may fuse AI with its nuclear command systems. NUMBER 2 ITALY'S ECONOMIC STABILITY AND DEMOGRAPHIC CRISIS Colleague Lorenzo Fiori, Il Giornale. Lorenzo Fiori reports that Italy's economy is stabilizing, with debt under control and bond spreads narrowing close to Germany's levels. While northern Italy remains industrialized, the south suffers from depopulation and climate change. Fiori emphasizes the urgent need for government policies to boost Italy's declining birth rate. NUMBER 3 NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION AND RUSSIAN SANCTIONS Colleague Henry Sokolski, Nonproliferation Policy Education Center. Sokolski criticizes the lifting of sanctions on Russian banks for nuclear projects and highlights the dangers at the Russian-occupied Zaporizhzhia plant. He warns against potential deals allowing Saudi Arabia and South Korea to enrich uranium, arguing this brings them dangerously close to bomb-making capabilities. NUMBER 4 LANCASTER COUNTY AND A HOLIDAY SPENDING SLUMP Colleague Jim McTague, Author and Journalist. Reporting from Lancaster County, Jim McTague observes a sluggish Christmas shopping season, with consumers buying practical items like gloves rather than expensive packages. While tourist venues like Sight & Sound Theaterremain busy, he predicts a mild recession in 2026 due to rising local taxes and utility costs. NUMBER 5 THE URGENCY OF SOCIAL SECURITY REFORM Colleague Veronique de Rugy, Mercatus Center. Veronique de Rugy argues Social Security must be reformed before trust funds run dry in the 2030s. She contends the system unfairly redistributes wealth from young workers to increasingly wealthy seniors and advocates for capping benefits or means-testing rather than raising taxes or allowing across-the-board cuts. NUMBER 6 NASA'S NEW LEADERSHIP AND PRIVATE SPACE Colleague Bob Zimmerman, BehindtheBlack.com. Bob Zimmerman discusses Jared Isaacman's confirmation as NASA administrator and an executive order prioritizing commercial space. Zimmerman predicts Isaacman might cancel the crewed Artemis II mission due to safety concerns with the Orion capsule, signaling a shift away from government-run programs like SLS toward private enterprise. NUMBER 7 SPACE BRIEFS: ROCKET LAB AND MARS RIVERS Colleague Bob Zimmerman, BehindtheBlack.com. Zimmerman highlights Rocket Lab's record launches and Max Space's new inflatable station module. He notes a European satellite report on sea levels omitted "global warming" references. Additionally, he describes Martian drainage features that resemble rivers and cites a study claiming AI algorithms are exposing children to harmful content. NUMBER 8 THE FALL OF THE REPUBLIC: SULLA TO CAESAR Colleague Professor Edward J. Watts, University of California at San Diego. Watts traces the Republic's fall, starting with the rivalry between Marius and Sulla. Sulla'sbrutal proscriptions and dictatorship traumatized a young Julius Caesar. Watts explains that Caesar eventually concluded the Republic's structures were broken, leading him to seize power to enforce rights, which his assassins misinterpreted as kingship. NUMBER 9 NERO, AGRIPPINA, AND THE MATRICIDE Colleague Professor Edward J. Watts, University of California at San Diego. Professor Watts details the pathology of the Roman emperorship, focusing on Agrippina's maneuvering to install her son Nero. Watts describes Nero's eventual assassination of his mother using a collapsible ship and his pivot to seeking popularity through rigged Olympic victories in Greece before losing control of Rome. NUMBER 10 THE YEAR OF FOUR EMPERORS AND FLAVIAN RULE Colleague Professor Edward J. Watts, University of California at San Diego. Watts analyzes the chaos following Nero's death, where Vespasian seized power after a brutal civil war that burned Capitoline Hill. The segment covers the Flavian dynasty, Titus's destruction of Jerusalem, and Domitian's vilification, concluding with Nerva's coup and the adoption of Trajan to stabilize the succession. NUMBER 11 THE BARRACKS EMPERORS AND THE ANTONINE PLAGUE Colleague Professor Edward J. Watts, University of California at San Diego. The discussion turns to the "barracks emperors," highlighting Trajan's expansion into Dacia and Hadrian's infrastructure focus. Watts describes Marcus Aurelius's Stoic governance during constant warfare and a devastating smallpox pandemic, which forced Rome to settle German immigrants to repopulate the empire. NUMBER 12 SUPREME COURT CHALLENGES TO TARIFF POWERS Colleague Professor Richard Epstein, Hoover Institution. Professor Epstein analyzes potential Supreme Court rulings on the President's use of emergency powers for broad tariffs. He predicts the Court may find the interpretation unconstitutional, creating a logistical nightmare regarding the refund of billions in collected revenues and addressing the complexity of overturning Article I court precedents. NUMBER 13 EXECUTIVE POWER AND INDEPENDENT AGENCIES Colleague Professor Richard Epstein, Hoover Institution. Epstein discusses a Supreme Court case regarding the President's power to fire members of independent boards like the FTC. He fears Chief Justice Roberts will side with executive power, a move Epstein views as an "unmitigated disaster" that undermines the necessary independence of agencies like the Federal Reserve. NUMBER 14 ECONOMIC SLOWDOWN AND CONSUMER SPENDING Colleague Gene Marks, The Guardian. Gene Marksreports on a US economic slowdown, citing contracting architectural billings and falling hotel occupancy. He notes that while the wealthy continue spending, the middle class is cutting back on dining out. Marks attributes inflation to government money circulation and discusses proposals for mandated retirement contributions. NUMBER 15 AI ADOPTION IN BUSINESS AND CONSTRUCTION Colleague Gene Marks, The Guardian. Marks argues that AI is enhancing productivity rather than replacing humans, despite accuracy issues. He highlights AI adoption in construction, including drones and augmented reality for safety. Marks notes that small businesses are eager for these technologies to improve efficiency, while displaced tech workers find roles in smaller firms. NUMBER 16

EXECUTIVE POWER AND INDEPENDENT AGENCIES Colleague Professor Richard Epstein, Hoover Institution. Epstein discusses a Supreme Court case regarding the President's power to fire members of independent boards like the FTC. He fears Chief Justice Roberts will side with executive power, a move Epstein views as an "unmitigated disaster" that undermines the necessary independence of agencies like the Federal Reserve. NUMBER 14

SUPREME COURT CHALLENGES TO TARIFF POWERS Colleague Professor Richard Epstein, Hoover Institution. Professor Epstein analyzes potential Supreme Court rulings on the President's use of emergency powers for broad tariffs. He predicts the Court may find the interpretation unconstitutional, creating a logistical nightmare regarding the refund of billions in collected revenues and addressing the complexity of overturning Article I court precedents. NUMBER 13

A surprising legal principle from conservative Supreme Court gun cases could help restore the right to vote as a first-class constitutional right. Drawing on his experience arguing his fifth case before the SCOTUS, Marc Elias shows how voting has been wrongly treated as a second-class right—subject to balancing tests and state convenience—while other rights receive strict protection, and argues that the Constitution, history, and modern technology all support stronger, uniform safeguards for free and fair elections. Watch for deep insight into the US legal system, legal principles, and how we can strengthen the democratic process. Support independent journalism: https://newsletters.democracydocket.com/member-youtube Stay informed with the latest news and political analysis: https://newsletters.democracydocket.com/youtube Follow Democracy Docket: Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/democracydocket.com Instagram⁠: https://instagram.com/democracydocket Facebook⁠: https://facebook.com/democracydocket X/Twitter⁠: https://twitter.com/DemocracyDocket TikTok⁠: https://tiktok.com/@democracydocket Threads: https://www.threads.net/@democracydocke

In this video I discuss a critical 9-0 unanimous Supreme Court decision and the responses after!

The U.S. Department of Justice has strongly urged the Supreme Court to reject Ghislaine Maxwell's petition, which seeks to overturn her 20‑year sex‑trafficking conviction by invoking the 2007 non‑prosecution agreement (NPA) Jeffrey Epstein secured with Florida federal prosecutors. Maxwell argued that a co‑conspirator clause in that agreement should shield her from prosecution in New York—but both the district court and the Second Circuit found that the NPA bound only the Southern District of Florida, and explicitly did not extend immunity to unnamed co‑conspirators in other jurisdictions.In its response, the DOJ emphasized that Maxwell's reading of the NPA is legally flawed and unsupported by the facts. Prosecutors maintained that Maxwell was not explicitly named in the agreement and that there was never any indication the Florida office intended to extend immunity to her. Moreover, the DOJ noted that only high-ranking Justice Department officials—not local prosecutors—could authorize an agreement with nationwide binding effect, which never occurred in this case. They argued Maxwell's petition does not present any new legal questions or conflicts among federal courts that would warrant Supreme Court intervention, and therefore, her conviction should stand without further review.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:DOJ urges Supreme Court to turn away Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell's appeal - ABC NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

This presentation will provide an overview of how to prepare for visits from Immigration and ICE officers, in light of increased ICE investigations, workplace raids, and community visits associated with immigration applications.Kathleen A. Spero has a long-standing interest in immigration and foreign relations. She graduated from San Diego State University magna cum laude with a dual major in Political Science and International Security and Conflict Resolution in 1999. She received her Master of Pacific and International Affairs, cum laude, from the University of California, San Diego School of Global Policy and Strategy (formerly the Graduate School of International Relations and Pacific Studies) in 2001. After earning her Master's degree, Kathleen joined the International Rescue Committee, an international refugee assistance and resettlement agency, as a Program Specialist in the company's headquarters. While at IRC, Kathleen discovered her interest in immigration law, decided to attend law school, and received her J.D. Degree, cum laude, from Thomas Jefferson School of Law in San Diego, California, in May 2008. For the Spring 2023 semester, Kathleen served as an instructor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, teaching a course on Immigration Law.Since her graduation from law school, Kathleen has dedicated her career to immigration law. She has held positions with Fragomen, Del Rey, Bernsen & Loewy; the San Diego Volunteer Lawyer Program; and Malitzlaw. In addition to her work with Jacobs & Schlesinger, Kathleen has volunteered with Casa Cornelia, the Immigration Justice Project, UURise immigration legal services, and the American Immigration Lawyers Association.Kathleen has worked for Jacobs & Schlesinger since 2016, where she focuses on providing legal assistance and counseling to families, businesses, and individuals seeking to navigate the complex immigration laws of the United States. She primarily handles employment-based cases, investor visas, family-based petitions, and naturalization cases.Kathleen is admitted to the State Bar of California and is licensed to practice law before the Supreme Court of California and the Department of Homeland Security nationwide.Stay up to date with CBP: http://update.craftbeerprofessionals.org/

We update the status of some of 2025's biggest legal stories.Check out our new True Crime Substack the True Crime Times Get Prosecutors Podcast Merch Join the Gallery on Facebook Follow us on TwitterFollow us on Instagram Check out our website for case resources: Hang out with us on TikTokSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Gov. Spencer Cox wants to expand aka pack the Supreme Court. Host Ali Vallarta, executive producer Emily Means, and City Cast Salt Lake contributor Chandler Rosenberg discuss state leaders' motives. Plus, Salt Lake's word of the year and some festive picks for your weekend. Resources and references: Salt Lake's 2025 Naughty and Nice List [City Cast Salt Lake]  A first look at Utah Republicans' plan to expand the state Supreme Court [Deseret News] Join us for "How the Grinch Stole Christmas" on Saturday, Dec. 20 at 4 p.m. at the Utah Film Center. It's totally free with activities for kids like face painting, Who hairdos, and stop-animation station. Become a member of City Cast Salt Lake today! It's the best way to support our work and help make sure we are around for years to come. Get all the details and sign up at membership.citycast.fm. Subscribe to Hey Salt Lake, our daily morning newsletter. You can also find us on Instagram @CityCastSLC.  Text or leave us a voicemail with your name and neighborhood, and you might hear it on the show: (801) 203-0137 Looking to advertise on City Cast Salt Lake? Check out our options for podcast and newsletter ads. Learn more about the sponsors of this episode:  Cyprus Credit Union ICO Salt Lake Sewciety Live Crude - Use code CITYCASTSLC to try CRUDE's Oil Cleansing Starter kit for Free

Birthright citizenship is headed to the Supreme Court — and the stakes couldn't be higher. Michael Smerconish sits down with Washington Post columnist and National Review editor Ramesh Ponnuru to unpack one of the most consequential constitutional debates of our time. As the Court prepares to hear a challenge to birthright citizenship, they explore what the Constitution actually says, how the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” should be interpreted, and whether the U.S. is truly an outlier compared to the rest of the world. From immigration enforcement and executive authority to American exceptionalism and global norms, this conversation breaks down the legal arguments, policy tradeoffs, and political realities surrounding a case that could reshape who gets to be an American. A must-listen ahead of what could be a landmark Supreme Court decision. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

On June 4, 1995, Rob Reiner joined Meet the Press to defend Hollywood from charges that it had been “consumed by mindless violence and loveless sex.” Reiner returned on March 31, 2013, as the Supreme Court considered the constitutionality of same-sex marriage. The full episode on video is available on MeetThePress.com. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Are President Trump's tariffs illegal? Will the independence of federal agencies be a thing of the past? Is birthright citizenship about to be taken away? These are just a few of the consequential questions before a Supreme Court that's hell-bent on destroying obstacles to President Trump's executive power. Alex talks to two plaintiffs at the center of of these cases, Toymaker Rick Woldenberg and former FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter. Then, she sits down with NYU Professor and Strict Scrutiny host Melissa Murray to put it all into context and talk about what the long term impacts will be of a Supreme Court where corruption and partisanship are now out in the open.  Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The New Yorker staff writer Isaac Chotiner joins Tyler Foggatt to reflect on several of the most notable interviews he conducted in 2025. They discuss competing theories about the origins of political violence over the past year, how to understand President Trump's approach to power in his second term, and the challenges of covering an Administration that rarely appears to be driven by a coherent ideological framework. They also revisit two high-profile interviews: one with the former White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, about her decision to leave the Democratic Party, and another with the legal scholar Cass Sunstein, on the limits of “big tent” politics and his curious friendship with Henry Kissinger. This week's reading: “In the Wake of Australia's Hanukkah Beach Massacre,” by Isaac Chotiner “The Federal Judge at the Trump Rally,” by Ruth Marcus “The Year in Trump Cashing In,” by John Cassidy “The Party Politics of Sovereign House,” by Emma Green “Want to Talk to Zohran Mamdani? Get in Line,” by Eric Lach The Political Scene draws on the reporting and analysis found in The New Yorker for lively conversations about the big questions in American politics. Join the magazine's writers and editors as they put into context the latest news—about elections, the economy, the White House, the Supreme Court, and much more. New episodes are available three times a week. Tune in to The Political Scene wherever you get your podcasts.  Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

December 18, 1944. In a controversial judgment, the U.S. Supreme Court upholds the racist treatment of Japanese Americans during World War Two. Support the show! Join Into History for ad-free listening and more. History Daily is a co-production of Airship and Noiser. Go to HistoryDaily.com for more history, daily.

SUBSCRIBE TO JORDAN'S FREE NEWSLETTER. Get the facts, without the spin. UNBIASED offers a clear, impartial recap of US news, including politics, elections, legal news, and more. Hosted by lawyer Jordan Berman, each episode provides a recap of current political events plus breakdowns of complex concepts—like constitutional rights, recent Supreme Court rulings, and new legislation—in an easy-to-understand way. No personal opinions, just the facts you need to stay informed on the daily news that matters. If you miss how journalism used to be, you're in the right place. In today's episode: Trump Signs AI Regulation Executive Order; Here's What It Means and Doesn't Mean (0:18) Trump Designates Fentanyl a "Weapon of Mass Destruction." Here's What That Means and What'll Change (4:58) Congress Sends Defense Authorization Bill to President's Desk; Here's What's In It (9:14) Fact-Checking President Trump's End-of-the-Year Address (~17:53) Quick Hitters: Bongino Steps Down, Hegseth on Strike Video, Government Admits Fault in Mid-Air American Airlines Crash, CDC Adopts New Hep B Vaccine Recommendation, Judge Allows White House Ballroom Construction to Proceed, Inflation Cools, HHS Proposes Revoking Funding for Providing Transition Treatment for Minors, Trump Signs Executive Order Fast-Tracking Marijuana Re-Classification (~35:09) GOOD NEWS to Close Out the Year (~44:08) SUBSCRIBE TO JORDAN'S FREE NEWSLETTER. Watch this episode on YouTube. Follow Jordan on Instagram and TikTok. All sources for this episode can be found here.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Aaron Siri is the Managing Partner of Siri & Glimstad LLP and has extensive experience in a wide range of complex civil litigation matters and class actions. Siri & Glimstad LLP's team is made up of more than 100 professionals and the firm has robust practices in the areas of civil rights, class actions, employment litigation, immigration, medical malpractice, and vaccine injury and exemptions. Mr. Siri has extensive experience and has handled numerous high-profile cases related to mandated medicine, vaccine injury, and policy. This experience includes challenges to federal and state mandates; the restoration of exemptions, including for U.S. military members; extensive litigation against federal agencies for transparency; and deposing immunologists, infectious disease doctors, pediatricians, and vaccinologists, including the world's leading vaccinologist. Mr. Siri has successfully prosecuted numerous class actions against large corporations resulting in payments to hundreds of thousands of Americans. Mr. Siri has acted as counsel to clients in multiple commercial disputes exceeding one billion dollars, including Oracle Team's challenge for the America's Cup and matters concerning the collapse of the World Trade Center. Prior to Siri & Glimstad, Mr. Siri was a litigation attorney at Latham & Watkins and, prior to that, clerked for the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Israel where he advised the Chief Justice of relevant American, English (Commonwealth), and International Law precedent for cases of first impression, including removal of Israel's citizens from the Gaza Strip. Mr. Siri earned his law degree at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law with four Prosser Prizes and ten High Honors and was the Editor-in-Chief of the Berkeley Business Law Journal. Prior to law school, Mr. Siri was an auditor at Arthur Andersen LLP, where he examined internal controls and audited micro-cap technology companies. Mr. Siri is admitted to practice law in federal and state courts across the country and is regularly interviewed on national television as an expert on various legal issues related to civil rights. Mr. Siri has also been published in numerous national print media outlets. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.