#Business disputes attorneys hollywood

[businessdisputelawfirmhollywood]

How Business Dispute Lawyers Facilitate Effective Mediation

In the dynamic world of business, disputes are unavoidable. They arise from differences in opinions, contractual disagreements, or simply from the competitive pressures of the market. However, not all conflicts need to end up in lengthy and costly court battles. Enter mediation—a powerful tool that allows for the resolution of disputes efficiently and peacefully. At the center of this process are business dispute lawyers who play an essential role in guiding the mediation to a successful conclusion. We will explore how these legal professionals facilitate effective mediation.

Understanding Mediation

Mediation is a voluntary process where parties in a dispute come together to negotiate a resolution with the help of a neutral third party—the mediator. Unlike litigation, which can be adversarial and combative, mediation is collaborative and aims at finding a mutually beneficial solution.

The Role of Business Dispute Lawyers in Mediation

1. Preparation and Planning

Preparation is key to effective mediation. Business dispute lawyers begin by thoroughly understanding the details of the conflict. They gather all relevant documents, evidence, and witness statements. By having a clear picture of the dispute, they can anticipate potential areas of agreement and disagreement.

2. Choosing the Right Mediator

Selecting an appropriate mediator is vital. Business dispute lawyers use their networks and expertise to recommend mediators who have specific experience and success in dealing with similar disputes. A well-chosen mediator can significantly influence the tone and outcome of the mediation process.

3. Guiding Clients Through the Process

For many businesses, mediation might be an unfamiliar territory. Business dispute lawyers simplify the process for their clients, explaining each step and what to expect. They guide how to present their case effectively and how to communicate constructively with the opposing party.

4. Crafting Strategic Approaches

Mediation requires a different strategic approach compared to litigation. Business disputes attorneys hollywood help their clients think creatively about possible solutions. They encourage a mindset shift from winning the argument to finding a resolution that works for both parties. This involves identifying common interests and proposing compromises.

5. Facilitating Communication

Effective communication is the backbone of successful mediation. Business dispute lawyers ensure that the dialogue remains respectful and productive. They intervene when discussions become heated, helping to refocus the conversation on finding common ground. Their legal expertise allows them to clarify legal points and debunk misconceptions that may arise.

6. Negotiating Settlements

One of the primary roles of business dispute lawyers during mediation is to negotiate settlements. They leverage their negotiation skills to advocate for their client’s interests while remaining open to compromise. This delicate balance is essential to reaching a resolution that both parties can accept.

7. Drafting Settlement Agreements

Once an agreement is reached, it needs to be documented accurately and comprehensively. Business dispute lawyers hollywood draft the settlement agreement, ensuring that it includes all necessary legal provisions and protections. This document serves as a binding contract that can be enforced if either party fails to uphold their end of the agreement.

Benefits of Mediation in Business Disputes

Cost-Effective

Going to court usually costs more money than mediation. The quicker resolution translates to lower legal fees and less disruption to business operations.

Confidential

Unlike public court cases, mediation is a private process. This confidentiality can be particularly important for businesses that want to protect their reputation and sensitive information.

Control and Flexibility

The parties still have power over the resolution during mediation. Judgment and verdicts from juries do not bind them. This flexibility allows for creative solutions that might not be possible in a courtroom setting.

Preserving Relationships

Mediation creates a collaborative environment, which can help preserve business relationships. This is especially valuable in industries where companies may need to continue working together despite their disputes.

If your business is facing a dispute, consider mediation as a first step. Reach out to a skilled business dispute lawyer who can guide you through the process and help you achieve a resolution that benefits all parties involved.

[edwardsmediationacademy]

Artificial Intelligence in Mediation: What the Future Holds for Mediators

Artificial intelligence (AI) for helping mediate disputes has begun to gain traction. Although it might not yet be commonplace, it is on its way to playing a pivotal role in conflict resolution, providing mediators with tools and functionalities that streamline the mediation process, offer data-driven insights, and help manage communications and negotiations. The use of AI in mediation looks both promising and transformative and presents opportunities and challenges for mediators.

The Transformative Impact of Artificial Intelligence on the Mediation Process One can’t help but think of artificial intelligence (AI) without conjuring up Hollywood-inspired images of computers exhibiting human-like qualities in their quest for control. While these images remain mostly the stuff of imagination, the exponential growth of machine learning, predictive algorithms and their implications for the practice of law and mediation are too real to ignore. Clearly, the “AI revolution” has arrived and its transformative impact is here to stay.

Yet, most mediators still question whether its arrival portends the replacement of the genuinely human skills that mediators bring to the table. Creativity, empathy, and emotional intelligence are a few of the so-called “soft skills” that remain the exclusive province of human intervention. That said, I recently attended several international mediation conferences where the subject of artificial intelligence dominated agendas, and panel discussions moved beyond a dystopian future vision and focused instead on the practical benefits of having this fourth party in the mediation room.

What will be the practical impact of technological advancements like artificial intelligence in preparation for and during the mediation process? What guardrails exist to ensure the ethical and unbiased application of machine learning in a mediation environment? These are but a few of the questions that we, as mediators, must ask ourselves to keep pace with the changing world and its new methods for resolving disputes.

Client Expectations As attorneys and clients come to mediation from a world increasingly accustomed to using artificial intelligence, one can assume that they will expect no less from their chosen mediator. Online dispute resolution, while technologically advanced, may not fully replace the human touch in mediation. What might this brave new world of artificial intelligence in mediation look like, and what should the mediators of tomorrow be thinking about today?

Using Artificial Intelligence as “Augmented Intelligence” Artificial intelligence augments and enhances mediators’ capabilities through advanced data processing, predictive analytics, natural language processing, and various support tools. This augmentation allows mediators to make more informed decisions, manage cases more efficiently, and ultimately improve the mediation process. Some of the ways are discussed below.

Preparation AI can assist as a thought planner during the convening phase of mediation. The mediator can use AI tools to identify objectives and priorities, preview potential obstacles, and even attempt to gauge what might be a “fair resolution.” Questions can be scripted in advance based on the specific dispute, such as “Give me five examples of interests that might be important to the parties” or “Provide examples of how the competing interests of the parties might be reconciled.”

For mediators who routinely receive large volumes of expert reports, business records, or other documents, AI-based software can transform the exercise from one of locating and synthesizing information to an evaluation and verification process.

Mediation Brief Analysis Artificial intelligence can help summarize briefs, analyze and evaluate the strength of legal positions, and even offer predictions about an attorney’s advocacy skills and mediation competency based solely on the composition of the mediation brief. At Signature Resolution, we are actively experimenting with integrating AI to enhance our case data through AI-generated summaries and advanced search capabilities.

Communication For those interested in a deeper level of mediation preparation, AI-based tools can assist mediators in facilitating communication and developing different types of questions, such as “What do you hope to achieve through mediation today?” Biometric AI technology currently exists to assist mediators in understanding and interpreting human emotions to identify underlying emotions.

Negotiation Perhaps the most significant application of AI includes the predictive ability based on data collected and what it portends for attorneys using AI to support their negotiation positions. AI-based negotiation tools currently exist to assist the parties, and potentially the mediator, in pursuing favorable negotiated outcomes. Negotiation strategies can be implemented using strategic tools that surpass traditional distributive bargaining exercises, allowing mediators to craft creative solutions to disputes.

Drafting Settlement Agreements AI can assist in the real-time preparation of settlement agreements and other closing documents, thereby reducing the opportunity for confusion or scrivener errors in a post-mediation drafting exercise.

Mediator Feedback Perhaps most intriguing is the possibility that someday AI can be used by the mediator to provide critical analysis and feedback, either in real-time or post-mediation. By asking AI reflective questions such as “How did my efforts in today’s mediation compare to other recent mediations?” or “What questions did I pose that elicited the most useful information or informative response during private caucus?” the mediator can improve her skill development.

Ongoing Concerns About the Ethical Considerations of AI in Mediation As with any new and fast-developing technology, some legitimate questions remain regarding the use and application of AI for mediation. Properly managing this so-called “4th party” in the room will require consideration and potential erection of guardrails to prevent various misguided outcomes. What are a few of the most concerning considerations?

Bias Perhaps the most troubling of all concerns is that to the extent AI relies on algorithms based on collected data, the predictive outcomes will reflect the potential bias of that underlying data. When the data used to train an AI system reflects past prejudices and inequalities or is not representative of the broader population, an AI’s decisions can be skewed, and the biases may replicated or even amplified, leading to unfair or discriminatory outcomes.

One example of bias offered by a recent conference attendee was that when she (using her female voice) instructed Siri to perform a task, her instructions were ignored. When her husband, using a decidedly deeper, more masculine voice, gave Siri the same instruction, the task was immediately carried out. This is but one small example of potential implicit bias in the manifestation of AI that reflects the larger world bias built into the underlying data.

AI’s machine learning algorithms can also be biased based on their design or the assumptions built into them. This is particularly problematic in mediation, where fairness and impartiality are crucial. AI’s lack of creative and expansive thinking can prevent it from identifying and correcting these biases.

Additionally, AI’s inability to fully understand the complex context of disputes, including cultural, social, and personal factors, can also lead to biased outcomes.

And because AI systems follow predefined rules and patterns, they are less flexible in handling unique or nuanced situations. This rigidity can result in biased outcomes when the AI cannot adapt to the specific needs or circumstances of the parties involved, unlike a human mediator who can think outside the box.

To mitigate these issues, it is essential to ensure close monitoring and updating of AI systems to identify and correct biases and to use diverse and representative datasets for training AI. The judgment of experienced mediators will be needed to complement the use of AI tools to ensure a balanced and fair dispute resolution process.

Ethics AI can help identify ethical moments in mediation, which offers significant assistance to those not otherwise sensitized to a potential ethical issue. That said, this assistance will need to be premised on standardized ethical rules and ethical considerations. Whose rules will become the standard, and what cultural, political, or legal issues this will surface still need to be addressed. Finally, while many can agree on generalized standards, the nuanced application of those standards may still be beyond AI’s current ability to apply.

Liability Who is responsible when AI gets it wrong? Many are familiar with the recent example of the New York attorney submitting a legal brief replete with AI-generated misapplied cases. Similarly, a colleague recently used AI to research legal authority to guide his role as Special Master. When he began reading the cases cited to support his intended action, he quickly learned the cases neither supported the proposition asserted or were made up entirely.  Commonly referred to as hallucination, AI often seeks to fill in gaps reflecting unavailable knowledge. When confronted, the AI source apologized for getting it wrong.

Legal professionals need to be informed about ethical considerations and apply independent professional acumen to ensure the intelligence part of AI is accurate. The problem of AI occasionally hallucinating responses in lieu of substantively correct answers may be emblematic of early generative AI. Nonetheless, anyone using AI, including mediators, must apply independent professional acumen to ensure the intelligence part of AI is accurate.

Confidentiality As we collect, store, and access increasingly large amounts of data, how do we ensure the privacy and confidentiality of this data? If not properly protected, the already skeptical, privacy-oriented public will be even less inclined to allow the appropriate collection of data upon which AI depends.

Machines vs. Human Mediators One cannot engage in a meaningful discussion of AI without considering the ultimate, if not seemingly inevitable, trajectory of AI use in mediation. Many will argue that the choice between AI as “worthless” and AI as “replacing trained mediators altogether” is no longer binary. However, the impact on the human “soft skills” that mediators bring into the room looms large in any debate.

While AI technology can enhance efficiency, provide valuable insights, and increase accessibility, the core human elements that separate mankind from machines – empathy, creativity, kindness, and trust-building, emotional intelligence, and ethical judgment – remain irreplaceable. AI will not replace the ability of an experienced mediator to navigate complex social dynamics, handle the emotional and ethical complexities of mediation, or make nuanced moment-to-moment decisions that clients expect from us.

AI Does Not Replace Formal Mediation Training for Human Mediators While generative AI tools like ChatGPT can provide mediators with feedback, simulations, and other resources for developing their mediation skills, they cannot replace comprehensive, formal mediation training. (Just ask ChatGPT yourself!) Formal mediation training offers in-depth and thought-provoking lessons from experienced professionals and a structured learning environment that is effective for developing effective mediation skills. AI tools must be viewed as complementary to a trained mediator’s critical thinking skills, not a replacement for those skills.

Moving Forward As with all change, there will be those who are slow to adapt. Like everything new in mediation, innovation requires a change of mindset. After all, it wasn’t too many years ago that many of us could not envision a role for virtual mediation, and now it has become the default setting for many.

The future will likely see a hybrid approach where AI and human mediators work together, leveraging the strengths of both to improve the mediation process and deliver better outcomes for all parties involved. Mediators who adopt AI as a complementary tool and continue to develop their human-centric skills will be well-positioned to thrive in this evolving landscape.

Hopefully, the days of avatars replacing human mediators aren’t on the horizon; those mediators who embrace the new technology in the room will be one step closer to advancing the superpower of mediation. Those who fail to heed the game-changing potential of artificial intelligence in mediation are in danger of being left behind. Human mediators, with their ability to think strategically and craft creative solutions, will remain essential in addressing the complex, subjective, and emotional aspects of disputes.

[tabloidtoc]

National Enquirer, December 28

You can buy a copy of this issue for your very own at my eBay store: https://www.ebay.com/str/bradentonbooks

Cover: Ghislaine Maxwell scandal explodes 

Page 2: George Clooney was rushed to the hospital after rapidly dropping 28 pounds to play an ailing astronomer in his latest movie The Midnight Sky and the harrowing incident has infuriated worried wife Amal Clooney -- George’s scare came when he was diagnosed with life-threatening pancreatitis days before he was scheduled to start filming on a glacier in Finland -- Amal was unhappy and angry that he put his health on the line for the role and she was also furious because this wasn’t the first time the father of her twins has been in harm’s way and she’s demanding he take better care of himself so he’ll be around to care for his kids 

Page 3: Lori Loughlin’s deluded daughter Olivia Jade Giannulli is clueless over the college admissions scandal that landed her parents in jail and believes her own hype according to a body language expert -- in an interview on Jada Pinkett Smith’s Red Table Talk Olivia claimed she had no idea posing for pictures on a rowing machine to finagle a crew scholarship to the University of Southern California despite never having practiced the sport was deceitful but body language expert Susan Constantine said Olivia doesn’t appear to have any understanding of the consequences of her actions or those of mom Lori and dad Mossimo Giannulli -- after observing Olivia’s confession Constantine said she didn’t notice any deceptive indicators such as pauses in her speech or shrugging of her shoulders however she labeled Olivia completely unequivocally oblivious which she said made it challenging to judge Olivia’s truthfulness 

Page 4: Lonely Diane Keaton is longing for love and she’s turned to former flame Jack Nicholson for help in landing a new guy -- Diane is truly desperate to find a man and she knows if there’s one person who can help her navigate the dating scene after all this time it’s Jack -- the Oscar-winning actress shocked the world when she recently admitted she hasn’t been on a date in 35 years and she made a joke of it but the pandemic has made her realize how lonely she really is -- Diane would never date Jack again but knows he has a lot of eligible friends who would fit her dating profile 

* Dying Olivia Newton-John worries endlessly about her daughter Chloe and made a touching final request of close pal John Travolta: Please take care of Chloe after I’m gone -- Olivia’s concerns for Chloe spiked after she blasted the COVID-19 vaccine on social media writing that natural medicine is the party she belongs to -- Olivia has been battling stage 4 breast cancer while John lost his wife Kelly Preston to the same disease and John loves and admires Olivia for the way she’s battled this disease and she’s given him the hope and encouragement he needs -- now Chloe’s ongoing issues have pushed Olivia to beg John to pledge he’ll be there for her daughter because Chloe has spent over $450,000 on multiple plastic surgeries including breast enhancements and a nose job and lip enhancements and Botox and she’s also battled anorexia and depression which led to bouts with cocaine and alcohol addiction -- Olivia has always been deeply concerned about who would look out for Chloe if she wasn’t around and now that she can see the end is near she asked John to be that person; he never blinked an eye and said of course 

Page 5: Ozzy Osbourne’s frail and feeble appearance has friends fearing for the rocker but he has no plans to abandon a 2022 comeback even if it kills him -- the 72-year-old singer has battled Parkinson’s disease and crippling nerve damage but has vowed he will die onstage -- nobody disputes he has the heart of a lion and it’s great to see him out and about again recording music and talking the good talk but ultimately Ozzy is a very sickly guy who needs to protect himself and not charge around trying to delude himself by living life at a pace that doesn’t make sense anymore 

Page 6: Rattled reality star Kylie Jenner is living in fear after being terrorized by two crazed fans and is now spending $350,000 a month on a 25-person security detail -- Kylie filed court documents seeking a restraining order against Justin Bergquist who allegedly broke into her $36.5 million California home last month 

Page 7: Lonely Ryan Seacrest may have nearly half a billion bucks in the bank but he’d trade in his riches for another shot at love -- he was so devastated by his breakup with on-again off-again galpal Shayna Taylor last summer he fears he may never find a woman to spend the rest of his life with and he now realizes her put his career before his personal life one too many times and may suffer for it forever -- Ryan’s recent health woes have been a wake-up call and forced him to understand the price he’s paying for taking his partners for granted for so long -- Ryan now realizes life is too short to go it alone and it’s finally dawned on him he’s not invincible and not so self-sufficient after all 

* Miley Cyrus’ admission that she’s had a lot of FaceTime sex has left friends and advisers fearing she may be setting herself up for some unwanted exposure -- though Miley explained she’s turned to virtual hookups to avoid physical contact during the pandemic but she’s putting herself at an entirely different kind of risk and she’s setting herself up as a potential victim of revenge porn 

Page 10: Hot Shots -- Brooke Burke showed off her toned figure in Malibu, Andrew Garfield looked bored on the NYC set of Tick Tick...Boom!, Busy Philipps cleaning, Audrina Patridge and her daughter Kirra on a Beverly Hills playdate 

Page 11: Guy Fieri is eating up heaps of praise for handing out $500 grants to more than 43,000 restaurant workers across the nation -- he scrambled to raise over $21.5 million in seven weeks to help legions of unemployed restaurant laborers who have suffered financially due to the COVID-19 health and economic crisis -- through his new Restaurant Employee Relief Fund Guy personally buttonholed fat cats at cash-rich corporations such as PepsiCo and Uber Eats and Moet Hennessy USA to make donations -- he shows how he did it and shines a light on the industry’s continuing challenges in Restaurant Hustle 2020 a documentary he produced for the Food Network 

* Garth Brooks and Trisha Yearwood are spreading yuletide cheer with their TV holiday special but they’re more interested in ringing cash registers than Christmas bells -- Garth and Trisha rake in $60 million a year from concert ticket sales and CD purchases and merchandising but the couple saw their cash flow slow during the pandemic -- they lost a bunch of money but they had the unique opportunity to do TV specials and grab a big chunk of it back -- while the $10 million they are pocketing for their TV specials won’t make up for what they would have netted on tour it was a sweet stocking stuffer and they both want to get back on the road and really rake it in but TV has made the wait a lot easier 

Page 12: Straight Shuter -- With Beyonce and Taylor Swift facing off for Song of the Year at the upcoming Grammy Awards producers are scrambling to prevent another Kanye West explosion like what happened in 2009

* Killing off The Talk may be the only hope of saving Drew Barrymore’s tanking talk show

* The Real Housewives of New York are treating the first Black cast member Eboni K. Williams with kid gloves because no one wants to come across as racist 

* Niecy Nash and Jessica Betts (picture) 

Page 13: January Jones’ desperate bid for online attention has pals concerned she may be cracking up -- her red-hot career appears to have cooled since Mad Men ended in 2015 and January is dying to land another plum part like Betty Draper but she’s going about it the wrong way -- she’s been posting sexy bikini pictures and leggy dance numbers on Instagram but that’s not the way to catch the eye of casting directors especially with so few shows in production during the COVID-19 lockdown 

* Caitlyn Jenner has reached out to trans actor Elliot Page offering to be his big sister in an opportunistic PR ploy -- while Caitlyn was one of many trans celebs including Jazz Jennings and Geena Rocero to offer Elliot congratulations and support, Caitlyn viewed the announcement as a new opportunity to leap back into the limelight and she believes that by aligning herself with Elliot she can regain her status as an activist and the symbol of transgender rights in Hollywood -- Elliot is happy to listen to Caitlyn’s advice but he’s been navigating his gender issues for years and doesn’t need guidance and he’s not going to be rude but he doesn’t need the help 

Page 14: Crime 

Page 15: A never-before-heard audio recording is of iconic soul singer James Brown’s wish to leave his $100 million fortune to educate poor children -- in the garbled 1999 recording the singer who died suddenly in 2006 called the creation of his I Feel Good foundation his lasting legacy but his precious foundation has not seen a dime because his fortune has remained tied up in court since his death which is the subject of an investigation by the Fulton County, Georgia District Attorney’s office after allegations surfaced that Brown might have been poisoned by someone after his money 

Page 16: American Life 

Page 17: What Shocked and Rocked in 2020 -- the best scoops and stories of the year 

Page 25: Fired Hillsong Church pastor Carl Lentz was so starstruck by his celebrity parishioners he believed he was a star himself and his ego fueled his shocking fall from grace and now he’s getting mental health treatment after being accused of cheating on his wife and getting sacked for moral failures -- Carl tended the trendy megachurch’s New York City flock and regularly rubbed shoulders with celebs including NBA star Kevin Durant and singer Selena Gomez and even once invited Justin Bieber to live with him before being booted by bigwigs but now he’s said to be getting help at an outpatient facility specializing in depression and pastoral burnout but cunning Carl may have made the move simply to revamp his wrecked reputation 

Page 26: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are heading to couples therapy in a desperate bid to stay together because their marriage is hanging by a thread -- the pair are at each other’s throats as they struggle to adjust to their new life in America -- Harry’s gone from being excited about the move to feeling tortured and it’s like he swapped his royal prison in Britain for a new hell in a $14 million California mansion and he fears he’s made a terrible mistake but Meghan’s ordering him to man up and grab this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to make millions away from the monarchy’s suffocating shadow -- the fighting came to a head before the holidays when Harry was feeling especially homesick and guilty about abandoning his family especially his brother Prince William and his grandmother Queen Elizabeth -- adding to their troubles Meghan seems hellbent on staying in the public eye during the pandemic and she masterminded their personal video calls to charities in London and the U.S. and the secret deliveries of meals to the needy but then she made them public and the truth is it’s The Meghan Show now and Harry’s just the side act 

Page 27: A charming Chinese spy bedded two Midwestern mayors and courted other clueless politicians to weasel her way into U.S. government circles -- Chinese national Christina Fang also known as Fang Fang, reportedly entered the U.S. as a college student in 2011 

Page 31: Candice Bergen moaned that at the age of 74 she’s a wreck and that she has a wattle -- Candice admitted to having her eyes done while filming the Murphy Brown reboot because they were very hooded and as for today she knows she should have injections because she has deep lines along her lip but she can’t take the pain 

* Rachael Ray lost her New York home to a blazing inferno but her holidays were salvaged by the warmth of community spirit -- following the devastating fire she and her husband moved into the property’s guesthouse and in a clip on The Rachael Ray Show the emotional host showed off her festively decorated digs and gushed she didn’t know where she’d be without friends and a community and people so dear to her that helped her bring Christmas to life even when you’re not at home 

Page 32: Health Watch -- blood test predicts Alzheimer’s 

Page 34: Longtime lovebirds Goldie Hawn and Kurt Russell are hoping to make a movie with their whole family -- the star-studded cast would include Goldie’s kids Kate Hudson and Oliver Hudson and the couple’s son Wyatt Russell -- as for filming with the entire gang Goldie gushed that they have thought about it and she’d love to do something with her kids and the grandchildren too 

* Hollywood Hookups -- Kristin Cavallari and Jeff Dye heating up, Malik Beasley and Larsa Pippen dating but Malik’s wife Montana Yao filed for divorce, Chrishell Stause and Keo Motsepe dating 

Page 36: Infamous Hollywood hotel Chateau Marmont has a storied history of sex, drugs and rock ‘n’ roll ever since it opened its doors in 1929 and nearly a century later it hasn’t been tamed -- even during the pandemic the majestic hotel is wild with drunks, overdoses and luckily averted suicide attempts and according to 911 records the debauched celebrity haunt is filled with people having breakdowns -- the Chateau’s crazy days and nights are legendary: it’s where John Belushi died in one of the bungalows in 1982 from a deadly cocaine-heroin concoction 

Page 38: One of the most iconic images from the James Bond films which is a handgun used by Sean Connery in Dr. No has sold for $256,000 at auction in Beverly Hills -- the gun is a deactivated semi-automatic Walther PP pistol -- the winning bidder who asked to remain anonymous is an American who’s seen every James Bond film with his children -- a helmet created for Tom Cruise in Top Gun also sold at the auction for $108,000 while a sword used by Bruce Willis in Pulp Fiction sold for $35,200 

* Dolly Parton has one major thing left on her bucket list which is she wants to see Beyonce sing Jolene one of the country star’s signature songs -- Jolene has been recorded more than any other song Dolly has ever written but that isn’t enough for her because she also wants to see it updated by one of the top female stars of a new generation -- it has been recorded worldwide over 400 times in lots of different languages but nobody’s ever had a really big hit record on it and Dolly always hoped somebody might do it someday by someone like Beyonce 

* Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson has wrestled his way into the alcohol market with his own tequila brand and lifted it into first place as the most successful spirit launch in history and he’s even on track to double George Clooney’s first-year launch -- Dwayne is expected to move more than 300,000 cases of small-batch Teremana Tequila in its first year of trading 

Page 40: Smitten singer Rihanna has fallen hard for A$AP Rocky but friends fear the playboy rapper will leave her broken-hearted -- Rocky is a charming guy but he also has a love ‘em and leave ‘em reputation and everyone’s concerned she’s more into him than he is into her -- Rihanna’s desperate to meet a man she can see herself with for the rest of her life and she believes Rocky might be the one but everybody thinks she’s rushing into things with Rocky -- Rocky is not interested in a long-term romance and Rihanna shouldn’t be thinking of this as more than a port in the storm 

* Lizzo is livin’ large and she’s showing every inch of her jiggles and folds on TikTok -- the body-positivity enthusiast wore a white bikini for an all-angles video in which she amply demonstrated the tricks models and celebs use to look slimmer -- she bared her belly and back and legs and sometimes jiggled her thighs or grabbed a hunk of herself to prove there’s more to luscious ladies than meets the eye and wrote, “Wild to see the body positive movement come so far. Proud of the big girls who gave it wings.” 

Page 42: Red Carpet -- The Crown stars -- Claire Foy, Emma Corrin, Gillian Anderson, Vanessa Kirby, Erin Doherty 

Page 47: Odd List -- baseball fan Darren Johnson hatched an unusual idea for his new chicken coop making it a model of Houston’s former Eighth Wonder of the World The Astrodome

[theletterunread]

May Day, May Day, May Day

Last May, the world continued to fall apart, as it's been doing for many years – though at a noticeably accelerated pace. The coronavirus dictated everyone's life and kept me mostly in my apartment in Franklin Village, living a life that was just like my normal life, only moreso. I played video games (but for more hours at a time), watched movies (but more than usual), and read books (but longer books, like Ulysses and the last Karl Ove Knausgaard novel, that were too heavy to have carried around and read while commuting). I did a lot of new writing and got a few rejections for some old writing. Just as I had seven years earlier, I began to wish I had a piano – as my apartment’s previous tenant, singer-songwriter Rebecca Black, did – so I could pass my downtime creating something nice.

The May before that, my writing partner and I submitted writing samples through the WGA Staffing System in the hopes of being hired to write for a sitcom. This job board had been set up by the Writer’s Guild to help writers find work without the assistance of their agents, whom the WGA had instructed its members to fire following a dispute with the Association of Talent Agents. My writing partner and I were skeptical that anybody (least of all us) would be hired through this system – we figured staffing decisions would still be determined by Hollywood’s impenetrable cliquishness – but we knew there was nothing to be lost by giving it a try.

On a Thursday, we submitted applications to three shows. Two of them were cancelled by Saturday – almost as if our applications reminded the producers that they still had dead shows to clear out – and we never heard back from the third.

The May before that, a paralegal left the law firm I work at in Downtown LA because he’d found a job closer to his home in Long Beach. My boss took him out to lunch, after which he returned to the office to say his goodbyes. He thanked me for teaching him some filing skills, but I had trouble accepting the gratitude. Even after six years, I still felt like a pretender in the legal world, skeptical that I knew anything teachable.

Later that afternoon, my boss informed the rest of us that, at lunch, the paralegal had asked him, “Do you wanna smoke some weed?” My boss had declined, noting that it was noon on a Wednesday. Our receptionist said that he had recently made the same offer to her. But an associate attorney and I had never been offered the same opportunity even once in the six months we worked with him.

The May before that, my pianist friend passed through LA and we met for lunch in Westwood. He was the first peer whose hair I noticed was going grey. Mine had been turning for a few years already. Good for both of us.

When I returned home, I played The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, an acclaimed game which shares a lot of its DNA with one predecessor in particular: The Wind Waker. I was happy to see that game’s achievements respected by this new installment in the series because I still felt the exact same protectiveness of and identification with The Wind Waker that I had 14 years earlier, no matter that I was getting old and grey.

The May before that, I received a rejection letter from a literary magazine for a short story that I had submitted for publication 14 months earlier. I also received a rejection from a literary agent for a novel I’d written. Neither one upset me too much: the short story because I’d completely forgotten it was out in the world; the novel because the agent sent me back thoughtful notes, and I was touched that anyone would even take the time to read 75,000 words I’d written. Plus, it was easy to brush off literary set-backs. I had just had made my first business trip to Hollywood, and I was confident I’d soon be working as a sitcom writer.

The May before that, I got a sharp pain in my back anytime I breathed in deeply. The internet said it was probably a strain in one of my intercostal muscles, but couldn’t rule out pneumonia or something scarier. Not wanting a repeat of seven years earlier, when I’d ignored ankle pain and wound up in surgery, I visited a doctor. She diagnosed it as a strained intercostal muscle and wrote me a prescription for anti-inflammatories, which I never picked up.

Three days later, my friends and I were sharing interesting quotations over email (Tuesdays we shared poetry, Wednesdays paintings, and Thursdays quotations). The last contribution was from H.P. Lovecraft: “The oldest and strongest emotion of mankind is fear, and the oldest and strongest kind of fear is fear of the unknown.”

The May before that, my roommates and I threw a party in our apartment. We invited 47 people and just about 47 people showed up. We had a great time until my landlord called me downstairs to show me that our front gate had been broken by one of our guests while departing. I esteemed my landlord so highly that there was little in life I hated more than disappointing him.

By the next morning, my roommates and I had determined who the culprit was, but we weren’t sure whether to ask him to pay up. While we weighed our options, I went to McCarren Park to attend a picnic hosted by a friend of mine from high school. I didn’t know any of the other guests, but I asked them whether, in my situation, they would reach out to the vandal and ask him to pay. They all said it was a tough call.

Ultimately, my roommates and I paid for the gate ourselves, swallowing the repair charge as the cost of hosting guests. As one of my roommates used to say when shrugging off his post-party hangovers, “You gotta pay the piper.”

The May before that, I wanted to resume playing the piano, so I made arrangements to buy an electric keyboard from a man who lived on the Upper East Side. I reached out to my only friend with a car – the same woman to whom I’d lost my virginity four years before – and asked if she would help me haul the equipment back to Bed-Stuy. She agreed on the condition that I would go with her to Rockaway Beach afterwards. Though the beach is my least favorite of all leisure destinations, I said sure and told her where to meet me.

She showed up to the Upper East Side without a car and without any understanding that I had expected her to bring a car. I had forgotten to ask for that, but it wouldn’t have made a difference: she hadn’t been vehicled for two years. I asked why she thought I would request her help with this chore, if not for her ability to bring a car. She asked why I hadn’t mentioned the car in my request, why I assumed she had one even though I had only seen her drive once, two years earlier, and where my gratitude was for her being willing to come out in 90-degree weather to help with such a tedious chore. Her rhetorical questions were better. We lugged the keyboard, its stand, its pedal, and a bunch of cords back to Brooklyn over two subway transfers and then went to the beach, where the temperature was about 40 degrees lower.

Even though the keyboard’s quality was affirmed by my (imminently greying) pianist friend when he came over for one of our parties, it didn’t scratch my itch the way a real piano would have. I kept it for three years until the speakers stopped working.

The May before that, I began working at a law firm in Midtown. I didn’t know how I landed the position, a phenomenon that’s repeated in every job I’ve got – or not got. Despite my supposed knowledge of film and TV, I’ve been turned down for writing jobs and even to work for Blockbuster. But I was hired to work at a venerable firm while knowing absolutely nothing about the law.

Between that respectable job and the largesse of my landlord, letting me live in Shangri-La for $600 per month, I spent my early-to-mid-twenties building unusual financial stability. I didn’t recognize it, though, and those were the years I was most worried about money. In the years before and since, financial anxiety was nothing; my worries were (are) about writing. And tidily, in that middle period, the creative side of life caused no concern.

The May before that, I graduated from NYU. More than any catastrophe I’ve lived through, that event created an atmosphere of the End of Days. Feelings of wistfulness and anxiety about casting off into the unknown were underscored by Collapse Into Now, the new R.E.M. album I was listening to repeatedly. It is a poignant record (though it wouldn’t be identified as such for another four months, it was secretly R.E.M.’s farewell album) but I was in an emotional state to be moved by any music. I couldn’t even join in the culture-wide mocking of Rebecca Black’s “Friday” that was going on; I found her earnestness unbearably touching.

At the end of the month, I moved into my new place in Bed-Stuy. My roommates and I had flipped for the apartment as soon as we saw it, not just because its competition wasn’t fierce – other prospective apartments had rat poison on the floor or 18-inch-high ceilings – but because it was spacious and cheap and distinctive, and because we liked the landlord. (And it went both ways: he told us that he had declined other possible tenants while waiting for our decision because, “I took a shine to you guys.”) And even though it was still a little strange to be sleeping and eating and showering in a new place, and even though a couple of teenagers had shouted at me while I was moving in – using what federal judges now call “racially charged language” – and even though I still had no idea how to shape a life outside of school, I felt better, because I was in My Home.

The May before that, I was finishing up a semester abroad in Ireland. At times during that spring, I compared myself to the freshman I’d been two and a half years earlier. I had been so naïve, so unworldly when I came to New York in 2007. Now, it was 2010 – a modern year, the dawn of a new decade – and I was 20 years old, living across the Atlantic. I had lived long enough to have a past, to have life behind me. I was a real person.

But if I ever had any specific examples of what made “Junior Year Me” more sophisticated than (or even different from) “Freshman Year Me,” I have completely forgotten them now. The two iterations are collapsed into one character in my mind. And when I see the numbers now, 20 as an age is much closer to the two decades before it than to the years that have come since, and 2010 looks like an absurdly miniscule year.

The May before that, I lost my virginity in a college dorm on 14th Street in Manhattan. It happened in the afternoon, after two failed attempts in prior evenings. The school year was winding down – when my girlfriend called to invite me over, I was packing up my dorm room, and when I arrived, her suitemate was in their common room, packing up her things – so there was no more room for error.

I recall looking at a digital clock, but I don’t recall what time it showed. Nor do I remember the weather, though I remember either being pleased that it was raining, or wishing that it were raining. For a redefining moment, it’s awfully hazy. The fog of war. I had to be reminded many, many years later that, after we finished, I offered a dirty joke that was extremely in and out of character: “I was packing boxes in my dorm, and then I came over here to pack boxes.”

Afterwards, I walked back to my dorm in the West Village. My friends and I had plans to watch a marathon of all of the videos we had filmed that year, and we did. It was several years before I told them where I had been earlier that day.

The May before that, I had an MRI on my ankle, which had been hurting for a year. After I left the hospital, I went to Blockbuster to interview for a summer job and absolutely bombed. I may have admitted that I only planned to keep the job until college resumed in September; I certainly volunteered that I knew nothing about high-traffic film genres like action or horror. When asked what movies I might recommend to customers, I offered artsy snoozers like Ed Wood.

Just as well that I was never offered a job, as the MRI showed that I had, “the ankle of a 70-year-old,” and arthroscopic surgery was scheduled. I spent the next two months first in a cast, then in a boot. I passed the summer making videos and uploading them to YouTube, thinking maybe I’d go viral, as I’d been hoping for two years. The most attention I got was from foot fetishists who liked when I showed my casted leg.

The May before that, my high school was shut down on what was supposed to have been my last real day of senior year. An AP Spanish Literature test and a band concert were scheduled for the day, after which I had no more obligations. But cafeteria workers coming in early in the morning spotted two masked men creeping through a hallway. The workers called the cops, the masked men fled, and the bomb squad was called in. School was closed for the day.

Had there been a bomb, this might be a disaster story known to lots of people of my generation. But there was no bomb, and it’s a story that even I forget most of the time. The general consensus was that the masked men were just students coming in early to set up some departing-senior stunt. They were never identified, though I was confident I knew who they were.

My test and my concert were rescheduled, so I had to keep going to school. The morning of the makeup AP exam, I told one of my classmates that I couldn’t help but wish we had been able to wrap up high school the week before, as anticipated. She cut me off and said, “You can’t even think about that.”

The May before that, YouTube penetrated mass consciousness. The notion of “going viral” was not known to us then, but it was still obvious how well the site could facilitate the spread of good work. I was certain that the videos my friends and I were making could be successful on there. We had so many funny ideas, it was inconceivable that not a single one of them would catch fire. Maybe not immediately, but it couldn’t take forever.

The May before that, Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith premiered. I disliked the previous movie, had forgotten the one before that, and was totally agnostic about the original trilogy, yet I convinced myself to be excited for this one: This is how a person interested in film should feel. My mom and I made plans to go as a treat after an afternoon laboring in the garden, and I invited a friend to come along.

My friend called back later in the day to ask if he could bring another kid from school to the movie. This other kid and I wound up growing closer in the last years of high school, but at the time, I still found him mean and unpredictable. I worried that he might laugh at me for still going to the movies with my mom, or worse, that he would act up in some distasteful way in front of her. My parents weren’t overly sensitive, but I was still haunted by a memory from a birthday party three years before: this kid seriously tasking my dad by telling an awful dirty joke. ("How do you circumcise a redneck?")

I lied to my friend and told him that the trip to the movies had been cancelled. Then I lied to my mom and told her that my friend had decided not to come. At the movie theater, I kept looking over my shoulder, worried that my friend might decide to come anyway (maybe even with the other kid), and I’d be caught. He didn’t, and the next day he asked if I still wanted to see the movie with him, so I watched Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith twice in two days.

The May before that, in Downtown LA (only a mile from the law firm where I’d be working 13 years later), Nintendo had a very successful presentation at the annual Electronic Entertainment Expo. At a time when its public reputation was shaky, Nintendo blew the roof off the Los Angeles Convention Center with a showcase of a new handheld, a new spokesman, and a new Legend of Zelda game. The previous entry, The Wind Waker, had drawn a lot of attention (mostly condemnation gradually giving way to praise) for its colorful, cel-shaded art style. This new game looked more subdued, realistic, and – in the parlance of the times – mature.

While I was excited by the new entry, I felt sad that it appeared to be such a blatant rejection of The Wind Waker, a game I had been defending against adolescent smears since before its release, a game I thought had proven itself to be a masterpiece. Yet here was Nintendo itself surrendering to the backlash and giving the haters exactly what they demanded. That wasn’t how the world was supposed to work, and I felt that I had been hung out to dry. These feelings were still with me more than a decade later when Breath of the Wild came along to close the circle.

The May before that, a blizzard hit Colorado. It was a spring snow, very wet and heavy, and it destroyed the plants that my mom had been adding to the yard since we moved in. She was in the house with my newborn brother, so my dad and I shoveled the walk. It was hard, slushy work, but I greatly preferred it to the lawn jobs and gardening I’d been doing over the preceding year. A private yard was supposedly one of the pleasures of living in a house rather than the apartments and condos we’d previously had, but it wasn’t worth the work that went into it. Visiting a public park or walking around the neighborhood was much more fun than sitting on your own boring lawn.

It wasn’t anything that would be relevant for eight years, and it wasn’t anything I was conscious of for longer than that, but I was developing a sense of what I dreamed would be My Home.

The May before that, my family was newly installed in our first house. Our old condo had been bought by a guy who ran an outdoor cinema over the summers, and he had given us three free passes. I went with two friends to see the second screening of the season, Airplane!

Before the show, one of my friends mentioned that he was going to be working that summer at his dad’s restaurant, and the other said he had been given a spot at his uncle’s factory (it made insulated water bottles). I felt left out, and wished that I could get work too. I wondered if there was a way I could leverage my knowing the man who ran the outdoor cinema into a job.

I remember that longing, yet I don’t remember how, two years later, I came to be working at the outdoor cinema. I have no record of who talked to whom and said what to get me that gig, the first of many positions I would get without knowing how. The job stayed on my resume until I went to work for the law firm in Midtown, but I’m not sure how useful it was. It wasn’t enough to get me in the fucking door at Blockbuster.

The May before that, R.E.M. released its 12th studio album, Reveal. I heard its lead single, “Imitation of Life,” while leaving the Albuquerque airport in a rented car, and was entranced. When we got back to Boulder, I asked my parents to buy a copy of the CD, beginning a fandom that hadn’t abated ten years later when I was listening to Collapse Into Now.

Four months after Reveal was released, the U.S was hit by the September 11th attacks, the first calamity of my life. I’ve never since looked at a copy of Reveal without thinking, “That was from the world before 9/11.” Directionless. And my ability to draw meaning from the eternal return has advanced no further.

[michaeljacksoncaptaineo]

Today in History

On this day December 29, 2003, The Nation Of Islam issues a statement denying that it has taken over any of Michael Jackson’s business affairs, or that it is taking a central role in his defense strategy over recent child molestation charges.

NY Times:

Dispute in Michael Jackson Camp Over Role of the Nation of Islam

By Sharon Waxman

Dec. 30, 2003

Officials from the Nation of Islam, a separatist African-American Muslim group, have moved in with Michael Jackson and are asserting control over the singer's business affairs, friends, employees and business associates of Mr. Jackson said.

Initially invited to the Neverland Ranch several weeks ago to provide security for Mr. Jackson, members of the Nation of Islam are now restricting access to him and have begun making decisions for him related to the news media, his business affairs and even his legal strategy, some of Mr. Jackson's friends and associates said. Mr. Jackson faces charges of child molesting in Santa Barbara and recently moved into a rented house in Los Angeles, where Nation of Islam officials have accompanied him.

Efforts to reach Mr. Jackson through his spokesman were not sucessful, but his lawyer, Mark Geragos, and The Final Call, the Nation of Islam's newspaper, denied the claim.

Leonard Muhammad, chief of staff and son-in-law of the Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, now works out of the Los Angeles office of Mr. Geragos, Mr. Jackson's lawyer, the Jackson associates said. Mr. Muhammad stood behind Mr. Geragos during a recent televised news conference and, according to two of Mr. Jackson's employees who spoke on condition of anonymity, he participates in phone calls involving media and legal strategy.

Mr. Jackson's official spokesman, Stuart Backerman, resigned on Monday to protest the Nation of Islam's presence, said a colleague of Mr. Backerman, who could not be reached for comment on Monday.

The employees said they spoke out because they are concerned about Mr. Jackson's welfare and because his multicultural message was at odds with the group's philosophy of black separatism. The Nation of Islam is a small group that advocates black self-empowerment and a separate African-American state, and some of its leaders have espoused anti-Semitic, anti-gay and racist rhetoric. Mr. Jackson is not Muslim nor a member of the Nation of Islam.

''The Nation of Islam and Louis Farrakhan's son-in-law have taken over completely and are in full and total charge,'' said one senior Jackson employee, speaking on condition of anonymity. ''They have gone in and taken over control of the finances in terms of who's getting paid, how much,'' the employee added. ''They're approving all funds and have decided they have control of the business manager and accountant, without signing authority or power of attorney. They are working out of Geragos's office; in essence they're telling him what to do.''

A business associate of Mr. Jackson who was accustomed to speaking to the singer daily said there were about a half-dozen Nation of Islam members around the singer constantly, whether at Neverland or in Los Angeles. ''These people are basically brainwashing him,'' said the associate, who is also a friend of Mr. Jackson's. ''They tried to do the same thing to Whitney Houston. They offer a false sense that they can control everything. Everyone is scared of them. They pretty much keep Michael semi-captive.''

Another Jackson employee said: ''They're negotiating business deals with him. They're negotiating media deals, who can talk, how much. You've got a lawyer who's scared to throw them out. Michael doesn't know what to do with them.''

The employees said Mr. Geragos and Mr. Muhammad together negotiated an interview of Mr. Jackson by the CBS program ''60 Minutes,'' which was shown on Sunday, in exchange for an agreement by the network to broadcast a still-incomplete Michael Jackson special, for which Mr. Jackson would be paid $5 million.

The interview was negotiated last week by Les Moonves, chief executive of CBS, over the objections of Jackson advisers who said they thought it was a bad idea to put Mr. Jackson on television while he faced felony charges.

In response to inquiries on Monday a statement issued by The Final Call said that the Nation of Islam ''has no official business or professional relationship with Mr. Michael Jackson.'' The statement added, ''The Nation of Islam joins thousands of other people in wishing him well.''

In a telephone interview on Monday Mr. Geragos denied that the Nation of Islam was running Mr. Jackson's affairs. ''The idea that there is some takeover by the Nation of Islam -- someone is spinning you,'' he said. ''Nobody has told me what to do and what not to do. Leonard, I believe, is someone Michael consults with, just like in excess of 25 people.''

Mr. Geragos said that members of Mr. Jackson's security detail were Muslim but that that did not mean they belonged to the Nation of Islam. Mr. Geragos said that he felt these accusations of Nation of Islam control have originated with the Santa Barbara district attorney's office, which is ''playing the race card,'' he said.

But a half-dozen people from Mr. Jackson's inner circle, some speaking on condition of anonymity, said they had not been able to talk to the star in weeks and laughed at the notion that the district attorney was the source of their own comments.

Mr. Jackson's main business partners, Dieter Wiesner and Ronald Konitzer, said that they had been unable to get to Mr. Jackson for the last two weeks. ''These are difficult times,'' Mr. Konitzer said in a phone interview. ''My concern is the business side. I would like to get back to business.'' Asked if he were being pushed out by the Nation of Islam, Mr. Konitzer said: ''I don't want to comment on that one.'' Others who are said not to be able to contact Mr. Jackson include Mr. Backerman and Mark Schaffel, one of Mr. Jackson's business associates, who could not be reached for comment.

Despite the concern of Jackson employees about the CBS interview, Mr. Geragos said Mr. Jackson himself decided to give the interview, and that it was not unusual for high-profile figures awaiting trial to speak to the media. ''Michael wanted to make a statement, his fans wanted him to,'' Mr. Geragos said. ''People are extremely interested.'' Mr. Muhammad was present briefly during the interview, Mr. Geragos said.

In the interview Mr. Jackson again confirmed that he enjoyed sleeping with children, though not in a sexual way. ''Of course -- why not?'' he said when asked about it. ''If you're going to be a pedophile, if you're going to be Jack the Ripper, if you're going to be a murderer, it's not a good idea. That I am not.'' He also accused the police of brutality in handcuffing him and humiliated him by locking him in a bathroom smeared with feces during his arrest.

Eyewitnesses said that Mr. Jackson was guarded by Nation of Islam security at a party at Neverland on the Saturday before Christmas. He was not permitted to leave his main house because of alleged security risks that day, nor in the two days after the party, they said.

''Security told him the premises was not secure, they'd rather have him back in the house,'' said a friend of Mr. Jackson who was a guest at the party, speaking on condition of anonymity. ''I felt like Michael was a prisoner in his own house. The bottom line is: what kind of security do you need in your own home?''

Meanwhile Mr. Jackson has rented a house in downtown Los Angeles, where he is also accompanied by Nation of Islam security. He told ''60 Minutes'' he considered Neverland tainted because of the police search.

The motives of Mr. Muhammad and the Nation of Islam are not clear. The group, which believes in black pride and racial separation, has not supported Mr. Jackson in the past; Mr. Jackson has undergone extensive cosmetic surgery and his children appear to be Caucasian.

But some would consider gaining Mr. Jackson as a follower or proponent of the tiny group, which numbers about 20,000, to be a huge coup. Mr. Jackson's now-shunned advisors say they fear the Nation of Islam intends to use Mr. Jackson's celebrity to increase its visibility and make money off the star and that Mr. Jackson is too naïve to suspect otherwise.

Mr. Jackson was introduced to the Nation of Islam through his nanny, Grace Rwarmba, who is a member of the group, and through Mr. Jackson's brother Jermaine, several people close to Mr. Jackson said. The pop star met Mr. Farrakhan in Las Vegas last month, and the Nation of Islam leader ''talked like a father to him,'' said someone present at the meeting. ''They prayed together.'' Around Thanksgiving Mr. Muhammad moved up to Neverland and is said to have begun asserting control.

Mr. Farrakhan has called Judaism a ''gutter religion'' and as recently as November gave a speech in which he called Jews the ''masters of Hollywood'' who feed ''the minds of the American people and the people of the world filth and indecency.''

[lawinformation]

How much will your child support enforcement case cost?

On the off chance that you have require a best reasonable Texas Divorce Law encounter, How much will your child support enforcement case cost? with the immense procedure!

Houston Divorce Lawyers: If you ask a lawyer a question about your legal situation, their response may well be, “It depends.” Years of seeing a number of different scenarios play out for different sorts of clients results in a lawyer understanding that there is no perfect answer to give any one client. This is true whether the question is about an aspect of their case or what a specific sort of family law case will end up costing.

If you have been through a divorce or child custody case in which you had child support set up, you know what your prior case ended up costing you. I remind clients that whatever the cost of a case, it is an investment in your and your child’s future.

This can seem like lawyer-speak sometimes, especially when a case enters its middle stages and time starts to slow down and it feels like it will never end. The question remains though- what will a child support enforcement case cost if you need to go back and address missed payments by your ex-spouse?

Attorneys want to an earn a living, but don’t want to drag a case out

Movies and television have done a great job of portraying attorneys as money hungry. If it were left up to Hollywood, attorneys would be in business primarily to help themselves and line their pockets along the way. Your simple, open and shut family law matter? A “typical” attorney will do whatever he or she can to string the case out and charge you for the pleasure of doing so. Is this how it is in real life?

Again, since you have been through a family law case before, hopefully, your experience does not match up with this one. Lawyers do want to earn an income, as do you, but there is one thing that movies and television don’t tell you that I will.

Lawyers are also busy just like you are. While we want to earn an income, we also want to move a case along the process efficiently so that you can reach your goals. Doing so ensures a happier client and a less stressed out attorney.

Factors to take into consideration when hiring a family law attorney

From what I can tell after having met with many potential clients of the Law Office of Bryan Fagan, PLLC, people in your position will typically look for experience, proximity to their home and cost when hiring an attorney.

These are all great attributes to look for in an attorney, by the way. I also recommend meeting with an attorney face to face to allow you an idea of how you and the attorney relate to one another.

This is not a business transaction, contract dispute or personal injury case that you are about to undertake. This is a family law matter that is near and dear to your heart. You want to be able to trust that your attorney understands this and is willing to do what it takes to help you achieve your goals.

Costs of a family law case in Texas

Family Law Attorney Houston: When you are trying to figure out costs of your potential child support enforcement case it is necessary to consider that you are about to incur costs that are beyond merely signing up with an attorney and paying a retainer fee. Filing your case in Harris, Montgomery, Ft. Bend or any other county in southeast Texas will cost a few hundred dollars at least. This is true whether it is our office that ends up working for you or another attorney across town.

Once your petition is filed in court your attorney will likely utilize a private process server to seek out your ex-spouse and provide notice that there is now a pending enforcement suit in familylaw court.

This too, while likely not as expensive as filing the suit, will cost money. You can ask your potential attorney in an interview what sort of plan he or she has for serving your ex-spouse so that your case does not endure any needless delays. It is extremely frustrating to hire an attorney, file your case only to find that your attorney is unable to serve your ex-spouse.

From my experience, there is little need in a child support enforcement case for mediation. Mediation is the process that you likely went through for your divorce where you and your ex-spouse met with your attorneys at an independent attorney’s office to attempt to settle your disputes prior to a trial.

This means negotiating with the assistance of the mediator and ultimately signing what is known as a Mediated Settlement Agreement (MSA) once a settlement is hopefully reached. This process takes the place of a trial. Mediation costs typically between $300 and $500 (in the Houston area) for a half day mediation, but can save you thousands if you consider how much a trial would have cost in your divorce.

Child support enforcement cases don’t really function like a divorce case. There is less to negotiate upon because the issues are much more minute. Are you owed child support? Has your ex-spouse paid the support to as stated in your Final Decree of Divorce? What does the Attorney General’s ledger show as far as arrearages? These are much more matter of fact questions that need to be answered, and the opportunity to negotiate is not as great.

Initiating the Child Support Enforcement Lawsuit

In the beginning stages of a child support enforcement case, you are paying a down payment, also known as a retainer, to your attorney. This retainer fee can range from $2,000 on up to $10,000 depending on the attorney you are hiring.

As we stated earlier the filing fees in most Texas counties is approximately $300, not including copies for service and filing. Finally, a process server will likely cost roughly $100 for you and your attorney to utilize their services.

Preparing for Trial and Negotiating a Settlement

In an enforcement case, there is no true “middle” of a case. Once your enforcement is filed and your ex-spouse responds with an Answer you and he/she are either going to each prepare for Trial or work towards a settlement of your case.

I had a child support enforcement case about eighteen months ago in which our client and the opposing party were able to work out a settlement rather quickly where preparation for trial was not even needed. It ended up that the opposing client had simply misinterpreted the final decree of divorce and stopped paying child support too early. The misunderstanding was resolved, a payment plan was conceived for the back child support owed and no trial was had.

On the other hand, I have also represented a child support client where it took us until the day before a trial to settle the case and work out a plan that would avoid a costly lawsuit. Indeed, preparing for a full-fledged trial and then appearing in court will be the most costly aspect of your enforcement case if it comes to that. If you can avoid a trial it is typically for the best due to the costs and risks associated with this final step.

Additional questions about the costs of a child support enforcement case? Contact the Law Office of Bryan Fagan, PLLC

Houston Divorce Attorney: If you are in need of experienced, strong and effective advocates for your child support related enforcement case I would recommend that you contact the Law Office of Bryan Fagan, PLLC. Our attorneys represent clients in enforcement cases regularly and have achieved successful results in doing so.

A free of charge consultation with one of our licensed family law attorneys is only a phone call away. We schedule consultations six days a week in our office and we would be honored to speak with you about the services that we can provide to you and your family ... Continue Reading

[businessdisputelawfirmhollywood]

Navigating Business Disputes: When and Why You Need a Business Dispute Lawyer

Business disputes are an unavoidable part of running a company. Whether it's a disagreement with a partner, a breach of contract, or issues with intellectual property, these conflicts can disrupt operations, harm relationships, and even threaten the future of your business. Navigating these disputes effectively requires a strategic approach and a deep understanding of the law. This is where a business dispute lawyer comes into play. Let’s explore when and why hiring a business dispute lawyer is crucial for protecting your company’s interests and resolving conflicts efficiently.

Common Scenarios Where Business Disputes Arise

Business disputes can emerge in various forms and at any stage of a company's lifecycle. Here are some common scenarios where these disputes may arise:

Contract Disputes: Contracts are the backbone of business operations, outlining the obligations and rights of each party involved. Disagreements often arise when one party believes the other has failed to uphold their end of the deal. Breach of contract, misinterpretation of terms, or disputes over contract validity can lead to costly legal battles.

Partnership and Shareholder Disputes: Disagreements between business partners or shareholders can arise from differences in vision, management decisions, profit distribution, or breaches of faithfulness duties. Such conflicts can jeopardize the stability and success of the business.

Intellectual Property (IP) Disputes: Protecting intellectual property is vital for businesses, especially those in creative or innovative industries. Disputes over trademarks, copyrights, patents, or trade secrets can arise when one party believes their IP rights have been infringed.

Employment Disputes: Issues related to wrongful termination, discrimination, wage disputes, or breaches of employment contracts can lead to legal disputes between employers and employees, potentially damaging a company’s reputation.

Mergers and Acquisitions: Disputes during mergers or acquisitions can arise from valuations, agreement terms, or undisclosed liabilities. These conflicts can derail deals and lead to significant financial losses.

Why You Need a Business Dispute Lawyer

Navigating business disputes requires the specialized legal expertise that a business dispute lawyer provides. Here are the key reasons why hiring a business dispute lawyer is essential:

Expert Legal Advice: The business dispute attorney hollywood fl has in-depth knowledge of business law and is equipped to provide expert legal advice tailored to your situation. They can assess the merits of your case, identify potential risks, and develop a strategy to protect your interests.

Efficient Resolution: Resolving disputes quickly is crucial to minimizing disruption to your business. A skilled lawyer can help you navigate the complexities of the legal system, identify the best course of action, and negotiate settlements that avoid extended litigation and reduce costs.

Protection of Business Interests: Your lawyer’s primary responsibility is to protect your business interests. They will work to ensure that your rights are upheld, whether by defending you against claims, pursuing damages, or enforcing contracts. This protection extends to your company's reputation, financial stability, and long-term success.

Litigation and Negotiation Skills: Whether through negotiation or litigation, business dispute lawyers are skilled advocates. They can negotiate favorable settlements, draft legally binding agreements, and represent you in court if necessary. Their experience in dispute resolution techniques is invaluable in achieving a positive outcome.

Compliance and Risk Management: The business disputes lawyer hollywood also plays a critical role in helping companies comply with relevant laws and regulations. They can advise on best practices for contract management, employee relations, and other areas where disputes are likely to arise, helping you mitigate risks before they escalate into legal battles.

Whether dealing with contract issues, partnership disagreements, or intellectual property conflicts, having a business dispute lawyer by your side is crucial for resolving disputes efficiently and protecting your company’s interests.

[thefeministherald]

A handful of Pakistani women recently went public to accuse famous actor and musician Ali Zafar of sexually harassing and abusing them. Their announcement grabbed headlines, prompted outrage and sparked the Me Too movement in conservative Pakistan. The women’s remarkable statements — followed by similar claims in politics and business sectors — are a sea change in this highly traditional Islamic country where female honor killings, child brides and polygamy are commonplace. In Pakistan, women receive only a portion of an inheritance that males get. "I think in any society it is difficult for women to come forward,” said Nighat Dad, director of the Digital Rights Foundation and an activist for women's rights. “The Me Too movement has organically come with women coming forward against powerful men, be it Ali Zafar or a CEO of a tech start-up, to finally hold men accountable for their behavior.”  Victims of sexual abuse and harassment have long suffered in silence in Pakistan, where shame is placed on the woman and not the perpetrator. Most women never report the incidents, but those who do come forward often face shame or questions about their morality. Pakistani pop singer Meesha Shafi, who accused Zafar of sexually harassing her on multiple occasions, is challenging that tradition. “Today I am breaking this culture of silence and I hope that by doing that I am setting an example for young women in my country to do the same,” Shafi wrote on Twitter last month. “We only have our voices and the time has come to use them.” Zafar denied the claims and demanded that Shafi delete the allegation online and issue an apology, or he would file a $9 million defamation suit against her. “I am deeply aware and in support of the global Me Too movement and what it stands for,” Zafar said in a statement. “I am the father of a young girl and a young boy, a husband to a wife and a son to a mother. I have nothing to hide. Silence is absolutely not an option.” Shafi has refused to take down her tweets. Her attorney denied she defamed Zafar. Days after the public dispute erupted, more women came forward against Zafar, who has been compared to Hollywood producer and accused abuser Harvey Weinstein in the Pakistani press. Leena Ghani, a makeup artist based in London, said Zafar had repeatedly “crossed boundaries” with her. “His behavior displays a clear lack of respect for women,” Ghani said on Twitter. “Inappropriate contact, groping, sexual comments should not fall in the gray area between humor and indecency.”  Humna Raza, a blogger from Lahore, accused Zafar of groping her when she asked to take a selfie with him. Another woman, Noor Sehar, a Karachi marketing executive, accused Zafar of sexual misconduct at a party. Such allegations are not isolated. Khalid Bajwa, chief executive of local music streaming company Patari, stepped down from his post last month following sexual harassment allegations. While many have supported the Pakistani singer for bravely speaking out, others questioned her accusations. “I just don’t see any truth in these allegations,” said film actress Resham, who uses a single name for her career. “Ali cannot do such a thing. How can he harass a woman and she doesn’t slap him back, hit him with a shoe, push him away or complain to his wife?” Shafi also has been shamed on social media after she went public. "The backlash that Meesha has faced, the misogynistic attitudes that she has had to confront also sends women a message that there is still a cost to coming forward,” Dad said. Others defended her.  “Meesha is a superstar who is really successful and earns as much as the male stars in this country,” said actor and model Iffat Omar in an Instagram post. “So why would she do this if she was not hurt? Many people are claiming that she is doing this for fame or money. She already has more than enough of both.” Still, many women are afraid to come forward because of possible repercussions. For example, lawmaker Ayesha Gulali of the mainstream Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insafpolitical party, recently accused her party’s leader, Imran Khan, of sending her lewd text messages. She was hit with backlash both online and from her party. Party leaders tried but failed to kick her out of the party and expel her from parliament. Lawmaker Ayesha Gulali of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf party says her party leader Imran Khan sent her lewd text messages. Also, broadcast journalists Tanzeela Mazhar and Yashfeen Jamal pursued a sexual harassment case against the director of current affairs at Pakistan Television, Agha Masood Shorish, they stirred up a storm of criticism before he was eventually fired. “When I raised my voice, people responded with (degrading) comments about women, our character and personal lives,” Mazhar said. Still, Shafi encouraged other women to come forward with this answer on Twitter: “It’s only scary till you say it!”

[dcmarticles]

What To Do When a Company Breaches a Contract

You've got it in writing. The contract is signed and sealed. It should be bulletproof, right? Not necessarily. There are a lot of reasons why companies fail to live up to their contractual promises. When they don’t, you need to know your legal options.

Breach of Contract? Prove It!

Before challenging a company’s failure to meet its contractual obligations, you need to do some legal legwork.

Support Your Claim

Prove the existence of a contract.

Prove that the other party has not met their obligations.

Be prepared for counter claims and reasons why they have not met their obligations.

Prove the other party failed to perform their part of the contract.

Prove that the other party's failure to perform caused damages.

When Companies are in Breach of Contract

Business and contracts go hand-in-hand. You hire an employee, acquire a small-business loan, or open a merchant services account. The list of contracts goes on. When one party does not satisfy their part of the contractual bargain, a breach of contract exists. When this happens, you have several legal options.

Identify the Breach. It is best to seek the services of a business attorney who can point out aspects of the challenge you may not have thought about.

Send a Demand Letter. A demand letter is a legal request to settle a claim. Sending a demand letter is an inexpensive alternative to court. The letter should be brief and concise, should provide an overview of the alleged breach, and remind the company of its contractual obligations.

Mediation is a form of alternative dispute resolution that does not involve the courts. During mediation, an objective third party meets with all parties with the goal of facilitating discussions designed to achieve a fair and agreeable resolution.

File a Lawsuit. If mediation fails, your final recourse is to file a lawsuit. Expensive? Yes. But sometimes your only recourse is to let a judge decide the matter. Court action involves certain remedies, such as monetary damages or demands that the party at fault make good on its contractual obligation.

Filing Breach of Contract Suits in California

Attorney Fees. In California, the general rule for attorney fees states that each party pays their own. This premise is codified by California Legislature at Code of Civil Procedure section 1021. The rule holds unless other stipulations have been approved by the court.

Advice from The Law Office of Eric J. Proos

While the ability to file a breach of contract claim on your own seems appealing, there are legal nuances involved that can make navigating the legal system harder than you might think. Do you live in West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, Westwood, and the surrounding greater Los Angeles area? Do you think you have a claim? If so, call attorney Eric J. Proos now at (213) 784-3640 for legal advice you can trust.

[filmstruck]

Andy Griffith’s Mind-blowing Performance in A FACE IN THE CROWD (’57) by Jill Blake

Like a lot of Southerners, I grew up watching reruns of THE ANDY GRIFFITH SHOW (’60-’68). It was a staple in our household and we watched it together as a family every night. We were particularly fond of the first five seasons and we loved the rapport between Andy Griffith’s Sheriff Andy Taylor and Don Knotts’s Deputy Barney Fife, and their adventures in the small, fictional town of Mayberry, North Carolina (based on Griffith’s hometown of Mount Airy, NC). While some of the dialogue featured in the show is a bit outdated and sexist (unfortunately common in most of the sitcoms of the 1950s and 1960s), the groundbreaking depiction of a single father and widower raising his son, overarching themes of family, loyalty and hospitality, coupled with the familiar, quirky mannerisms that are second-nature to us Southerners, really resonated with my family. And they still do, a generation later with my young daughter. 

To me, Andy Griffith, and the character he created for his show (which he first debuted in an episode of the Danny Thomas series MAKE ROOM FOR DADDY [’53-’65]), represented so much of the goodness that can be found in the South. That goodness is so often overshadowed by the archaic, stubborn views of a few who insist on keeping the South married to its embarrassing, troubled past; and overlooked because of misunderstanding and broad stereotypes about Southern people from those outside the region’s loose borders. (As an aside, the South has a lot of work to do to improve its tarnished reputation, so it’s understandable that many people have an unfavorable view.) Andy Griffith was one of us, and he made good by representing his home with pride and dignity. He never forgot his roots and because of that, he made us proud. Griffith carefully constructed an image of a strong, principled Southern man who owned up to his mistakes while never losing sight of his moral center or succumbing to the power of his office. Sheriff Taylor was a model civil servant and elected official who respected and acknowledged that he worked for the people, and as such he had a great responsibility that he upheld at all times.

But there is another side of Andy Griffith’s acting talents, one that is in direct opposition to the folksy, wholesome images he created with his popular Andy Taylor character and later on with Ben Matlock, the always-successful criminal defense attorney in the series MATLOCK (’86-’95), and even in his late-career performance in the exceptional indie film WAITRESS (’07), written and directed by the late Adrienne Shelly. It’s a side that we’ve only seen in one performance; a side that is so dark and twisted and depraved that when compared to the image of Griffith that we know and love, it’s difficult to process and digest. And yet, it’s a brilliant, once-in-a-lifetime performance that should be considered the actor’s crowning achievement.

I’m referring to Griffith’s role as Lonesome Rhodes in Elia Kazan’s 1957 drama A FACE IN THE CROWD. 

In recent years, specifically in the last couple of decades, A FACE IN THE CROWD has been rediscovered by audiences and reevaluated by critics, with the film creeping back into cultural relevance and blowing the collective minds of everyone with a pulse. Based on a short story by Budd Schulberg, who also wrote the adapted screenplay, A FACE IN THE CROWD is an unflinching criticism of the American public’s eagerness to blindly follow a charismatic personality, by fully buying into the manufactured brand of that personality—one composed of deceit, greed, hubris and moral bankruptcy—while remaining blissfully ignorant to the truth. A truth that is easy to find, as it lies just under the personality’s dynamic, yet precariously fabricated image. Griffith’s Larry “Lonesome” Rhodes is a full-time drunk tank resident in a Deep South jail, whose meandering and charming tall tales impress a local radio producer, Marcia Jeffries, played by Patricia Neal. Jeffries puts Rhodes’ singing and storytelling on the radio, bestowing him with the nickname, Lonesome. He’s an overnight success, quickly making his way from the Podunk radio station to national television, with Jeffries invested as both his business partner and lover. 

A FACE IN THE CROWD follows the unexpected, yet somehow predictable, rise and fall of the dangerous cult of personality that is Lonesome Rhodes; a modern parable and cautionary tale warning us all of the predatory wolf in sheep’s clothing. A lesson that we still have yet to learn as we compulsively invest ourselves in the megalomaniac acolytes of Lonesome Rhodes. This is a film that was made sixty years ago, but feels like it could’ve been made sixty days ago. It has never lost its relevancy or its powerful message. Matter of fact, it has gained relevance in the last six decades. And that can be directly attributed to Andy Griffith’s incredible performance.

It’s hard to believe, but A FACE IN THE CROWD was Griffith’s film debut, and one of a very small number of theatrical films he made, as he spent the vast majority of his career on television. At the time of the film’s release, it wasn’t terribly well-received and Griffith didn’t earn the recognition that his performance deserved. No Academy Award nomination for him in a banner year for Hollywood films (David Lean’s THE BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI [‘57] being the big winner that year, including a win for Alec Guinness for Best Actor), which today seems like an unforgivable oversight. But I think one of the reasons why A FACE IN THE CROWD and Griffith’s performance is so well-received today is because of what we know about Andy Griffith as a person and the on-screen persona he created in his various television shows. We have an entire career laid before us that contradicts and even condemns the very essence of Lonesome Rhodes. Yet, Rhodes’s manufactured image is familiar and comforting. He looks like Sheriff Andy Taylor. He sounds like him. He even has that earnest, good ol’ boy quality about him that we find so endearing in Sheriff Taylor. Then there’s the masterminded bait and switch that Lonesome cleverly pulls off—at least for a time. And that’s what is so unnerving and terrifying.

I think a lot of times Elia Kazan gets too much credit for the brilliance of A FACE IN THE CROWD. And while I’m not disputing his talents as a groundbreaking filmmaker, I firmly believe the film’s potency as a prescient commentary should be mainly attributed to Griffith’s performance, and how the trajectory of his career in the years that followed has given the film valuable retrospective context. And of course, there’s no way to plan for how a film will be received decades after its release. And it’s utterly preposterous to think that Griffith spent years playing morally grounded, likable characters just so that one day when his role as Lonesome Rhodes would be reevaluated, we’d all crumple under the weight of an existential crisis. (Believe me, I’ve thought about this as some elaborate plot, where at the end Griffith exclaims, “The Aristocrats!”) It’s more like Griffith spent the rest of his career distancing himself from Lonesome Rhodes, and maybe that’s why we never saw this side of his acting again. And honestly, I can’t say that I blame him. No one wants to be “that guy,” unless you are “that guy,” and you love being you because you’re too stupid and self-absorbed to see your impending demise. Andy Griffith’s performance in A FACE IN THE CROWD is one of those rare gifts the universe sometimes throws our way. Sure, it’s a confusing anomaly and antithetical to everything we know to be true, with many of us honorary Mayberrians still assembling the pieces of our blown away minds—but it’s still a gift.

[livinginlandmarketing]

Riverside County misspent more than $4.6 million in federal coronavirus relief funding on furniture, door keypads, cameras and bulletproof windows for the Sheriff’s Department, complaints filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and several local groups allege.

The complaints filed Friday, July 30, ask the federal government to recover the CARES Act money “so that (it) may be reallocated to programs and services that respond to the public health emergency caused by COVID-19,” read the complaint to the U.S. Treasury Department’s inspector general.

“CARES Act funds are intended to support community members struggling with the economic and health impacts of the pandemic,” Adrienna Wong, ACLU Southern California senior staff attorney, said in a news release.

Related Articles

As COVID-19 cases rise, some Southern California casinos are asking guests to mask up again

Disneyland requires non-union employees to get vaccinated, starts discussions with unions

Knott’s Berry Farm ends reservation requirements after year of COVID-19 restrictions

Schools in Riverside and San Bernardino counties prepare for students after a year of virtual learning

Don’t throw away your shot (record) if you want to see ‘Hamilton’ in Hollywood

“Redirecting those funds to pad law enforcement budgets hampers recovery efforts, disregards the suffering in our communities and, in this case, violates the law.”

County spokeswoman Brooke Federico said via email the county’s CARES Act funding team reviewed departments’ spending requests to make sure they were eligible for CARES Act dollars.

“The sheriff’s projects, specifically, ensured appropriate physical distancing and safety, while reducing contact and decreasing the risk of transmission within congregate inmate settings and among essential personnel,” Federico said.

In an emailed statement, Sheriff Chad Bianco said Friday that “three completely anti-law enforcement (and particularly) anti-Sheriff’s Department … organizations have made more frivolous complaints and are counting on anti-law enforcement media to fuel their demands for social justice.”

“The county of Riverside had an exhausting process for distribution of CARES Act funding and I am extremely confident the process ensured the county operated within federal government guidelines,” the sheriff added.

Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco defended the use of federal COVID-19 dollars to upgrade cameras and door keypads at sheriff’s facilities. (File photo by Watchara Phomicinda, The Press-Enterprise/SCNG)

At the May 25 Board of Supervisors meeting, Bianco defended using COVID-19 funds to upgrade cameras and door keypads at sheriff’s facilities. The county’s undersheriff told supervisors the office upgrades would replace old flooring and reduce the risk of viral infection.

“Our deputies are in there hundreds of times a day through the main door,” he told supervisors. “Hundreds of times a day, with inmates, without inmates, contaminating other people. So we worked very very diligently with the executive office to come up with funding for this.”

Bianco noted the pandemic forced the closure of sheriff’s stations to the public last year. With the new cameras, “if we ever did have to go to a lockdown again where we’re not going to let (people) in (sheriff’s facilities), we can engage with them outside through the camera system, through the speaker systems … ” he said in May.

Riverside County received $497 million last year — $431 million directly, $56 million through the state — from the CARES Act, a $2.2 trillion COVID-19 relief package passed by Congress and signed by then-President Donald Trump in March 2020.

Supervisors used the money, which is separate from the $479 million the county expects to receive from the American Rescue Plan relief bill passed this March, to cover county departments’ COVID-19-related expenses, a move that buoyed a county budget that was initially expected to take a body blow from the pandemic.

Among other priorities, CARES Act funding also paid for personal protective equipment for health care workers; office partitions, telework equipment and other tools to promote social distancing by employees; shelter for the homeless and aid for struggling small businesses and renters unable to pay their landlords because the pandemic took away their jobs or work hours.

In the past year, the five elected county supervisors have resisted pressure from activists who want less money spent on law enforcement and more devoted to social programs and helping the homeless and disadvantaged. Joining in the ACLU’s complaints are the Corona-based Starting Over Inc. and Riverside All of Us or None, groups that advocate for criminal justice reform and have sought to divert funding from the sheriff.

“The projects proposed by the Sheriff’s Department have nothing to do with COVID-19 and the harm it has caused in our communities,” Shaun LeFlore, a Riverside All of Us or None organizer, said in the ACLU’s release.

The complaint to the treasury department focuses on three CARES Act-funded items unanimously approved by supervisors. According to county reports, the money funded:

$1.3 million to upgrade key cards and video cameras

$669,000 for bulletproof window glazing and perimeter security improvements

$2.7 million for “lighting, flooring, cabinets, office furniture and equipment” at sheriff’s facilities

Money from the sheriff’s budget also paid for those items.

In each instance, the projects do not meet federal rules for how CARES Act money can be spent, the ACLU argues.

“Swiping a key card instead of turning a physical key does not substantially reduce employees’ contact with door handles or other office objects, such that this technology does not improve the Sheriff’s Department’s control of COVID-19 spread,” the complaint read. “Additionally, installing an upgraded camera system does nothing to minimize office staff’s exposure to sick staff or visitors.”

Related links

How Riverside County plans to spend $431M in coronavirus dollars

How Riverside County plans to spend $479 million in coronavirus relief money

Effort to defund Riverside County Sheriff’s Department continues amid new budget

Riverside County budget to include $5.5 million for deputy patrols

Why Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco wants $18 million more in funding

Installing bulletproof glass to protect against active shooters “is not a new cost undertaken” to fight the pandemic and bulletproof glazing doesn’t reduce the virus’s spread, the ACLU argues.

Regarding the $2.7 million item, Undersheriff Dennis Vrooman told supervisors June 8 that the project would replace surfaces in jail and coroner’s facilities that are highly susceptible to bacterial viral infections.

“If we replace them, it’s less likely that we have the spread of disease and things like that in those facilities for both the inmates and our staff,” Vrooman said.

The ACLU disputes that. “Replacing floors, furniture and cabinetry is similarly unrelated to public health, as this proposal does not reduce staff members’ contact with these surfaces,” the complaint read.

“Furthermore, improving Sheriff’s Department office facilities does not assist with providing healthcare services, aiding businesses, or supporting individuals suffering from the economic fallout of the pandemic.”

-on July 30, 2021 at 08:15AM by Jeff Horseman

[stormycastles]

NPR: How A Shocking Attack Inspired India's Actresses To Fight Harassment

November 4, 2017 | NURITH AIZENMAN

Sayanora Philip (foreground), a singer in Mollywood films, takes a selfie with fellow members of the newly formed Women in Cinema Collective.

Listen here

Every day seems to bring a new high profile case of sexual harassment in American media. It began with accusations against Harvey Weinstein. This week NPR's senior vice president of news was forced to resign over allegations against him.

But this problem is hardly limited to the U.S. For the past several months one of India's major film industries has been made to face up to similar problems in its own ranks after the sexual assault of a prominent actress. In reaction, women movie stars, directors and other film professionals have formed an unprecedented coalition to fight back.

They call themselves the Women in Cinema Collective, and the group includes some of the biggest names in "Mollywood." That's the nickname for the industry that produces movies in the 35-million-strong South Indian state of Kerala in the local language of Malayalam — and which is not to be confused with "Bollywood," the better known nationwide Hindi-language film industry based in the city of Mumbai.

Launched in May, the WCC has been lobbying both the industry and political leaders for a host of reforms — ranging from setting up an official complaints system through which women could report harassment and get justice to the stipulation that production companies must provide such long-denied basics as toilets appropriate for women on set.

Perhaps no one is more surprised at their newfound activism than the women themselves.

"None of us thought we could all stand up and ask for the same thing," says Rima Kallingal, a prominent movie actress. "None of us thought of it."

That all changed on an evening last February, when a Mollywood actress got into a chauffeured car hired by the company producing a film she was working on. According to a judge's summary of allegations made by the state prosecutor, suddenly another vehicle rammed the car from behind. A gang of men jumped out of that vehicle and forced their way into the actress's car. Over the next couple hours they drove around with her as their prisoner, taking photographs and video as they sexually assaulted her.

"I can't even imagine the psychological pressure she went through when she was in that car," recalls Kallingal, who is a close friend of the actress. (As a matter of policy, NPR does not name individuals who are the alleged victims of sexual assaults unless they choose to be identified).

Kallingal believes that, whatever their aim, the assailants assumed the actress would be too traumatized or ashamed at the prospect of the photographs being made public to report the crime.

"That's where she proved everybody wrong," says Kallingal. That same night, after the actress was set free, she contacted the police.

"I still remember going to meet her the very next day," says Kallingal. "How she stood like a rock and was so clear that she was going to come down on every person who was involved in this."

Within days police had arrested several men, including one whom the actress had recognized during the attack as someone who had driven her car during a previous film shoot, according to the judge's summary of the prosecutor's allegations. (An attorney for the man told NPR his client will be pleading not guilty in the case and was not involved in the attack.)

Kallingal says that in India survivors of a sexual assault are often either blamed or pitied as somehow irreparably soiled. So the actress's defiance was a watershed moment.

"She changed the whole narrative with that single act of bravery."

She also inspired her female colleagues to start a conversation they'd never had before. At first they were simply phoning each other out of shock — and to discuss ways they could lend the actress their public support. But the fact that the attack had taken place on a work trip, and, allegedly at the hands of someone who had been employed in the film industry, soon prompted deeper conversations about how safe any of them could feel in an industry that is loosely organized and requires them to show up at all manner of odd hours to remote locations where all but a handful of their colleagues are men.

The more the woman talked, the more they confided in one another about instances of sexual abuse and even assault they had faced on the job.

"It was like we opened a can of worms," says Parvathy Thiruvothu, another top actress. "It was really shocking for everyone once we got together, about 20 of us, that we have been either assaulted or faced the casting couch in the industry over years and we've never spoken about it even with each other. We were all made to believe that it was just us, just that one incident, [that] it doesn't happen to everybody."

The stories they shared ran the gamut: Women getting slapped for expressing creative differences on set. Male actors and directors making lewd comments on set or sending suggestive texts late at night. Directors and male stars or even male crew members insisting that a woman, including not just actresses but support staff such as hair stylists, sleep with them over the weeks that a film was being shot — and docking a woman's pay or getting her blacklisted if she refused. For some women, refusal wasn't even an option.

"I was assaulted," says Thiruvothu. On one of her movies, a powerful man in the industry "would expect me to be in his room to discuss scenes and be physical with me. I was really young at the time, and for him to say 'It's okay, you know, it's very normal' and for me to try to escape — and I didn't. I was forced to be intimate."

What's more, she says, in conversations she's now had with other Mollywood women, they've told her this same man assaulted them as well — and that he's one of a few men who appear to be repeat offenders. "These men are still reigning in this industry as powerful people," she says. "We have our Weinsteins here."

But when it comes to naming them publicly, that's where the parallel with Hollywood ends. Whereas Weinstein's accusers have been greeted with virtually universal support from both their colleagues in Hollywood and the wider public, Mollywood women say they worry the reception would be very different if they were to take on major figures.

"We would be plucked out. We would be hushed down," says Thiruvothu.

And not just because of the blaming and shaming that anyone reporting sexual assault in India may face. In India, being in the movie business in particular can open a woman to accusations of having loose morals, says Bina Paul, a veteran film editor: "It's considered rather taboo to enter cinema." So much so that the first hurdle a woman often faces to joining the industry is her family's disapproval.

Thiruvothu agrees. "Even now as an actor, the way I get comments on social media is that, 'Hey, you sleep around. You're not even a pure woman, you're just a whore."

So when cases do come to light, says Paul, "it's always twisted [as] she was willing to, or she wanted to get ahead in her career."

As for the film industry itself, Mollywood's treatment of the actress who was attacked in February hasn't inspired confidence among the women of the WCC. In July police charged one of the industry's most famous actors with hiring the gang that carried out the attack. According to the judge's summary, the prosecution alleges that the actor, Gopalakrishan Padmanabhan Pillai, who goes by the stage name Dileep, bore a grudge against the actress for precipitating the breakup of his marriage by conveying information about him to his then-wife, with whom the actress was close friends.

An attorney for Dileep says he was not involved in any way. And to the dismay of the women in the WCC, some of the most prominent men in Mollywood have started speaking out in Dileep's defense.

Kallingal, the actress who is close friends with the survivor of the February assault, does not dispute these men's right to maintain Dileep's innocence until he is proven guilty. But she says that by neglecting to simultaneously express concern for the actress they have been essentially conveying that "they stand with him and not with her." Worse, she says, "there are people who are questioning [the actress's] morality, her integrity, her character even."

Thiruvothu and others say this climate explains why few women in India's other film industries — including Bollywood — have come forward through the #metoo campaign that has proven so galvanizing in Hollywood.

"I have friends in every single Indian film industry," says Thiruvothu. "This is not just an issue of [Mollywood]."

How to change the culture of silence? The women of the WCC say they concluded that the first step was to band together.

"We thought our individual voices were not strong enough," says Kallingal. "So we should voice our opinion strongly together, in one voice."

Among their key demands is the establishment of a complaints committee with the power to investigate charges of sexual harassment and other forms of discrimination and to punish the perpetrators with sanctions ranging from reprimands to dismissal — even to legal charges, if warranted.

Indian law actually already requires companies of a certain size to institute such systems. But because the film industry functions more informally — with crews coming together for film shoots for several weeks, then disbanding — the assumption has been that the law does not apply. Now the WCC is consulting legal experts to assess if that's really true, and, even if so, what legal steps would be needed to set up a complaints adjudication system for their industry.

In May members of the WCC also met with the chief minister of the state of Kerala, who agreed to their request to appoint a commission that is now studying the question.

But while addressing harassment is a top priority, the WCC also wants to find ways to remedy a host of other forms of gender discrimination that its members say contribute to making their industry inhospitable to women: unequal pay; a lack of maternity benefits; failure by management to provide bathroom facilities for women on set; contracts that permit movie producers to substitute a nude body double without an actress's consent; and just a general culture of not treating women's contributions seriously.

"In every way they belittle you," says Kallingal.

They're also exploring ways to bring more young women into the industry — state-sponsored scholarships to study at film schools, for instance, or state laws that would incentivise companies to hire more women. And not just as actresses or hair stylists. Right now says Paul, "You don't have women gaffers. You don't have women technical staff. We're so outnumbered. You go on to a film set and there are three women and 80 men."

In addition the WCC is encouraging the industry's professional associations to start training workshops on appropriate workplace behavior. For instance, says Thiruvothu, the men who comment on a woman's body on set, "they really do feel that it is normal to do that and that it's actually a compliment."

But she says it's not just the men who need educating: "The women have been taught to giggle and allow it. We all are part of the problem. We all think it's okay."

Indeed the women say their conversations have made them realize how much they had internalized the view that they should minimize inappropriate behavior by men for the sake of keeping the peace.

Thiruvothu recalls how from childhood, whenever she was pinched or groped — like the time when she was 17 and a man at a shopping mall grazed his hands over her breasts and then just walked past — adults told her it was best not to make a scene.

"That's how society has trained us — to take it all in and implode," she says. "I think we've imploded enough. It's coming out now."

Freelance writer Chhavi Sachdev contributed reporting to this story.

[clarice83]

A 'Supernatural' Profits Fight, and the AT&T-TW Merger Issue That Few Are Discussing

Warner Bros. has been battling the creator of one of the longest-running television shows in an arbitration that addresses the fairness of media consolidation and the very mechanism to resolve disputes with those who feel shortchanged. Since AT&T announced in October 2016 that it would be acquiring Time Warner for $85 billion, there has been hardly any talk about how the deal will impact creative talent. When the issue of vertical integration comes up, it's often a discussion on whether distributors including Comcast, Dish, and Verizon will get fair terms to license networks like HBO or TBS, or whether AT&T might try to unfairly compete for telecom customers by holding exclusives on a would-be owned show like Game of Thrones or a franchise like "Batman." AT&T executives insist this would make no business sense, that receiving money for content is the name of the game, and that antitrust history prevents government officials blocking a merger between a supplier and a distributor. But virtually ignored is how this deal will impact those who create, write, star, and direct in popular entertainment. If the question hasn't provoked more examination, there could be a reason for that beyond the complexity of the topic. Almost all contracts in entertainment include arbitration provisions. As a result, most of the disputes that arise from vertical integration are kept hushed. But The Hollywood Reporter has learned about one pending fight in arbitration — and it's a battle that not only involves Warner Bros. and the very lawyer now tasked with fighting the Justice Department, but it also addresses the fairness of media consolidation and the mechanism to resolve disputes from those who feel shortchanged by studios selling to their affiliated distributors. The arbitration is over Supernatural, the CW series that is now in its thirteenth season. It's obviously a successful show given its longevity, but few appreciate the economics underpinning the series. According to a 2013 profit participation statement sent out by Warner Bros., the total gross receipts for the show's first eight seasons amounted to $570 million. But after expenses, distribution fees, interest payments, and money to the talent agency that packaged the show, Warner reported that Supernatural had a deficit of nearly $23 million, meaning nothing in the pool for those entitled to a percentage of net profits. See the profit participation statement:

Eric Kripke, the creator of the fantasy horror series as well as a profit participant, objects to the studio's accounting. In particular, he points to what Warner has been booking in license fees from its affiliated broadcast network. (In fairness to Warner, it must be noted that the CW is only half-owned by Warner Bros. with the other half enjoyed by CBS, which presumably had a say too.) "The show is one of the CW's most successful series," states an audit claim. "It is customary in the television industry for studios to obtain license fees from networks that, starting in Season 5, equal or exceed the cost of producing the show... If Warner had merely received a full cost license fee from the CW for Season 5 through 8, the gross receipts would be increased by $104,005,323." This is what actually occurred:

Kripke, through his loan-out, also raises other issues including transactions with affiliated on-demand services and insufficient documentation to determine whether the license fees from Netflix and Hulu represent fair market value. In response, Warner has invoked arbitration by filing a demand at JAMS, a leading arbitration forum. Representing by a team at O'Melveny & Myers which includes Daniel Petrocelli (recently tapped by AT&T to defend that Time Warner merger in case the government sues to block it), the studio retorts, "Under the parties' agreements, Kripke granted WBTV absolute discretion and control over how and whether to distribute and exploit the Series, including by authorizing WBTV to license the show to an affiliated company." Warner knocks at Supernatural in its arbitration demand letter and says Kripke has gotten the benefit of the bargain with millions of dollars in fixed fees. The studio says the reduction in license fees was necessary. According to its lawyers, "As a result of these deals, Kripke has continued to obtain greater total compensation, because the Series, which otherwise would have been cancelled during its early years based on its performance, has remained on the air." Now that the case is in arbitration, Kripke's attorney is mounting what might best be characterized as a fight priming the bigger fight. It's something that Warner probably didn't expect. Kripke is represented by Ron Nessim, an attorney at Bird, Marella who recently sued AMC on behalf of various Walking Dead executive producers including Robert Kirkman and Gale Anne Hurd. Along with the Frank Darabont litigation, the Walking Dead profits cases represent more exploration over the issue of whether creatives are being treated fairly when studios producing content share a parent company with the outlet distributing the content. Nessim is also the author of a 2015 article in the UCLA Entertainment Law Review entitled "Mandatory Arbitration Provisions Involving Talent and Studios and Proposed Areas for Improvement." In that article, Nessim makes the argument that studios may be advantaged in arbitration thanks to a phenonomenon that critics call "repeat player bias." Meaning, if an arbitration vendor like JAMS wishes to maximize its revenue, that vendor may have financial motives — unconscious or otherwise — to favor parties who arbitrate repeatedly. Nessim's concerns have now impacted how he's handling the Supernatural case. After Warner submitted its demand for arbitration, the parties began volleying letters to each other and to a case manager at JAMS. Correspondence began last month and has continued through this week. Among other things, Nessim is demanding information about financial and professional relationships between JAMS and those involved in the present case. He also is insisting upon disclosures about potential arbitrators. He wants to know all about Warners' prior and pending cases, the amount of the claims, the prevailing parties and so forth. Last and not least, Nessim is pushing JAMS to classify this clash as a "consumer arbitration," which would mean that JAMS would have to publish information about this Supernatural case on its website. Warner has attacked Kripke's endeavor as a "sideshow" while Nessim writes in his most recent letter, "[I]n a 'company town' like Los Angeles, we believe that members of the talent community are justifiably concerned about the danger of arbitration providers and their neutrals being influenced in favor of the entertainment conglomerates that draft the contracts that direct the business to them." The matter remains unresolved. If the Justice Department does move forward with a courtroom effort to stop AT&T's $85 billion acquisition, the issues faced by creatives might not be overtly discussed in a complaint spelling out the competitive harms of vertical integration. But as the government's case continues, it just well might. In an important speech before the American Bar Association on Thursday, the Justice Department's antitrust chief Makan Delrahim addressed vertical mergers. He expressed skepticism of behavioral remedies or divestitures that may only partially remedy the harms of consolidation of suppliers and distributors. He also said, "If a merger is illegal, we should only accept a clean and complete solution, but if the merger is legal we should not impose behavioral conditions just because we can do so to expand our power and because the merging parties are willing to agree to get their merger through." Led by Petrocelli, AT&T may probe any undue influence that CNN-hating Donald Trump has had on the Justice Department, which is supposed to operate independently. At the same time, there's potential skeletons in Hollywood's closet to probe and put before a judge if prosecutors dare. After all, if any problems from a merger of this type aren't dealt with on the front end, how many creatives in Hollywood have confidence such issues will be fairly resolved later on in private forums? 

Source: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/a-supernatural-profits-fight-at-t-tw-merger-issue-few-are-discussing-1059396

[thexerohour]

Show Notes for 10/30/2020

[[[Episode 53 is not yet posted]]]

Facebook deletes multiple accounts after linking lead singer in Christian rock band to QAnon

CANTON (WXYZ) — The lead vocalist of the Christian rock band, Sweet Crystal, was stunned when he went to log onto Facebook one day last week and discovered all nine of the accounts he administers for the band, their brand and business had been deleted because the Goliath of social media had somehow linked him to the conspiracy movement known as QAnon.

"So, because my profile disappeared, they all disappeared. They're all gone," said Marq Andrew Speck of Canton. "That's 11 years of my life and I have never posted anything political in my life. My stuff is all inspirational or videos, photos of the band, that kind of stuff. And it was just a kick in the gut."

QAnon is a far-right movement that believes satan-worshipping pedophiles in the "deep state" are plotting against President Donald Trump.

https://www.wxyz.com/news/local-news/facebook-deletes-multiple-accounts-after-linking-lead-singer-in-christian-rock-band-to-qanon

Trump the Defender 

Trump was less articulate about the very good people on both sides comment, because he was more concerned with defending citizens from the press than he was about PR. Defended Rush Limbaugh on interview on Fox and Friends when the journalist asked who the next conservative voice is. Trump cut her off, saying that we need to take a moment to acknowledge rushes accomplishments, and recognizing how much Rush supported Trump from day one. This was a very positive redirection.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ji8OzFQ-bU

QAnon

This article is about the baseless far-right conspiracy theory.

QAnon is a “far-right conspiracy theory” alleging that a cabal of Satan-worshiping pedophiles is running a global child sex-trafficking ring and plotting against US President Donald Trump, who is battling against the cabal. The theory also commonly asserts that Trump is planning a day of reckoning known as "The Storm", when thousands of members of the cabal will be arrested. No part of the theory is based on fact. QAnon has accused many liberal Hollywood actors, Democratic politicians, and high-ranking officials of being members of the cabal. It also claimed that Trump feigned conspiracy with Russians to enlist Robert Mueller to join him in exposing the sex-trafficking ring and preventing a coup d'état by Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and George Soros.

Learn More

This Documentary is graphic and disturbing. You’ve been warned.

Fall of the Cabal - https://odysee.com/@besthiking1:8/Fall-of-the-Cabal-Full-Documentary----by-Janet-Ossebaard:3

Out of the Shadows - https://odysee.com/@Juan-Sumoradis:d/OUT-OF-THE-SHADOWS---OFFICIAL-DOCUMENTARY---FULL:5

Let’s Talk about Leftist Conspiracies, Activists, and how Dangerous they are

Miles Taylor

Miles Taylor is an American former government official in the George W. Bush and Trump administrations, best known for his previously anonymous criticisms of Donald Trump.

In 2018, while deputy chief of staff to Nielsen, he wrote the New York Times op-ed "I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration" under the pen-name 'Anonymous', which drew widespread attention for its criticism of Trump. In 2019, he published the book A Warning.

In August 2020, while on leave from his job at Google, he produced an ad for Republican Voters Against Trump, denouncing Trump and endorsing Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential election. Taylor was the first former senior Trump administration staffer to endorse Biden.[4] As of August 2020, he is the highest-ranking former member of the administration to endorse Biden.

In October 2020, Taylor revealed himself to be 'Anonymous'.

Neil Morris Ferguson - 1st Coronavirus Models

Neil Morris Ferguson OBE FMedSci (born 1968) is a British epidemiologist[3] and professor of mathematical biology, who specialises in the patterns of spread of infectious disease in humans and animals.  In February 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, which was first detected in China, Ferguson and his team used statistical models to estimate that cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were significantly under-detected in China. He is part of UK's Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team. 

On 5 May 2020, it emerged that Ferguson had resigned from his position as a government advisor on the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) committee after admitting to "undermining" the government's messages on social distancing by meeting up with a married woman. 

Neil has a squeky clean image if yo use Google. if you use Qwant, you can find these kinds of results.

“So the real scandal is: Why did anyone ever listen to this guy?”

John Fund writes:

[Imperial College epidemiologist Neil] Ferguson was behind the disputed research that sparked the mass culling of eleven million sheep and cattle during the 2001 outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease. He also predicted that up to 150,000 people could die. There were fewer than 200 deaths. 

In 2002, Ferguson predicted that up to 50,000 people would likely die from exposure to BSE (mad cow disease) in beef. In the U.K., there were only 177 deaths from BSE.

In 2005, Ferguson predicted that up to 150 million people could be killed from bird flu. In the end, only 282 people died worldwide from the disease between 2003 and 2009.

In 2009, a government estimate, based on Ferguson’s advice, said a “reasonable worst-case scenario” was that the swine flu would lead to 65,000 British deaths. In the end, swine flu killed 457 people in the U.K.

Last March, Ferguson admitted that his Imperial College model of the COVID-19 disease was based on undocumented, 13-year-old computer code that was intended to be used for a feared influenza pandemic, rather than a coronavirus. Ferguson declined to release his original code so other scientists could check his results. He only released a heavily revised set of code last week, after a six-week delay.

Just telling people what they want to hear.

guy? https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2020/05/08/so-the-real-scandal-is-why-did-anyone-ever-listen-to-this-guy/

The Scientist Whose Doomsday Pandemic Model Predicted Armageddon Just Walked Back The Apocalyptic Predictions

British scientist Neil Ferguson ignited the world’s drastic response to the novel Wuhan coronavirus when he published the bombshell report predicting 2.2 million Americans and more than half a million Brits would be killed. After both the U.S. and U.K. governments effectively shut down their citizens and economies, Ferguson is walking back his doomsday scenarios.

https://thefederalist.com/2020/03/26/the-scientist-whose-doomsday-pandemic-model-predicted-armageddon-just-walked-back-the-apocalyptic-predictions/

James Hodgkinson  - Congressional baseball Shooter

On June 14, 2017, during a practice session for the annual Congressional Baseball Game for Charity in Alexandria, Virginia, James Hodgkinson shot U.S. House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, U.S. Capitol Police officer Crystal Griner, congressional aide Zack Barth, and lobbyist Matt Mika. A ten-minute shootout took place between Hodgkinson and officers from the Capitol and Alexandria Police before officers fatally shot Hodgkinson, who died from his wounds later that day at the George Washington University Hospital.[7][8] Scalise and Mika were taken to nearby hospitals where they underwent surgery.[9] Hodgkinson was a left-wing activist. The Virginia Attorney General concluded Hodgkinson's attack was "an act of terrorism... fueled by rage against Republican legislators". Oh yeah, and he’s a Bernie Bro

He earned some hitjbs from media outlets, that hid his motives for the attack, but offered plenty of information for discredit him as a crazy person on his own 

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/james-hodgkinson-history_n_59414028e4b003d5948c6f50

https://heavy.com/news/2017/06/james-hodgkinson-alexandria-gop-baseball-shooter-shooting-gunman-identified-illinois/

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/06/14/james-t-hodgkinson-congressional-shooter-dead-239547

Other Bernie-Bros

 The 19-year-old’s focus on Biden started in the spring, according to the order… Days after Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) suspended his presidential campaign, Treisman, who had suggested in a Reddit post that he had to “save bernie,” posted a meme with the caption questioning whether he should kill Biden. 

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/jim-treacher/2020/10/23/bernie-bro-with-van-full-of-guns-and-explosives-plotted-to-assassinate-biden-media-buries-the-lede-as-usual-n1082276

Project Veritas Video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JC3V2vTTrx4

Willem Van Spronsen - Ice Bomber

The 2019 Tacoma suicide bomber attack occurred when an Antifa domestic terrorist with an assault rifle firebombed a federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility housing hundreds of children with a massive explosion in Tacoma, Washington; The attacker was shot and killed by police. He also burnt a car and was attempting to ignite a large external propane tank.

https://loomered.com/2019/07/14/antifa-terrorist-attacks-ice-detention-facility-with-bombs-and-rifle-leaves-manifesto-behind/

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/tacoma-ice-police-shooting-washington-willem-van-spronsen-antifa-detention-centre-a9004131.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/07/14/armed-man-throwing-incendiary-devices-ice-detention-center-killed-officer-involved-shooting-police-say/

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/07/tacoma-ice-facility-terror-attacker-ided-as-antifa-activist/

[deniscollins]

Goldman Sachs Malaysia Arm Pleads Guilty in 1MDB Fraud

What would you do if you were a Goldman Sachs executive and an employee introduced you to a wealthy Malaysian businessman with extensive government connections known for being a flamboyant businessman wanting you to raise billions of dollars in bonds, but it was unclear how the businessman obtained his wealth: (1) make the deal and earn huge fees, (2) refuse to make the deal? Why? What are the ethics underlying your decision? 

Goldman Sachs played a starring role in the dubious financial engineering that helped spark a global financial crisis last decade, and its 151-year history is dotted with scandals that ended in fines or governmental scoldings. But never before had it had to go before a U.S. judge and admit it was guilty of a crime.

The bank, one of Wall Street’s most powerful firms, admitted criminal wrongdoing by its Malaysian subsidiary on Thursday in a Brooklyn federal courtroom, bringing to a close a globe-spanning foreign bribery case that is the worst black eye in Goldman’s long history.

Goldman employees, the bank said, took part in a scheme to pay $1 billion in bribes to foreign officials. The bank, in turn, arranged the sale of bonds to raise $6.5 billion that was intended to benefit the people of Malaysia but was instead looted by the country’s leaders and their associates.

In the end, the scandal, which netted the bank a relatively paltry $600 million in fees, will cost Goldman and its current and former executives dearly. The bank itself will pay more than $5 billion in penalties to regulators around the world, more than it had to pay for peddling bonds backed by risky mortgages a decade ago. And it has moved to recoup or withhold more than $100 million in executive compensation, a rare move for a Wall Street bank.

In a statement, Goldman’s chief executive, David Solomon, said the former employees who had broken the law had concealed their actions. But he acknowledged that the bank had fallen short, and that employee subterfuge relieved neither he nor anyone else of responsibility.

“When a colleague knowingly violates a firm policy or, much worse, the law, we — as a firm — have to accept responsibility and recognize the broader failure that individual behavior represents for our firm,” he said.

Mr. Solomon and other current and former executives — including the bank’s former chief executive Lloyd Blankfein — will lose a total of $174 million over the leadership failures that took place in connection with the 1Malaysia Development Berhad fund, known as 1MDB.

“It goes with the responsibility of leadership to accept some consequences for things that go wrong on your watch,” Mr. Blankfein, who retired in 2018, said Thursday.

More than $2.7 billion was looted from the fund by powerful figures in Malaysia, including the family of the country’s prime minister at the time, Najib Razak, and Jho Low, a financier with expensive tastes who was the heist’s mastermind and remains an international fugitive.

The money taken from 1MDB funded lavish lifestyles for powerful Malaysians, including friends and family of Mr. Najib. The money bought paintings by van Gogh and Monet, a mega-yacht docked in Bali, a grand piano made of clear acrylic that was given to a supermodel as a gift, and a king’s ransom in jewelry. Pilfered money also financed a boutique hotel in Beverly Hills, a share of the EMI music publishing portfolio and the Hollywood movie “The Wolf of Wall Street.”

Karen Seymour, the bank’s general counsel, officially entered the guilty plea for Goldman’s Malaysian subsidiary, which admitted it had “knowingly and willingly” conspired to violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. The parent company of the bank itself entered into a three-year deferred prosecution agreement on a similar charge, which will be dismissed if Goldman complies with the deal.

While Goldman earned a reputation for ruthlessness during 2008 — its “great vampire squid” nickname still echoes in the public consciousness — it has long been a darling of authorities, and has offered something of a revolving door into public service. Hence its other nickname: “Government Sachs.”

There was little real drama associated with the 1MDB investigation’s resolution: Goldman and prosecutors spent nearly two years working out the terms, and the bank had long ago set aside money for penalties it knew were coming. Three law firms worked on the matter for the bank, and this year Goldman lobbied top officials with the Justice Department for a degree of leniency.

Dennis M. Kelleher, chief executive of Better Markets, a Wall Street watchdog, was underwhelmed by the settlement, calling it “highly favorable” to Goldman. The $2.3 billion fine, he said, is “virtually meaningless,” and he did not expect the Justice Department to show much interest in enforcing the deferred prosecution agreement.

A more serious penalty would have involved the appointment of an independent monitor to oversee the bank’s compliance procedures and a guilty plea by the bank itself, not a subsidiary.

“Goldman’s involvement with 1MDB was no ordinary crime in terms of scale, scope, consequence and egregiousness,” Mr. Kelleher said.

All told, Goldman will have to shell out billions in penalties and returned money in Malaysia, the United States and Hong Kong. The scandal also brought down Mr. Najib, the former prime minister, who is appealing his conviction in a corruption trial in Malaysia.

As part of the plea deal, Goldman has agreed to a statement of facts compiled by federal authorities that it will not be able to dispute. That document outlines a number of internal control failings at Goldman that authorities said should have detected the wrongdoing by its former employees, as well as Mr. Low’s involvement.

Mr. Low, a flamboyant businessman who had befriended many Hollywood celebrities and was known for staging wild and extravagant parties in Las Vegas, was introduced to a Goldman banker, Tim Leissner, in 2009. Mr. Leissner, the husband of the fashion designer and model Kimora Lee Simmons, began talking to Mr. Low about finding ways for Goldman to increase its business activities in Malaysia, but encountered obstacles when some at Goldman objected to Mr. Low’s becoming a client of the bank because it was unclear how he had amassed his wealth.

In early 2011, some in Goldman’s compliance division pushed back on the idea of the bank’s doing business with two of Mr. Low’s companies. Prosecutors wrote that one person at Goldman in March 2011 went so far as to say, “To be clear, we have pretty much zero appetite for a relationship with this individual.”

Even so, Mr. Leissner and Mr. Low remained connected, and Goldman earned the fund’s business. By December 2012, just a few weeks before the bank arranged a third bond deal for 1MDB, Mr. Low met with Mr. Blankfein at Goldman’s offices in New York. — just one of several meetings that top executives at the bank had with him between 2009 and 2014. One meeting, prosecutors wrote, took place on a yacht in southern France.

“Personnel at the bank allowed this scheme to proceed by overlooking or ignoring a number of clear red flags,” Brian C. Rabbitt, acting assistant attorney general for the Justice Department’s criminal division, said during a news conference.

Federal prosecutors had already brought charges against Mr. Leissner and another Goldman banker as well as Mr. Low, who is believed to be living in China. Mr. Leissner has pleaded guilty and agreed to forfeit up to $43.7 million.

Prosecutors acknowledge that Mr. Leissner was deceptive and frequently misled or lied to others at Goldman about whether he was dealing with Mr. Low. But authorities faulted Goldman for accepting those denials at “face value.”

Malaysian prosecutors also brought criminal charges against Goldman and more than a dozen executives, but the bank agreed in July to pay $2.5 billion to resolve that investigation. Goldman also pledged to cover any shortfall from the sale of $1.4 billion in assets that have been seized by prosecutors in the United States and Malaysia.

Much of the property seized belonged to Mr. Low, who has never appeared in court to face charges in the case. He has denied wrongdoing through representatives in the United States, but agreed last year to give up all claims to assets already seized by the government. Those assets, including apartments and a jet, are worth as much as $900 million. His exact whereabouts remains a mystery.

The bank’s Malaysian subsidiary is scheduled to be formally sentenced in December, allowing enough time for Goldman to secure waivers from regulatory agencies so it can operate as normal afterward, such as a fiduciary for employee pension and retirement plans.

While the legal saga is essentially over for Goldman, it will continue for some of the people involved: Mr. Leissner awaits sentencing, and the other banker charged in the United States, Roger Ng, has pleaded not guilty and awaits trial. Another former Goldman executive, Andrea Vella, has been barred from the financial industry by the Federal Reserve.

Goldman’s board said it was taking steps to recoup tens of millions of dollars in compensation from those three as well.

[virginiaprelawland]

William Sadleir, Movie Producer, Charged With COVID-19 Relief Fraud

By Kayla Blevins, Liberty University, Class of 2020

July 17, 2020

Hollywood movie producer William Sadleir, 66, was charged with fraud totaling up to $1.7 million in Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans. PPP loans are loans guaranteed by the Small Business Administration (SBA) under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act. Sadleir was also charged with wire fraud, bank fraud, false statements to a financial institution, and false statements to the SBA. (1) The complaint says that he “misappropriated” the millions he fraudulently stole to fund his “lavish lifestyle, including cash withdrawals and the purchases of a luxury car and a mansion in Beverly Hills.” (2)

Sadleir is accused of violating Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 [15 U.S.C. § 77q(a)], which deals only with disclosure and fraud in the sale of securities. (3) Sadleir was also charged with Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 [15 U.S.C. § 78j(b)], which makes it illegal to “use or employ, in connection with the purchase or sale of any security” a “manipulative or deceptive device or contrivance in contravention of such rules and regulations as the [SEC] may prescribe.” (4) The law defines “security” as stocks, bonds, debentures, a variety of other instruments, or, “in general, any instrument commonly known as a ‘security.’” (5) Finally, Sadleir was charged with Rule 10b-5 [17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5], which bans any act (or omission) that results in fraud (or deceit) in connection with the acquisition or sale of any security.(6)

Sadleir attained $1.7 million and more in forgivable loans guaranteed by the SBA by deceptively claiming the resources would be used to support staff expenses for three film production and supply companies. (7) The truth was that Sadleir used a substantial percentage of the funds for his personal and non-business-related expenses, such as personal credit cards and a car loan. The three entities he controlled to obtain over $1.7 million in PPP loans guaranteed by the SBA for COVID-19 relief were the following: BIT, Aviron Group, LLC, and GroupM Media Services, LLC.

BIT is based in Delaware and is a statutory trust traded on the New York Stock Exchange. (8) It works as a management investment company and it invests in loans and other debt instruments to generate income. (9) The second group that Sadleir owned and operated was Aviron Group, LLC. This is another Delaware company that is based in Beverly Hills, California. Aviron Group, LLC is a company involved in the business of film distribution. (10) Finally, Sadleir owned and operated GroupM Media Services, LLC. Also based in Delaware, it is a limited liability company that Sadleir used to misappropriate BITmonies. (11) This is a fake company because he named it to sound like another legit company, GroupM Company.(12)

The bank approved the monies for Sadleir to use for hisstaff expenses and other specific business-related expenses, such as utilities or rent payments. (13) But these certifications were false, according to the complaint. (14) Once Sadleir received the monies, he fraudulently putmost of it to his private bank account and used it to pay off his credit card debts and car loan. (15) The complaint says he had more than $80,000 on his credit cards and $40,000 on his car loan.(16) Add those expenses together and it totals $120,000.The rest of the money went toward the purchase of a new mansion in Beverly Hills, remodeled his office at Aviron, paid himself and his wife over $350,000, paid $254,000 to settle alegal dispute, purchased a $127,000 Tesla, and spent about $109,000 on home furnishings and remodeling.(17) All totaled, it adds up to $960,000. The purchase of the home and remodeling his office put his debt over the $1.7 million. (18) Therefore, he also is accused of tricking an investor out of another $30 million, in addition to the Paycheck Protection Program, in order to cover up his first fraud. He accomplished this by misrepresenting several fake invoices to BIT concerning his “sham” company GroupM Media Services, LLC. (19) The complaint says,

Relying on the fake December 2016 and February 2017 invoices, BIT authorized Aviron to release funds to GroupM Media Services, LLC. Aviron appears to have released the funds reflected in the fake October 2017 invoice without BIT’s prior knowledge or authorization.  Specifically, Sadleir’s fraudulent invoices claimed to support…payments to GroupM Media Services, LLC. (20)

The plaintiffs are the Securities and Exchange Commission, and they are requesting the court to force Sadleir to pay back all misappropriated monies. Assistant Attorney General Brian Benczkowski of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division said, “This defendant allegedly used Paycheck Protection Program loans to pay off his credit card debts and other personal expenses, rather than using the funds for legitimate business needs.”(21) The PPP grants small-businesses and other organizations to be given loans with a maturity of two years and an interest rate of 1 percent. (22) PPP loan profits must be used on payroll costs, interest on mortgages, rent, and utilities. (23) The PPP allows the interest and principal to be forgiven if businesses spend the proceeds on these expenses within eight weeks of receipt and use at least 75 percent of the forgiven amount for payroll.(24)

PPP loans are loans guaranteed by the Economic Security (CARES) Act. The CARES Act was passed on March 29, 2020, to deliver financial assistance to Americans who were financially devastated because of COVID-19. (25)The Justice Department said, “One source of relief provided by the CARES Act was the authorization of up to $349 billion in forgivable loans to small businesses for job retention and certain other expenses, through the PPP.  In April 2020, Congress authorized over $300 billion in additional PPP funding.” (26)

U.S. Attorney Nick Hanna of the Central District of California said,

This film producer allegedly made a series of misrepresentations to a bank and the Small Business Administration to illegally secure taxpayer money that he then used to fund his nearly empty personal bank account. The Paycheck Protection Program was implemented to help small businesses stay afloat during the financial crisis, and we will act swiftly against those who abuse the program for their own personal gain. (27)

Assistant Director in Charge Paul Delacourt of the FBI’s Los Angeles Field Office said, “The FBI is committed to maintaining the integrity of the PPP and will hold accountable those who cheat the system at the expense of American taxpayers. These funds were designed to be a lifeline to businesses struggling to stay afloat during the current crisis.” (28)

Special Agent in Charge Wade V. Walters of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Office of Inspector General said,

Today’s charges hold the defendant responsible for his alleged actions to swindle money out of a federal program intended to help those in need during a pandemic crisis. When an individual cheats the Paycheck Protection Program out of money, it deprives hard-working Americans and deserving small businesses.  The FDIC OIG is committed to working with our law enforcement partners to investigate financial crimes to preserve the integrity of the nation's banking sector. (29)

When the authorities confronted Sadleir about his fraudulent activities, according to the complaint,Sadleir conceded that he “f—ed up.” (30)

________________________________________________________________

(1)  Securities and Exchange Commission v. William Sadleir, Complaint. July 11, 2020.  https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2020/comp24824.pdf.

(2)  Ibid.

(3)  Theodore J. Cohen, Implication Under Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933--The Effect of Aaron v. SEC, 49 Fordham L. Rev. 1161 (1981). https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2497&context=flr.

(4)  15 U.S.C. § 78j(b);ABA “Section 10(b) Litigation: The Current Landscape.”American Bar Association. Oct. 20, 2014. July 11, 2020. https://www.americanbar.org/groups/business_law/publications/blt/2014/10/03_kasner/.

(5)  15 U.S.C. § 78c(a)(10).

(6)  15 U.S.C. § 78j(b); Wikipedia, “SEC Rule 10b-5”. Wikipedia. July 22, 2019. July 11, 2020. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEC_Rule_10b-5.

(7)  Department of Justice, “Hollywood Film Producer Charged with $1.7 Million COVID-Relief Fraud: Individual Used Funds for Personal Expenses.” Department of Justice. May 22, 2020. July 11, 2020. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/hollywood-film-producer-charged-17-million-covid-relief-fraud.

(8)  Securities and Exchange Commission v. William Sadleir, Complaint. July 11, 2020. https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2020/comp24824.pdf.

(9)  Ibid.

(10)                   Ibid.

(11)                   Ibid.

(12)                   Ibid.

(13)                   Department of Justice, “Hollywood Film Producer Charged with $1.7 Million COVID-Relief Fraud: Individual Used Funds for Personal Expenses.”Department of Justice. May 22, 2020. July 11, 2020. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/hollywood-film-producer-charged-17-million-covid-relief-fraud.

(14)                   Securities and Exchange Commission v. William Sadleir, Complaint. July 11, 2020. https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2020/comp24824.pdf.

(15)                   Ibid.

(16)                   Ibid.

(17)                   Ibid.

(18)                   Ibid.

(19)                   Ibid.

(20)                   Ibid.

(21)                   Department of Justice, “Hollywood Film Producer Charged with $1.7 Million COVID-Relief Fraud: Individual Used Funds for Personal Expenses.”Department of Justice. May 22, 2020. July 11, 2020. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/hollywood-film-producer-charged-17-million-covid-relief-fraud.

(22)                   Ibid.

(23)                   Ibid.

(24)                   Ibid.

(25)                   Ibid.

(26)                   Ibid.

(27)                   Ibid.

(28)                   Ibid.

(29)                   Ibid.

(30)                   Gene Maddaus, “William Sadleir, Ousted Aviron Pictures Chair, Arrested in Alleged $30 Million Fraud.” Variety. May 22, 2020. July 12, 2020. https://variety.com/2020/biz/news/william-sadleir-aviron-pictures-ppp-arrest-1234614600/.