3 Likes
Sinking: The Steamship Authority
SSA general manager Bob Davis requests aid from Gov. Baker or says ferry service will cease on May 31. This could strand islands like Martha’s Vineyard and Nantucket.
2 Likes
3 Likes
Katy Tur apparently tweeted then deleted this:
2 Likes
Holy shit buckets, the world is crazy right now! 
4 Likes
China Limited the Mekong’s Flow. Other Countries Suffered a Drought.
New research show that Beijing’s engineers appear to have directly caused the record low levels of water in Thailand, Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam… and are lying about it.
2 Likes
Oh shit
3 Likes
This guy Rep Dan Crenshaw is a piece of work…total T defender…and loyalist who has this book he is promoting. Fortitude.
4 Likes
Asian Giant Hornets can utterly decimate a bee colony; Asian honeybees use a desperate method called the bee ball to kill them, but it only works if they get the scout. Our European honey bees have ZERO defense. They must not be allowed to settle here.
3 Likes
4 Likes
Tim Bray, a well known senior engineer and Vice President at Amazon has “quit in dismay” because Amazon has been “firing whistleblowers who were making noise about warehouse employees frightened of Covid-19.” In an open letter on his website, Bray, who has worked at the company for nearly six years, called the company “chickenshit” for firing and disparaging employees who have organized protests. He also said the firings are "designed to create a climate of fear."
Amazon’s strategy throughout the coronavirus crisis has been to fire dissenters and disparage them both in the press and behind closed doors. There have been dozens of confirmed coronavirus cases at warehouses around the country, and workers have repeatedly said the company isn’t doing enough to protect them. Last week, Amazon ended a program that allowed workers to take unlimited unpaid time off if they fear getting sick from the coronavirus. Last Friday, Amazon workers together with Target, FedEx, Instacart, and Whole Foods workers, went on strike to protest their working conditions.
In statements to Motherboard, Amazon has said its own protesting workers are “spreading misinformation and making false claims about Amazon,” and that it “objects to the irresponsible actions of labor groups.” Last month, Amazon fired Chris Smalls, an Amazon worker in New York City. In a meeting, Amazon executives said that they believe Smalls is not “smart or articulate,” and that publicly they would focus on “laying out the case for why the organizer’s conduct was immoral, unacceptable, and arguably illegal,” according to leaked notes from that meeting obtained by VICE News.
In his resignation letter, Bray said that “firing whistleblowers isn’t just a side-effect of macroeconomic forces, nor is it intrinsic to the function of free markets. It’s evidence of a vein of toxicity running through the company culture. I choose neither to serve nor drink that poison.”
4 Likes
Yes, “look at the science.”
During his campaign, he told CNN: “I had an uncle who went to MIT who is a top professor. Dr. John Trump. A genius. It’s in my blood. I’m smart.” He told the Boston Globe that he and his uncle “have very good genetics.”
A family friend who knew John Trump personally said the scientist would have recoiled at Donald Trump’s claim of scientific knowledge when promoting unproven drugs and other treatments.
“The John Trump I knew would have been horrified,” said John Van de Graaff, whose father, the famed scientist Robert Van de Graaff, was John Trump’s longtime business partner.
Van de Graaff told The Washington Post that he joined his father in many conversations with John Trump, and recalled him as a man dedicated to the rigorous testing of ideas who would not have approved of the way the president has blurted out dangerous supposed remedies for the novel coronavirus.
“He would have been distressed by a great deal of what President Trump has done,” Van de Graaff said. “He would have said, ‘Look at the science!’ ”
5 Likes
Ruth Bader Ginsburg from her bed - bearing down with her mental might on the notion that Companies could regulate whether employees could get contraception because it might not fit the employer’s stance.
She is a fighter for women…and against the ‘system.’
Hurry home Ruth!
The liberal justice repeatedly pressed on the notion that women would lose their coverage even if they didn’t share the employers’ religious beliefs.
“This leaves the women to hunt for other government programs that might cover them,” she told Solicitor General Noel Francisco, who was arguing the case for the Trump administration. “And for those who are not covered by Medicaid or one of the other government programs, they can get contraceptive coverage only from paying out of their own pocket, which is exactly what Congress didn’t want to happen.”
“You have just tossed entirely to the wind what Congress thought was essential, that is that women be provided these services with no hassles, no cost to them,” she added later. “Instead, you are shifting the employer’s religious beliefs, the cost of that, onto these employees who do not share those religious beliefs.”
4 Likes
This horrible crime will now go before a grand jury, it’s wild that it took this long. 
5 Likes
She Said Anthony Fauci Sexually Assaulted Her. Now She Says Jacob Wohl and Jack Burkman Paid Her to Lie.
After failing to frame Robert Mueller, Elizabeth Warren, and others for sexual misconduct, the infamous Trumpster hoaxers tried to go after Fauci. But the woman they hired to play the victim had second thoughts.
3 Likes
The Jobs Report Friday Will Be a Portrait of Devastation
For such numbers, there are no words.
Jobless rate soared to 14.7% in April as U.S. shed 20.5 million jobs amid coronavirus pandemic
The labor market has entered its darkest period since the Great Depression and many analysts believe it could take years to recover.
Employment Situation Summary
3 Likes
Want to listen in to the Supreme Court hearings??? Today Monday May 11th, they are streaming on CNN - two cases.
I am just getting ready for tomorrow’s cases - May 12th - T’s taxes via Mazars and NY DA Vance will be heard.
Mazars case
And NY DA Cyrus Vance Case
RESCHEDULED FOR ARGUMENT on Tuesday, May 12, 2020. VIDED.
Cases today - May 11th
The Supreme Court is continuing to hold oral arguments via teleconference due to the coronavirus pandemic. And in a historic first, it’s also allowing oral arguments to be aired live to the public.
Here’s what to know for Monday’s cases:
First Case: Jimcy McGirt v. Oklahoma
Time: 10:00 a.m. ET
Significance: Jimcy McGirt, a member of the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma, was convicted of raping a 4-year-old on what he says is a Creek reservation in Oklahoma. His lawyers say, however, that he was tried in the wrong court, because his crime occurred on Indian territory and the federal government, not the state has jurisdiction. Under federal law, major crimes committed by Indians on Indian country must be tried in federal court. One question before the court is whether a Creek reservation was established and if it was, whether Congress ever moved to disestablish it.
If McGirt prevails, Oklahoma may not have jurisdiction over crimes committed by Indians in the Eastern part of the state.
Participants: Ian H. Gershengorn, Riyaz A. Kanji, Mithun Mansinghani, Solicitor General , Oklahoma City. Deputy Solicitor General Edwin S. Kneedler
Where to find it: CNN.com is streaming live.
Supreme Court examines discrimination lawsuits against religious schools
Second Case: Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Agnes Morrissey-Berru
Time: Immediately following McGirt v. Oklahoma; at approximately 11 a.m. ET
Significance: A dispute concerning two teachers who sought to file employment discrimination claims against the religious schools that fired them. The justices will discuss the scope of the so called “ministerial exception” that holds that under the First Amendment the government cannot interfere with a church’s employment decisions.
Participants: Eric C. Rassbach, Assistant to the Solicitor General Morgan L. Ratner, Jeffrey Fisher
4 Likes
Supreme Court’s Oral Arguments for May 12th…
The Supreme Court hears oral argument via teleconference due to the coronavirus pandemic. This oral argument involves consolidated cases dealing with congressional subpoenas to third party companies for President Trump’s financial records.
Supreme Court Oral Argument on Congressional Subpoenas for President Trump’s Financial Records
Trump v. Vance Oral Argument
The Supreme Court hears oral argument via teleconference due to the coronavirus pandemic. This case involves presidential immunity and the New York District Attorney’s investigation into the Trump Organization.
Where to Listen:
Supreme Court Oral Argument on Congressional Subpoenas for President Trump’s Financial Records
Program ID:
471675-1
Category:
Public Affairs Event
Format:
Judicial Proceeding
Location:
Washington, District of Columbia, United States
Will Air:
May 12, 2020 | 10:00am EDT | C-SPAN 1
Airing Details
May 12, 2020 | 10:00am EDT | C-SPAN 1
May 12, 2020 | 10:00am EDT | C-SPAN RADIO
4 Likes
Looks like Trump’s Taxes may be coming to us…Gorsuch is a skeptic of T’s lawyers.
Ginsburg, Sotomayer, Kagan, Breyer are coming on strong in this hearing from T’s lawyers.
Supreme Court Hearings Live blogs
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/05/12/trump-taxes-scotus-hearing-live/
Various tweets to watch for…
Lawrence Tribe - Law Professor
Hearing #2 Trump v Vance
NYT blog
Charlie Savage
Washington Correspondent
Gorsuch and Kavanaugh are pushing Sekulow to explain why Clinton v. Jones, which the Supreme Court unanimously permitted to go forward, was less burdensome than Vance’s grand jury subpoena. The former required the sitting president to provide a deposition and the latter is just asking a third party to turn over records about the president. Sekulow argues civil cases are different than criminal investigations (potential monetary damages versus potential imprisonment).
12:05 PM ET
Peter Baker
White House Correspondent
Sekulow seems to indicate that a criminal case should have to meet a higher standard before burdening a president than a civil case because it could result in loss of liberty not just a monetary damage. But courts have traditionally said that a criminal process has a higher need for information than a civil case.
3 Likes