Former
Ohio
legal
aid
attorney
Matthew
Nicholas
Currie,
50,
is
facing
a
mountain
of
felony
charges
for
what
prosecutors
say
is
a
disturbing
stalking
campaign
of
a
teenager
and
other
women.
The
charges
include
40
counts
of
voyeurism;
49
counts
of
illegal
use
of
a
minor
in
nudity-oriented
material;
and
two
counts
of
unauthorized
use
of
a
computer,
cable
or
telecommunication
property.
Prosecutor
Mat
Heck
Jr.
says
the
investigation
began
in
October
of
2024,
when
a
relative
of
Currie
found
disturbing
images
in
his
phone.
“The
search
revealed
that
the
defendant
stalked
a
17-year-old
Oakwood
High
School
student.
The
defendant
went
to
her
residence
on
numerous
occasions
and
surreptitiously
photographed
and
videotaped
her
in
her
bedroom
through
her
windows,
including
in
various
states
of
nudity,
obviously,
all
without
her
knowledge,”
Heck
said.
Authorities
say
that
after
the
victim
left
for
college,
Currie
expanded
his
activities
to
include
other
women.
Four
victims
have
been
identified
so
far.
“A
91-count
indictment
does
not
happen
by
accident,”
said
Oakwood
Chief
Alan
Hill.
“There’s
a
tremendous
amount
of
work
that
goes
into
preparing
a
case
like
this.
…
From
this
point
forward,
this
is
about
holding
his
person
accountable
for
his
actions.”
Currie
left
his
job
at
the
Advocates
for
Basic
Legal
Equality
this
past
summer,
after
a
Parkinson’s
diagnosis.
He
is
scheduled
to
be
arraigned
January
20th.
Kathryn
Rubino
is
a
Senior
Editor
at
Above
the
Law,
host
of
The
Jabot
podcast,
and
co-host
of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
AtL
tipsters
are
the
best,
so
please
connect
with
her.
Feel
free
to
email
her
with
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments
and
follow
her
on
Twitter
@Kathryn1 or
Mastodon
@[email protected].
It’s
a
new
year,
which
means
it
can
be
a
new
you.
Many
take
on
New
Year’s
Resolutions.
Perhaps
a
different
approach
is
better.
1)
Don’t
“set
goals.”
Build
a
plan
you
can
execute
on
your
worst
day.
Most
New
Year’s
resolutions
fail
for
a
boring
reason:
they
aren’t
operational.
“Get
better
at
depositions”
is
a
wish.
“Do
two
deposition-prep
sessions
this
month
and
ask
a
senior
associate
to
critique
my
outline”
is
a
plan.
Start
small
and
specific:
Pick
three
outcomes
you
want
by
year-end
(skills,
relationships,
health,
money
—
your
call).
For
each
outcome,
write
a
short
to-do
list
you
can
start
in
January.
Then
take
it
one
step
further:
break
each
goal
into
“next
actions”
you
can
complete
in
30
minutes.
One
of
your
best
tools
is
embarrassingly
low-tech:
write
down
what
you’re
proud
of
and
keep
it
where
you
can
see
it.
It’s
not
vanity;
it’s
fuel.
Confidence
isn’t
just
a
personality
trait
in
law
—
it’s
part
of
the
product.
2)
Replace
willpower
with
systems:
checklists,
calendars,
and
repetition.
Law
rewards
consistency.
And
consistency
comes
from
systems,
not
motivation.
A
practical
trick:
build
checklists
for
repeatable
tasks
—
witness
interviews,
depo
prep,
discovery
responses.
Most
of
what
we
do
can
be
reduced
to
a
checklist,
and
every
time
you
use
it,
you
improve
it.
That’s
how
you
quietly
become
the
“always
prepared”
associate.
Another
simple
system:
review
your
calendar
forward
so
deadlines
stop
ambushing
you.
And
keep
a
running
case
list
so
you
can
spot
which
file
you’ve
neglected
and
re-engage
it.
3)
Stop
overthinking.
Start
doing.
(Yes,
it’s
that
blunt.)
Lawyers
are
wired
for
analysis.
That’s
why
clients
hire
us
—
and
it’s
also
why
we
get
stuck.
The
profession
breeds
analysis
paralysis:
we
think,
analyze,
ponder,
then
do
more
of
the
same
instead
of
deciding
and
moving.
The
fix
is
uncomfortable:
run
more
experiments.
Draft
the
outline
and
send
it.
Make
the
call
instead
of
sending
the
tenth
email.
Offer
to
take
the
first
cut
at
the
motion
even
if
it
won’t
be
perfect.
Businesses
beta-test.
They
try,
fail,
adjust,
repeat.
Lawyers
should,
too.
4)
Build
your
“pack”
—
not
just
friends,
but
strategic
relationships.
Young
lawyers
love
to
talk
about
“networking”
like
it’s
a
gross
chore.
It’s
not.
It’s
professional
survival.
We’re
pack
animals.
We
work
best
in
teams.
An
innovative
relationship
plan
is
specific.
One
list
worth
stealing:
have
at
least
one
relationship
in
each
category
—
a
lawyer
in
your
practice
area,
a
senior
lawyer,
a
solo,
a
recruiter,
a
bar
leader,
a
legal
journalist,
a
strong
public
speaker,
and
a
legal
marketer.
That’s
not
random.
That’s
an
ecosystem.
And
don’t
wait
for
“networking
events”
to
start.
Build
a
tribe:
three
or
four
like-minded
young
lawyers,
weekly
coffee,
ongoing
support.
The
job
gets
lighter
when
you’re
not
carrying
it
alone.
5)
Put
“reps”
on
your
calendar:
speaking,
writing,
and
client
communication.
Skill
doesn’t
come
from
reading
about
the
skill.
It
comes
from
doing
the
skill
badly
and
then
less
badly.
Public
speaking
is
the
clearest
example.
If
you’re
starting
with
bar
gigs,
your
first
few
presentations
might
stink
—
and
that’s
normal.
There’s
no
replacement
for
reps.
The
best
advice
for
fear
is
exposure
therapy:
scale
it
from
coffee
conversations
to
small
groups
to
bigger
rooms.
Same
with
writing.
If
you
want
to
become
a
strong
legal
writer,
write
more.
If
you
want
to
become
a
visible
lawyer,
publish
and
speak.
The
New
Year
is
a
good
time
to
decide
what
you’re
going
to
be
known
for
—
and
start
building
receipts.
6)
Be
intentional
about
your
career
moves:
don’t
chase
dollars
at
the
expense
of
development.
The
market
will
always
tempt
you:
more
money
elsewhere,
a
shinier
title,
a
faster
track.
But
early
in
your
career,
training
is
leverage.
If
you’re
at
a
place
that
mentors
you,
develops
you,
and
gives
you
opportunities,
think
before
you
leap.
That
doesn’t
mean
tolerate
disrespect
or
dysfunction.
It
means
separate
the
two
questions:
“Am
I
being
treated
professionally?”
“Am
I
being
developed
into
the
lawyer
I
want
to
become?”
Money
matters.
But
so
does
becoming
excellent
—
and
excellence
compounds.
7)
Be
proactive
in
your
cases:
set
the
agenda,
or
someone
else
will.
A
lot
of
young
lawyers
unknowingly
practice
defense
(or
plaintiff)
law
reactively
—
responding,
reacting,
chasing.
You
want
to
push
your
cases
forward
and
dictate
the
speed,
tone,
and
activity.
Said
differently:
be
proactive,
set
the
agenda,
and
move
the
ball
—
regardless
of
which
side
of
the
“v.”
you’re
on.
That
mindset
is
a
career
accelerant.
Partners
trust
the
associate
who
drives
cases,
not
the
one
who
waits
for
instructions
like
a
slow
printer.
8)
Use
AI
wisely
—
and
protect
your
clients
(and
yourself).
AI
is
here,
and
pretending
otherwise
is
malpractice-by-denial.
But
reckless
use
is
just
as
bad.
One
non-negotiable:
warn
clients
not
to
upload
your
work
product
or
attorney-client
communications
into
public
tools.
Prompts
and
uploads
can
be
discoverable,
and
there’s
no
attorney-client
relationship
with
a
chatbot.
Your
New
Year
assignment:
learn
the
tools,
understand
the
risks,
and
become
the
lawyer
who
can
use
technology
without
becoming
its
cautionary
tale.
9)
Guard
your
mental
health
like
it’s
part
of
your
job
(because
it
is).
“The
kids
aren’t
alright”
is
not
a
slogan;
it’s
an
observation
about
a
profession
that
can
be
a
perfect
cauldron
for
anxiety
and
depression.
The
answer
isn’t
“toughen
up.”
The
answer
is
to
build
support,
keep
lines
of
communication
open,
and
stay
aware
of
changes
in
yourself
and
your
colleagues.
Also:
humor
helps.
It’s
an
antidote
and
a
vaccine
for
stress
—
use
it.
The
New
Year
takeaway
This
profession
rewards
the
unsexy
stuff:
discipline,
consistency,
and
doing
the
work
when
you
don’t
feel
like
it.
Hard
work
is
still
the
difference
between
stasis
and
movement.
And
success
is
sustained
discipline.
So
tackle
the
New
Year
like
a
lawyer:
Define
the
objective.
Build
the
system.
Gather
the
right
people.
Take
the
next
step.
Repeat
until
it’s
yours.
And
if
you’re
waiting
for
the
perfect
moment
to
start,
stop.
Every
new
positive
habit
begins
with
a
decision.
Decide.
Frank
Ramos
is
a
partner
at
Goldberg
Segalla
in
Miami,
where
he
practices
commercial
litigation,
products,
and
catastrophic
personal
injury. You
can
follow
him
on LinkedIn,
where
he
has
about
80,000
followers.
The
skills
clients
will
demand
from
their
lawyers
are
about
to
change
dramatically.
Or
are
they?
The
McKinsey
Panel
At
CES
2026,
one
of
the
more
revealing
keynotes
featured
Jason
Calacanis
interviewing
Bob
Sternfels
of
McKinsey
and
Heman
Taneja
of
General
Catalyst
about
the
future
of
employment,
among
other
things.
What
emerged
wasn’t
just
advice
for
new
graduates,
it
signaled
a
roadmap
for
how
lawyers
need
to
think
about
client
origination
and
service.
At
one
point,
the
panelists
touched
on
a
critical
issue:
what
skills
will
be
sought
after
by
employers
with
the
advent
of
agentic
AI.
While
the
panelists
focused
on
those
who
are
getting
out
of
school
in
today’s
tough
employment
market,
what
they
were
talking
about
will
also
apply
to
what
lawyers
will
have
to
do
to
attract
future
clients.
A
Game
Changer?
The
game
changer
in
hiring
according
to
the
panel:
businesses
will
no
longer
be
focused
on
those
who
can
just
solve
problems
because
so
many
problems
can
and
will
be
solved
by
AI.
The
first
question
to
ask
is
instead
what
skills
humans
have
that
GenAI
and
AI
don’t.
According
to
the
panelist,
it
boils
down
to
three
things:
AI
can’t
aspire,
it
can’t
provide
leadership,
and
it
can’t
apply
human
judgment.
New
Skills?
As
a
result,
the
future
will
belong
to
those
who
ask
the
right
questions
about
the
problems.
Who
can
look
at
what
a
problem
means.
Who
can
figure
out
the
impact
the
problem
—
and
more
importantly,
the
solution
—
will
have
for
the
future.
It
will
matter
less
what
school
candidates
go
to
and
more
what
they
aspire
to.
How
resilient
they
can
be.
Leadership
skills
will
be
more
important.
And
drive
and
passion
may
be
everything.
If
you
want
to
get
hired,
the
panelists
say
worry
less
about
your
resume
and
more
about
doing
some
work,
even
if
for
free,
that
demonstrates
what
you
can
do.
That
shows
you
have
new
ways
of
thinking
about
things.
And
how
you
can
change
a
system
or
platform
for
the
person
you
want
to
be
hired
by.
Hiring
will
not
be
premised
on
future
on-the-job
training
since
it
will
take
less
time
to
build
an
agentic
agent
than
for
human
training.
(This
point
was
driven
home
to
me
later
in
a
keynote
by
Caterpillar
CEO
Joe
Creed
and
his
team.
They
displayed
an
AI
bot
that
can
provide
step-by-step
instructions
to
a
heavy
equipment
operator,
bypassing
an
otherwise
steep
learning
curve.)
This
means
that
some
kinds
of
experience
will
matter
less
and
judgment
more.
It
will
not
be
enough
to
recite
information;
it
will
be
the
ability
to
use
that
information
in
gray
areas
where
there
is
no
clear-cut
right
or
wrong
answer.
Being
nimble
and
innovative
will
matter
more.
AI
and
technology
in
general
are
developing
at
exponentially
warp
speed.
Being
adept
at
fast
adoption
and
implementation
will
matter
more
than
ever.
All
sounded
pretty
astute
even
though
the
panelists
lacked
concrete
examples.
But
more
than
that,
I
think
they
misunderstand
what
skills
and
talents
already
set
superstars
apart.
What
sets
themselves
apart.
Thinking
about
this
in
the
legal
context
might
help.
Asking
the
Right
Questions
I
often
handled
serial
litigation—cases
involving
the
same
product,
same
issues,
and
same
harm
in
a
variety
of
jurisdictions—over
my
career.
These
cases
were
often
viewed
as
merely
requiring
a
standard
playbook.
File
an
answer,
take
depositions,
defend
the
cases,
bill
by
the
hour.
But
one
particular
case
was
unusual.
It
needed
a
new
way
of
thinking
and
asking
the
right
questions.
It
meant
noticing
that
most
of
the
individual
cases
resolved
via
settlement
at
mediation,
that
it
was
important
to
the
client
to
move
the
cases
quickly,
and
that
many
of
the
lawyers
on
the
other
side
were
also
very
knowledgeable
about
the
cases.
That
led
to
quickly
getting
the
client
the
information
needed
to
assess
the
exposure
by
asking
the
other
side
to
provide
that
information
with
the
complaint.
In
exchange,
it
meant
a
commitment
to
the
other
side
to
mediate
the
case
within
60
days.
And
it
meant
converting
to
a
flat
fee
instead
of
billable
hour
to
solve
client
goals.
The
result:
a
national
problem
for
the
client
was
resolved
in
a
fraction
of
the
time
previously
thought.
That’s
asking
the
right
questions
and
coming
up
with
a
new
holistic
approach.
What
This
Means
for
Legal
If
the
panelists
were
right,
it
would
seem
at
first
blush
the
legal
world
is
about
to
be
turned
upside
down.
The
traditional
legal
model
assumes
law
schools
will
teach
people
the
law.
Young
lawyers
would
then
learn
how
to
practice
by
apprenticing
at
firms;
the
proverbial
on-the-job
training.
As
they
moved
up
the
ladder,
they
would
get
clients
by
knowing
the
law,
providing
information
to
clients,
and
standing
out
for
their
expertise.
But
that
model
seems
different
than
what
the
panelists
outlined.
And
while
the
panel
was
talking
about
how
to
get
hired
out
of
school,
they
might
just
as
well
have
been
talking
about
how
a
lawyer
gets
hired
by
a
client.
A
client
who
may
think
just
like
those
on
the
panel.
What
does
this
mean?
It
may
no
longer
be
enough
to
be
able
to
do
a
workman-like
job
solving
legal
problems.
Instead,
what
will
matter
more
is
the
ability
to
provide
holistic
answers
to
what
the
client
needs.
It
means
harnessing
the
tech
tools
and
providing
what
clients
can’t
get
from
their
own
AI
agents.
It
requires
asking
better
questions;
questions
the
client
may
not
have
thought
of.
To
have
the
passion,
drive,
and
aspiration
to
see
things
differently.
To
be
able
to
lead
a
team.
To
be
resilient
in
the
face
of
change.
To
demonstrate
your
abilities
by
offering
to
handle
a
client’s
matters
in
new
and
unusual
ways.
Experience
will
matter,
yes,
but
only
to
the
extent
it
supplies
judgment
to
do
things
in
better
ways.
To
get
to
the
core
issues,
not
the
surface
ones.
It
won’t
be
enough
to
send
a
client
an
email
notifying
them
of
a
development
the
client
will
likely
find
on
their
own.
It
won’t
be
enough
to
tell
them
the
news;
you
will
need
to
tell
them
what
it
means.
It
won’t
be
enough
to
be
an
expert
in
a
field.
You
will
need
to
show
how
you
can
use
that
expertise
to
do
things
an
AI
agent
can’t
do
and
the
client
can’t
access
on
their
own.
That
takes
judgment.
But
Then
Again,
Isn’t
That
What
Superstars
Have
Always
Done?
But
then
again,
isn’t
that
what
superstar
lawyers
and
originators
have
always
done?
Isn’t
that
what
my
example
demonstrates?
It’s
that
ability
and
willingness
to
adapt
to
new
issues
and
challenges
and
use
those
challenges
for
your
benefit.
It’s
not
being
constrained
by
experience
but
using
it.
It’s
asking
the
right
questions
and
seeing
where
things
may
be
going.
The
question
is
not
what
surface
skills
will
get
me
hired.
It’s
asking
what
conceptual
approach
will
provide
what
clients
really
need.
And
in
some
cases,
that
means
figuring
out
the
needs
before
the
client
does.
Like
showing
the
client
the
solution
to
their
legal
budget
crisis
is
for
you
to
change
your
billing
model.
Asking
what
skills
you
need
for
the
future
and
how
to
get
them
is
the
wrong
question.
The
right
question
is
how
you
should
philosophically
approach
what
you’re
doing
in
ways
a
bot
can’t.
That
philosophy
must
include
being
aspirational,
having
passion,
and
being
ready
to
change
and
adapt.
And
putting
your
client
first.
Want
to
be
hired
in
the
future?
Start
with
the
right
mindset.
Stephen
Embry
is
a
lawyer,
speaker,
blogger,
and
writer.
He
publishes TechLaw
Crossroads,
a
blog
devoted
to
the
examination
of
the
tension
between
technology,
the
law,
and
the
practice
of
law.
WASHINGTON
—
President
Donald
Trump
issued
an
executive
order
today
that
prohibits
defense
companies
from
making
share
repurchases
and
paying
dividends
to
shareholders,
as
well
as
places
restrictions
on
executive
compensation,
unless
companies
make
investments
to
modernize
weapons
production
facilities.
“All
United
State
Defense
Contractors,
and
the
Defense
Industry
as
a
whole,
BEWARE:
While
we
make
the
best
Military
Equipment
in
the
World
(No
other
Country
is
even
close!),
Defense
Contractors
are
currently
issuing
massive
Dividends
to
their
Shareholders
and
massive
Stock
Buybacks,
at
the
expense
and
detriment
of
investing
in
Plants
and
Equipment.
This
situation
will
no
longer
be
allowed
or
tolerated!”
Trump
said
today
in
a
post
on
his
Truth
Social
media
platform,
shortly
before
the
EO
was
published
on
the
White
House
website.
“Therefore,
I
will
not
permit
Dividends
or
Stock
Buybacks
for
Defense
Companies
until
such
time
as
these
problems
are
rectified
—
Likewise,
for
Salaries
and
Executive
Compensation.
MILITARY
EQUIPMENT
IS
NOT
BEING
MADE
FAST
ENOUGH!”
he
said.
The
executive
order
formally
says,
“Effective
immediately,
they
are
not
permitted
in
any
way,
shape,
or
form
to
pay
dividends
or
buy
back
stock,
until
such
time
as
they
are
able
to
produce
a
superior
product,
on
time
and
on
budget.”
“Every
firm
across
our
economy
has
a
right
to
profit
from
prudent
investment
and
hard
work,
but
the
American
defense
industrial
base
also
has
the
responsibility
to
ensure
that
America’s
warfighters
have
the
best
possible
equipment
and
weapons.
These
two
objectives
are
not
mutually
exclusive,”
the
EO
says.
The
executive
order
mandates
that
Secretary
of
Defense
Pete
Hegseth
take
30
days
to
review
contractor
performance
and
identify
any
who
are
falling
short
—
from
“underperforming”
on
relevant
contracts,
to
failing
to
invest
in
production
capacity,
to
“not
sufficiently
prioritizing
United
States
government
contracts.”
If
so
identified,
Hegseth
is
to
work
with
the
company
to
remediate
the
issues
and,
if
that
fails,
Hegseth
is
to
“initiate
immediate
actions
to
secure
remedies”
through
a
number
of
legal
and
regulatory
channels,
such
as
the
Defense
Production
Act.
It
also
suggests
the
government
may
“cease
ongoing
advocacy”
for
underperforming
companies
when
it
comes
to
potential
deals
with
foreign
customers.
The
order
also
bakes
in
the
requirement
for
future
contracting,
saying
that
within
60
days
Hegseth
will
“ensure
that
any
future
contract
with
any
new
or
existing
defense
contractor,
including
a
renewal,
contains
a
provision
prohibiting
both
any
stock
buyback
and
corporate
distributions”
during
a
period
of
“underperformance.”
Elsewhere,
the
EO
mandates
that
executive
compensation
be
tied
not
to
traditional
financial
metrics
for
the
company,
but
to
“on-time
delivery,
increased
production,
and
all
necessary
facilitation
of
investments
and
operating
improvements
required
to
rapidly
expand
our
United
States
stockpiles
and
capabilities.”
Executives,
the
EO
says,
could
have
their
salaries
capped
at
currently
levels
—
presumably
more
flexible
than
Trump’s
original
demand
on
social
media
that
CEOs
not
make
more
than
$5
million.
In
his
social
media
post,
Trump
lists
several
actions
he’d
like
to
see
from
defense
companies
—
namely
building
new
production
plants
and
speeding
up
maintenance
and
repair
—
but
does
not
list
specific
metrics
that
companies
must
meet
to
regain
the
ability
to
buy
back
stock,
increase
executive
compensation
or
pay
dividends.
Singling
Out
One
Firm
In
another
post
on
Truth
Social
prior
to
the
EO,
Trump
took
aim
at
one
supposedly
offending
defense
company:
Raytheon,
the
weapon’s
building
arm
of
RTX,
responsible
for
manufacturing
products
like
the
Patriot
air
and
missile
defense
system.
Raytheon,
Trump
wrote,
“has
been
the
least
responsive
to
the
needs
of
the
Department
of
War,
the
slowest
in
increasing
their
volume,
and
the
most
aggressive
spending
on
their
Shareholders
rather
than
the
needs
and
demands
of
the
United
States
Military.
Raytheon
seems
to
think
this
is
the
Biden
Administration,
and
this
is
‘business
as
usual,’
IT’S
NOT!
Either
Raytheon
steps
up,
and
starts
investing
in
more
upfront
Investment
like
Plants
and
Equipment,
or
they
will
no
longer
be
doing
business
with
Department
of
War.”
The
president
added
that
RTX
must
stop
conducting
stock
buybacks
if
it
wants
further
business
with
the
US
government.
Breaking
Defense
reached
out
to
RTX
as
well
as
the
five
other
top
publicly
traded
defense
companies
for
comment.
RTX,
Boeing,
L3Harris
and
General
Dynamics
declined
to
comment.
Lockheed
Martin
and
Northrop
Grumman
did
not
immediately
respond
to
the
request
for
comment.
Roman
Schweizer,
an
analyst
with
TD
Cowen,
said
prior
to
the
EO’s
publication
that
Trump’s
statements
could
come
as
a
surprise
to
industry,
as
Tuesday’s
announcement
of
an
agreement
between
Lockheed
Martin
and
the
Pentagon
to
triple
PAC-3
production
was
seen
as
a
positive
sign
for
defense
contractors.
“Ultimately,
this
announcement
[from
Trump]
results
in
more
questions
than
answers,
and
we
would
expect
DoW
to
clarify
the
President’s
intent
at
some
point
and
establish
definitions
and
benchmarks
for
the
policy.
We
expect
Congress
to
have
questions
about
the
policy
as
well,”
he
wrote
in
a
note
to
investors.
In
December,
Schweizer
wrote
that
implementing
an
EO
targeting
defense
companies
could
result
in
“a
host
of
regulatory
and
legal
issues,”
including
on
whether
firms
like
Amazon
or
Microsoft
could
be
considered
defense
contractors
due
to
their
contracts
with
the
military
and
US
intelligence
agencies. In
today’s
note,
he
stated
that
his
take
remains
the
same.
Hegseth
expressed
support
for
the
pending
restrictions,
posting
a
screenshot
of
the
Truth
Social
post
on
X
and
adding
the
“100”
emoji.
In
another
social
post
guaranteed
to
raise
eyebrows
in
the
defense
industry,
Trump
said
he
wanted
the
defense
budget
for
fiscal
2027
to
be
raised
to
$1.5
trillion
—
more
than
50
percent
its
current
level.
“This
will
allow
us
to
build
the
“Dream
Military”
that
we
have
long
been
entitled
to
and,
more
importantly,
that
will
keep
us
SAFE
and
SECURE,
regardless
of
foe,”
the
president
wrote,
suggesting
purported
revenue
from
his
foreign
tariff
regime
would
offset
the
cost.
Updated
on
1/7/2026
at
5:32
p.m.
ET
to
include
information
from
a
later
Trump
post
on
Truth
Social.
*
“Bulk”
of
SDNY
prosecutors
are
spending
their
days
reviewing
Epstein
files.
You
know,
there
are
discovery
tools
that
can
handle
massive
productions
like
this
very
quickly
if
the
only
issue
is
protecting
the
victims
and
not,
say,
using
redactions
to
cover
up
and
mislead.
[Law360]
*
Quinn
Emanuel
equity
partners
averaging
$9
million
this
year.
[Bloomberg
Law
News]
*
Trump
seeks
millions
in
legal
fees
from
Georgia
election
interference
prosecution.
[NBC
News]
*
DOJ
complaining
about
Luigi
Mangione’s
lawyers
pointing
out
that
Pam
Bondi
worked
at
a
lobbying
firm
that
represented
United
Healthcare.
[ABC
News]
*
Is
a
pinstripe
suit
acceptable
for
interviews?
[Legal
Cheek]
From
the
Land
Reform
Program
to
the
structured
oversight
of
the
Tobacco
Industry
and
Marketing
Board
(TIMB),
from
pricing
frameworks
to
agronomic
support
systems,
the
state
has
quietly
but
effectively
rebuilt
a
globally
competitive
sector.
Today,
Zimbabwe
is
not
merely
a
tobacco
producer;
it
is
a
world-class
source
of
premium
flue-cured
Virginia
tobacco,
generating
over
US$1.2
billion
in
annual
foreign
currency
earnings
and
sustaining
the
livelihoods
of
nearly
1.2
million
Zimbabweans,
from
farming
households
to
auction
floors
and
logistics
chains.
This
achievement
should
be
acknowledged
for
what
it
is:
a
policy
success.
But
it
is
also
incomplete.
Agricultural
recovery
is
only
the
first
chapter
in
the
value
story.
The
truly
transformative
opportunity
now
lies
in
converting
this
production
strength
into
industrial
depth
moving
decisively
from
exporting
raw
leaf
to
exporting
value-added
tobacco
products.
Crucially,
the
policy
foundation
for
this
shift
already
exists.
Zimbabwe
has,
over
the
past
few
years,
quietly
assembled
the
core
building
blocks
of
a
modern
export
manufacturing
economy:
●
Special
Economic
Zones
(SEZs)
with
competitive
fiscal
incentives
●
Export-oriented
manufacturing
licenses
●
USD-denominated
operating
and
banking
frameworks
●
Capital
protection
and
investment
guarantees
These
are
not
abstract
policy
ideas.
They
are
the
same
instruments
used
by
global
manufacturing
hubs
such
as
Dubai,
Vietnam,
and
Eastern
Europe
to
attract
patient
capital
and
anchor
high-value
industrial
activity.
The
question
before
us,
therefore,
is
no
longer
what
policies
are
needed.
The
question
is
how
quickly
and
effectively
we
activate
the
policies
already
in
place.
For
tobacco,
activation
means
building
SEZ-based,
export-only
processing
and
toll-manufacturing
platforms.
Facilities
where
Zimbabwean
tobacco
is
not
simply
baled
and
shipped,
but
processed,
blended,
cut,
and
manufactured
for
international
brand
owners
under
strict
compliance
and
traceability
frameworks.
This
toll-manufacturing
model
is
proven
globally.
It
allows
international
tobacco
companies
to
access
premium
leaf
and
skilled
processing
capacity
without
taking
agricultural
risk.
For
Zimbabwe,
it
delivers
something
far
more
powerful:
●
High-value
technical,
engineering,
and
managerial
jobs
●
Skills
transfer
and
industrial
learning
●
And,
critically,
the
retention
of
far
more
value
per
kilogram
of
tobacco
produced
Processing
at
origin
is
not
a
slogan.
It
is
an
economic
multiplier.
The
capital
to
unlock
this
next
phase
already
exists
within
Zimbabwe.
Pension
funds,
insurers,
and
institutional
investors
collectively
manage
significant
pools
of
long-term
capital
seeking
secure,
asset-backed,
development-aligned
investments.
What
they
require
are
bankable,
well-governed
projects
with
credible
sponsors,
strong
offtake
structures,
and
clear
alignment
to
national
priorities.
Export-focused
tobacco
processing
platforms,
anchored
in
SEZs
and
supported
by
long-term
international
contracts,
represent
exactly
this
kind
of
asset
class.
Re-industrialization
is
not
the
responsibility
of
the
government
alone.
It
is
a
shared
national
project.
About
the
Author Smart
Chireru
is
the
Founder
and
Chief
Executive
Officer
of
Bullion
Essence
Pvt
Ltd,
a
Zimbabwe-based
export
manufacturing
and
investment
company
focused
on
value
addition,
industrialisation,
and
foreign-currency
export
growth.
About
Bullion
Essence Bullion
Essence
is
developing
an
export-only,
SEZ-based
tobacco
processing
and
toll-manufacturing
platform
designed
to
process
Zimbabwean
tobacco
into
higher-value
products
for
global
markets.
The
company’s
model
integrates
compliant
processing,
skilled
manufacturing,
and
long-term
export
contracts
to
support
Zimbabwe’s
transition
from
primary
production
to
industrial
value
creation.
Both
Houses
of
Parliament
adjourned
last
month
to
the
10th
February.
In
this
Bill
Watch
we
shall
outline
the
business
they
are
expected
to
deal
with
when
they
resume,
but
please
bear
the
following
points
in
mind:
When
the
National
Assembly
and
the
Senate
adjourn,
they
set
down
all
outstanding
business
on
their
Order
Papers
(i.e.
their
agendas)
for
the
next
appropriate
sitting
day.
There
is
usually
too
much
to
be
covered
in
one
day
so
whatever
is
not
dealt
with
is
postponed
to
the
next
appropriate
day.
Both
Houses
of
Parliament
can
change
the
order
in
which
they
consider
business.
In
a
further
Bill
Watch
we
shall
publish
the
Government’s
legislative
agenda
announced
by
the
President
in
October
last
year.
THE
NATIONAL
ASSEMBLY
Tuesday
10th
February
Bills
to
be
dealt
with:
The
Assembly
is
expected
to
deal
with
the
following
Bills:
Zimbabwe
School
Examinations
Council
Amendment
Bill [link]
The
Committee
Stage
of
this
Bill
is
due
to
begin
Insurance
and
Pensions
Commission
Amendment
Bill[link]
Consideration
of
the
PLC’s
adverse
report
on
this
Bill
will
continue.
Reports
of
parliamentary
committees
The
Assembly
will
deal
with
reports
on
the
following
topics:
Adverse
reports
by
the
PLC
on
the
constitutionality
of
various
local
authority
by-laws
Audited
2022
and
2023
financial
statements
of
the
Ministry
of
Lands,
Agriculture,
Fisheries,
Water
and
Rural
Development
Audited
2022
financial
statements
of
the
Ministry
of
Finance,
Economic
Development
and
Investment
Promotion
The
state
of
vocational
training
centres
Projects
implemented
by
the
Lotteries
and
Gaming
Board
as
part
of
its
corporate
social
responsibility
2024
fourth
quarter
Budget
Performance
Report
of
the
Ministry
of
Information,
Publicity
and
Broadcasting
Services
Challenges
facing
university
students
(motion
to
be
restored
to
the
Order
Paper)
The
2024
fourth
quarter
Budget
Performance
Reports
of
the
Ministries
of
Public
Service,
Labour
and
Social
Welfare
and
Skills
Audit
and
Development
The
state
of
digital
information
centres
in
Zimbabwe.
Reports
of
constitutional
commissions
and
statutory
bodies
to
be
considered
The
Assembly
will
be
asked
to
consider:
2024
report
of
the
Zimbabwe
Electoral
Commission
2024
report
of
the
Judicial
Service
Commission
2024
report
of
the Attorney-General’s
Office
2024
report
of
the
National
Prosecuting
Authority
2024
report
of
the
Zimbabwe
Human
Rights
Commission
Reports
of
the
Zimbabwe
Electoral
Commission
on
various
by-elections
held
between
October
2024
and
January
2025
2024
report
of
the
Zimbabwe
Gender
Commission.
2024
report
of
the
Zimbabwe
Anti-Corruption
Commission
Motions
on
the
National
Assembly
order
paper
Motions
set
to
be
debated
by
the
Assembly
will
include
the
following
topics:
The
erection
of
public
galleries
and
statues
to
preserve
Zimbabwe’s
cultural
heritage
The
establishment
of
succession
rules
and
procedures
for
chiefs
Wednesday
11th
February
Note:
On
Wednesdays,
questions
and
other
private
members’
business
have
precedence
over
government
business.
Questions
set
down
for
answer
Among questions set
down
for
Ministers
to
answer
in
the
National
Assembly
on
Wednesday
11th
February
are questions on the
following
issues:
Construction
of
dams
and
other
infrastructure
The
cost
of
seed
maize
Provision
of
agricultural
inputs
to
organisations
supporting
persons
with
disabilities
Payment
of
allowances
owing
to
persons
employed
on
registration
exercises
in
2023
Statistics
on
convictions
for
procuring
in
2023
and
2024
The
contract
between
the
Government
and
a
private
company
for
the
provision
of
passports
Alignment
of
the
Citizenship
of
Zimbabwe
Act
with
the
Constitution
The
Government
Employees
Microfinance
Scheme
(GEMS)
Government
plans
to
boost
the
economy
of
Chinhoyi
The
establishment
of
local
economic
development
agencies
to
stimulate
economic
growth
in
provinces
Revenue
from
the
issue
of
number
plates
between
January
and
June
2025
Fraudulent
certificates
used
to
gain
entry
to
nurses’
training
How
the
government
balances
its
commitment
to
democracy
and
human
rights
with
trade
relations
with
autocratic
regimes
Health
assistance
for
Zimbabwean
women
in
South
Africa
The
status,
functionality
and
effectiveness
of
the
Rent
Board
Radio
and
television
time
allocated
to
political
parties
between
2023
and
2025
and
whether
the
Zimbabwe
Electoral
Commission
monitors
media
fairness
between
elections
Exemption
of
deaf
persons
from
need
to
have
vehicle
radio
licences
Revenue
from
issue
of
vehicle
licences
between
January
and
June
2025
Special
presidential
bonuses
for
civil
servants
Details
on
the
employment
of
primary
and
secondary
school
teachers
Assistance
for
mentally
challenged
persons
who
are
homeless
Votes
for
Zimbabweans
in
the
diaspora
Compensation
for
victims
of
political
violence
since
1980
Measures
to
keep
retailers
and
industries
in
business
Supply
of
electricity
to
local
authorities
at
non-commercial
rates
Whether
only
ZANU-PF
members
are
to
be
recruited
into
the
Army
THE
SENATE
Tuesday
10th
February
Bill
to
be
dealt
with
The
Senate
is
expected
to
deal
with
the
following
Bill:
Obviously
Wrong,
But
Probably
Not
Wrong
Enough
For
Qualified
Immunity:
Mayor
Jacob
Frey
has
since
told
ICE
to
leave
his
state.
Grand
Opening,
Grand
Closing:
Firm
starts
off
new
year
by
shutting
its
doors
forever.
So
Much
Money
Can
Only
Mean
One
Thing:
Layoffs
are
coming.
Why
Keep
Up
The
Act?:
Judge
makes
Lindsey
Halligan
explain
why
she’s
pretending
to
be
U.S.
Attorney.
Texas
Supreme
Court
Just
Gave
Themselves
A
New
Job:
They’ve
severed
ties
with
ABA
accreditation.
Kinda.
According
to
recent
analysis
by
Bloomberg
Law,
a
review
of
Form
10-K
filings
from
S&P
500
firms
during
fiscal
years
2019–2024
revealed
AI-related
disclosures
increased
how
much?
Hint:
The
majority
of
these
disclosures
appeared
in
the
“risk
factors”
of
the
Securities
And
Exchange
Commission
forms.
Fraud
is
bad.
When
it
takes
place,
it
should
be
uncovered
and
prosecuted.
That
was
exactly
what
was
happening
before
dimwitted
MAGA
internet
addicts
melted
down
this
week
over
old
and
largely
debunked
daycare
fraud
claims
made
(up)
by
a
23-year-old
right-wing
YouTuber.
These
allegations
got
so
much
traction
online
because
they
involve
Minnesota’s
large
Somali
population
and
MAGA
cult
members
are
foaming-at-the-mouth
racists.
I
wish
it
wasn’t
that
simple,
but
it
is.
A
little
background
here:
claims
of
fraud
happening
in
Minnesota
daycare
facilities
run
by
Somali
immigrants
date
back
to
at
least
2018,
when
Minnesota
Gov.
Tim
Walz
had
just
been
elected.
At
that
time
a
Fox
affiliate
(who
else?)
“reported”
(in
other
words,
fabricated)
allegations
that
up
to
$100
million
in
childcare
funds
were
being
funneled
to
a
Somali
terror
group
overseas.
In
March
of
2018,
two
months
after
Walz
became
governor,
nonpartisan
Legislative
Auditor
Jim
Nobles
released
a
report
on
fraud
in
Minnesota’s
daycare
assistance
program
that
found
that
although
fraud
was
a
persistent
concern
there
was
no
evidence
to
substantiate
the
claim
of
$100
million
of
fraud
in
the
state’s
daycare
system
per
year,
nor
was
any
evidence
uncovered
of
any
taxpayer
funds
being
sent
to
terrorists.
Flash
forward
a
few
years
to
the
pandemic.
Millions
in
taxpayer
funds
from
the
USDA
were
paid
primarily
to
the
Twin
Cities
nonprofit
Feeding
Our
Future
through
a
Minnesota
state
agency
overseeing
emergency
food
programs
on
the
state
level.
The
money
was
paid
out
in
2020,
and
by
April
of
2021,
staff
at
that
Minnesota
state
agency
realized
something
was
very
wrong.
They
informed
the
FBI
that
Feeding
Our
Future
was
diverting
taxpayer
funds
away
from
child
nutrition
programs.
Following
an
official
investigation,
several
FBI
raids,
and
the
dissolution
of
Feeding
Our
Future,
prosecutions
of
those
involved
in
the
fraud
began
in
September
of
2022.
That
very
month,
Republicans
applauded
Walz
for
catching
the
fraud
so
early.
Just
kidding!
Instead,
even
as
the
prosecutions
began,
they
blamed
him
for
fraud
committed
by
third
parties
he
had
zero
involvement
with,
and
they
haven’t
shut
up
about
it
since.
Many
people
were
convicted
for
the
Feeding
Our
Future
fraud
as
the
criminal
cases
worked
their
way
through
the
system.
Not
one
of
them
was
a
Minnesota
state
employee.
No
state
employee
was
ever
implicated
in
this
case
in
doing
anything
illegal.
The
process
did,
however,
expose
vulnerabilities
in
Minnesota
to
public
program
fraud,
which
led
to
expanded
investigations
in
2024
and
2025.
There
were
more
prosecutions,
and
more
oversight
was
installed.
Some,
but
not
all,
of
the
fraud
defendants
prosecuted
during
this
multiyear
campaign
were
indeed
of
Somali
descent
(the
ringleader
of
the
Feeding
Our
Future
fraud
was
a
regular
old
Karen-looking
blonde
white
lady).
Then,
on
the
day
after
Christmas,
egged
on
by
Minnesota
Republicans,
23-year-old
content
creator
Nick
Shirley
released
a
social
media
video
in
which
he
visited
Twin
Cities
daycare
centers,
claimed
there
were
not
children
at
them,
and
fantasized
that
he
had
“uncovered
over
$110,000,000
[of
Somali
daycare
fraud]
in
ONE
day.”
His
video
could
have
just
as
easily
been
—
could
have
much
more
easily
been,
in
fact
—
a
video
of
daycare
employees
not
wanting
to
expose
the
children
under
their
care
to
a
random
creepy
young
man
with
a
camera
who
had
no
good
reason
to
be
there.
State
inspectors
immediately
followed
up
with
each
of
the
businesses
featured
in
Shirley’s
video
and
found
all
of
them
to
be
operating
as
expected.
Despite
Shirley’s
claims
being
almost
instantly
debunked,
they
went
viral
on
the
right-wing
internet,
because,
see
above,
howling
racists.
As
much
as
he
initiates
many
ridiculous
lies
himself,
he
also
follows
along
with
the
catchy
ones,
so
President
Donald
Trump
is
still
riding
the
coattails
of
Shirley’s
viral
video.
He’s
deployed
thousands
more
federal
immigration
agents
to
the
Twin
Cities
and
froze
federal
childcare
funds
owed
to
five
blue
states.
That
won’t
be
the
end
of
it
either.
In
the
wake
of
this
circus,
Walz
ended
his
campaign
for
a
third
term
as
Minnesota
governor.
“Every
minute
that
I
spend
defending
my
own
political
interest
would
be
a
minute
I
can’t
spend
defending
the
people
of
Minnesota
against
the
criminals
who
prey
on
our
generosity
and
the
cynics
who
want
to
prey
on
our
differences,”
he
said.
By
vastly
exaggerating
the
grain
of
truth
in
their
racist
fraud
fever
dreams,
Trump
and
his
supporters
may
have
found
a
temporary
justification
for
their
grotesqueries.
But
by
putting
his
state
above
his
own
ambitions,
Tim
Walz
has
ensured
that
these
MAGA
lies
will
swiftly
disappear.
In
an
age
when
a
few
hours
and
a
sensational
unverified
video
clip
can
change
everything,
it’s
difficult
to
remember
the
value
of
long-term
thinking.
Nevertheless,
things
do
still
matter
beyond
the
daily
news
cycle.
Ten
years
from
now,
Walz’s
legacy
will
be
cemented
in
Minnesota
and
nationwide;
MAGA’s
grassroots
army
of
liars
will
all
be
long
forgotten.
Jonathan
Wolf
is
a
civil
litigator
and
author
of Your
Debt-Free
JD (affiliate
link).
He
has
taught
legal
writing,
written
for
a
wide
variety
of
publications,
and
made
it
both
his
business
and
his
pleasure
to
be
financially
and
scientifically
literate.
Any
views
he
expresses
are
probably
pure
gold,
but
are
nonetheless
solely
his
own
and
should
not
be
attributed
to
any
organization
with
which
he
is
affiliated.
He
wouldn’t
want
to
share
the
credit
anyway.
He
can
be
reached
at [email protected].
Kathryn
