And to that I say, “Bite me.”

Shadé Zahrai, a CNBC contributor, weighs in with her advice regarding “one of the most effective ways to stop a manipulator.“ She says that the magic phrase is: “That’s interesting. Tell me more.”

This is passive-aggressive weenieism, as well as dishonest. I don’t tell people that I find something interesting unless it is, in fact interesting. Doing so is a lie. If I’m using “interesting” sarcastically but want “the manipulator” to think I’m sincere, that’s deceit, another form of dishonesty. Much of the time the “expert’s” use of “That’s interesting” is just another version of “Why bless your heart!”

So the expert says that the way to foil “manipulators” is to be manipulative. How expert of her! She recommends versions of her all-purpose defense if someone is trying to subtly coerce you, if someone is trying to guilt-trip you, and if someone is trying to gaslight you. Her discovery is nothing but warmed over 70’s era versions of the obnoxious (and and manipulative) deflections “I hear you” and “I acknowledge the validity of your feelings.” It’s conflict avoidance when conflict is needed.

If someone attacks me with an unfounded or unfair accusation, I might say, “Ok, produce your evidence, if you have any.” I might say, “That doesn’t deserve a response.” I might say, “What’s the matter with you?” But “That’s interesting” isn’t in the cards.

I don’t find it interesting when someone denies what I know to be true. I’ll say, “Nope, you’re wrong; your memory has betrayed you, or you’re lying. Which is it?” If someone says, “After everything I’ve done for you, this is how you repay me?” I will say, “I’m not repaying you. I’m doing what I believe has to be done, and our past interaction has nothing to do with it. I’m sorry my decision upsets you.” If someone says, “If you really cared, you’d agree with me, ” I’ll respond with, “Don’t try that emotional blackmail on me. It’s insulting, and I resent it.”

All around us now we are under psychological attack by people who want us be passive, fearful wimps, terrified on taking on liars, bullies and jerks directly. Don’t let them get away with it.

That video was posted two days ago by Irish filmmaker Ruairi Robinson, who was nominated for an Oscar in the short film category in 2002. He says his faux fight came from a two-line prompt into A.I. bot Seedance 2.0, owned by the Chinese parent company of TikTok, ByteDance.

The video went viral after screenwriter Rhett Reese (“Deadpool & Wolverine”, “Zombieland”) posted dire thoughts about what it portends on Twitter/”X.” earlier this week.“I hate to say it,” Reese wrote. “It’s likely over for us.”

““In next to no time,” he wrote later, ” one person is going to be able to sit at a computer and create a movie indistinguishable from what Hollywood now releases. True, if that person is no good, it will suck. But if that person possesses Christopher Nolan’s talent and taste (and someone like that will rapidly come along), it will be tremendous.” Now Hollywood is trembling in terror.

Stop me if you’ve heard this one…

My favorite Valentine’s Day memory comes from when I was a student at Harvard, directing my first show at nearby M.I.T. I had bemoaned to my cast how the holiday was bound to be a lonely one for me, as I had no girlfriend at the time and my room mates, who were all from far-flung states, where certain to be getting copious love notes in their mail boxes while mine would be, as usual, empty. (My home was in Arlington, Mass., a quick bus ride from Cambridge.) When February 14th arrived and the usual morning mail call with it, my room mate who was on mail duty that day announced, “Dick, you have eight cards. Slip, you have two. Mark, you got 12 cards. Worldman [he was Hawaiian], you also have 12. I have three, and Shithead (my room mates often called me “Shithead”) you have…these.”

And he poured out 58 little envelopes on the floor, each containing one of those little Valentines we used to exchange in elementary school. An M.I.T. coed named Nancy Green (not the original Aunt Jemima) in my chorus had persuaded every student in her dorm to write a personal message on one of those little cards, and she stamped, addressed and mailed them. It was a classic random act of kindness. Thanks, Nancy—wherever you are.

Meanwhile…

This one really troubled me, because it reinforces a public misunderstanding about lawyer ethics and one that many lawyers don’t understand either. [The first two installments of this limited Ethics Alarms series are here and here.]

In Season Two of “The Lincoln Lawyer,” Mickey represented a seductive restaurant owner (above) who was accused of murdering a local real estate developer with whom she had been in conflict.

Sidebar: Mickey had intimate relations with the woman immediately prior to her being arrested and retaining him s her attorney. Not afterwards, however, because it is an ethics violation in most states to have sex with your client. Some randy lawyers have had ethics complaints dismissed by proving that they had already been making whoopee with the client, so the usual reasons for the prohibition no longer applied.

That may be true, but I regard it as unethical (and stupid) for a lawyer to ever represent a client with whom he or she has had…or even wants to have..sexual relations. The restaurant owner was obviously using her lawyer’s attraction to her to cloud his judgment.

Of course not.

And therein lies their tragedy, and ours.

A newly released document in the so-called Epstein files reveals that Donald Trump, far from being an eager participant in Jeffrey Epstein’s trafficking in and exploitation of young women, was one of the first to alert authorities that Epstein was involved in illegal activities. As the New York Times reports today,

“…one of the first calls the Palm Beach police received was from Donald J. Trump, the local police chief at the time told the F.B.I. more than a decade later.

“Mr. Trump reportedly told the chief, Michael Reiter, ‘Thank goodness you’re stopping him, everyone has known he’s been doing this,’ according to a document recounting their conversation that is part of the tranche of Epstein files released by the Justice Department.

“Mr. Trump said it was known in New York circles that Mr. Epstein was disgusting and suggested that the police also focus their investigation on Mr. Epstein’s associate Ghislaine Maxwell, according to the memo. ‘She is evil,’ Mr. Trump reportedly said.”

“Mr. Trump also told the police chief that he was around Mr. Epstein once when teenagers were present and that he ‘got the hell out of there,’ according to Mr. Reiter’s account.” The former chief described his conversation with Mr. Trump to the F.B.I. in October 2019, two months after Mr. Epstein was found dead in his jail cell while awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges, the memo shows. Mr. Reiter told The Miami Herald, which reported on the document earlier, that the call with Mr. Trump occurred in July 2006.”

That’s years before Epstein’s first conviction.