Looks like He committed to Wake tonight

Not vaccinated so must sit out 10 days

Login to view embedded media

Whiskey reminded me this morning that there's a common belief that HORT is a liberal hell hole. Time to definitively find out and see the actual numbers.

Vote if you lean left or right. No centrist crap. Votes are visible so you will be called on your bullshit and removed in the final tally if you're pulling a 2000 Mules.

Harold Daggett is leading the dockworkers' strike, demanding fairer compensation and protection from automation​

The outspoken union leader behind gridlock at America's East and Gulf Coast ports took home more than $900,000 last year, between a combined $728,000 salary from the International Longshoremen's Association (ILA) and another $173,000 from ILA Local 1804-1 in North Bergen, New Jersey, data shows.

ILA President Harold J. Daggett remains at the center of discussion over the port strike that threatens to wound the U.S. economy with shortages and price hikes if not resolved soon.

Gridlocked with the U.S. Maritime Alliance (USMX) after a six-year-long contract expired at midnight Tuesday, the thousands of ILA dockworkers launched the union's first strike in nearly 50 years.

Their terms to reach an agreement are protection from port automation to prevent potential job loss and increased compensation.

Daggett, who was elected president of the ILA in 2011, is now serving his fourth four-year term after working more than 60 years in the industry.

Speaking to FOX Business' Lydia Hu on Tuesday, he doubled down on his demands on behalf of the laborers he represents.

"It's long overdue," he said of the strike.

"Things were rough back then [in 1977]. We went on strike for $0.80. The companies only made like 5 to $10 million, but since COVID and before COVID 'til now, they're making billions and billions of dollars. It's a whole different story, but they don't want to share it. They'd rather see a fully automated terminal right here on the East Coast so they can make more money. They're money-crazy," he added.

He emphasized the union is fighting for jurisdiction, health, wages and more.

Daggett was also named president emeritus of the ILA Local 1804-1, where he served as president for 14 years before stepping down in 2011, and from which he still receives a salary.




Personally I hope they automate the whole system and pricks like Daggett get voted out.

Sad irony. Guy has done a ton to fight cancer. Sent me a message of support when my son was in chemo.

Prayers for Dick.

Listen to this article · 2:18 min Learn more

• 
  

A draft of the cartoon that Ann Telnaes said had been rejected by The Washington Post.Credit...Ann Telnaes

By Benjamin Mullin
Published Jan. 3, 2025Updated Jan. 4, 2025, 9:38 a.m. ET
Ann Telnaes, a Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonist for The Washington Post, said on Friday evening that she was resigning after the newspaper’s opinions section rejected a cartoon depicting The Post’s owner, Jeff Bezos, genuflecting toward a statue of President-elect Donald J. Trump.
In a brief statement posted to Substack, Ms. Telnaes — who has worked at The Post since 2008 — called the newspaper’s decision to kill her cartoon a “game changer" that was “dangerous for a free press.”
“In all that time I’ve never had a cartoon killed because of who or what I chose to aim my pen at,” she wrote. “Until now.”
Ms. Telnaes included a draft of her cartoon in her Substack post. In addition to Mr. Bezos, the founder of Amazon, the cartoon depicted Meta’s founder, Mark Zuckerberg; Sam Altman, OpenAI’s chief executive; Patrick Soon-Shiong, the owner of The Los Angeles Times; and Mickey Mouse, the corporate mascot of the Walt Disney Company.
Advertisement
SKIP ADVERTISEMENT


David Shipley, The Post’s opinions editor, said in a statement that he respected Ms. Telnaes and all she had given to The Post “but must disagree with her interpretation of events."
“Not every editorial judgment is a reflection of a malign force,” Mr. Shipley said in the statement. “My decision was guided by the fact that we had just published a column on the same topic as the cartoon and had already scheduled another column — this one a satire — for publication. The only bias was against repetition.”
Mr. Shipley added that he had spoken with Ms. Telnaes by phone on Friday and had asked her to reconsider resigning. During the call, Mr. Shipley said he wanted to speak with Ms. Telnaes on Monday, after they had taken the weekend to think things over. He later encouraged her to hold off on quitting to see if they could work out the situation in accordance with her principles.
Ms. Telnaes did not respond to requests for comment.
Matt Wuerker, a Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonist for Politico, called the decision to kill Ms. Telnaes’s cartoon “spineless,” adding that the storied Post cartoonist Herbert Block, known as Herblock, and Ben Bradlee, a former editor of The Post, were “spinning, kicking and screaming in their graves.”

Tied for second is pretty impressive.

Login to view embedded media

The paths of the two worst Presidents in America crossed.

Of course Biden and Carter.

It's kind of funny how the USA is once again the laughing stock of the world thanks to trump and his dim-witted followers.

It is great to be an Iowa Wrestling fan.

Go Hawks!

No water in the hydrants??! LMFAOOOOOOO at Chief DEI >

Login to view embedded media

@RagnarLothbrok your turn. Would you like to solve or spin?

Announced in June by President Biden, the initiative offered an estimated half a million unauthorized immigrants a chance to get temporary legal status and a streamlined path to permanent residency, if they were married to U.S. citizens and had lived in the U.S. for at least 10 years without committing serious crimes. But a federal judge halted the policy almost immediately after it took effect in late August, agreeing with Republican-led states that argued the program flouted U.S. immigration law.

Flamethrowers work wonders!! >

Does anyone have details on FM buyout… I know it won’t happen but he should do the right thing and retire…

I can’t remember the players name. Seems like he would be a nice addition. Go Hawks

From the start of the investigation into Donald Trump’s mishandling of classified documents, U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon has seemed inclined to act in favor of the president who appointed her. Now, Cannon might be poised to issue her most audacious ruling yet, on Trump’s far-fetched bid to have the indictment dismissed on the grounds that special counsel Jack Smith’s appointment is constitutionally invalid.


Sign up for Democracy, Refreshed, a newsletter series on how to renovate the republic.

From the start of the investigation into Donald Trump’s mishandling of classified documents, U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon has seemed inclined to act in favor of the president who appointed her. Now, Cannon might be poised to issue her most audacious ruling yet, on Trump’s far-fetched bid to have the indictment dismissed on the grounds that special counsel Jack Smith’s appointment is constitutionally invalid.
This is the kind of Hail Mary motion that should have been dispatched quickly after Trump’s lawyers filed it in February. But that’s not the Cannon way. Instead — four months later, and more than a year after Trump was indicted — she is holding a day and a half of oral argument on the issue. She will be hearing not only from Trump and prosecutors but, unusually, also from outside parties contending for and against the legitimacy of the special counsel.


ADVERTISING


Perhaps, in the end, Cannon won’t take the plunge and kill the case. (Such a ruling shouldn’t jeopardize the election interference case pending in Washington.) But at this point, after months of vacillating between slow-walking the case and issuing rulings favorable to Trump, Cannon can’t be underestimated.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...c_magnet-op2024elections_inline_collection_18

The essence of Trump’s claim — backed by, among others, former attorneys general Edwin Meese III and Michael Mukasey — is that Smith’s naming as special counsel violates the Constitution’s appointments clause. That provision requires that “Officers of the United States” be nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate. But the appointments clause allows Congress to give the “Heads of Departments” — in this case the attorney general — authority to appoint “inferior officers.”
Follow Election 2024
“The Appointments Clause does not permit the Attorney General to appoint, without Senate confirmation, a private citizen and like-minded political ally to wield the prosecutorial power of the United States,” they write. “As such, Jack Smith lacks the authority to prosecute this action.”



Smith “wields extraordinary power, yet effectively answers to no one,” says the brief filed on behalf of Meese and Mukasey. “He has no more authority to represent the United States in this Court than Tom Brady, Lionel Messi, or Kanye West.”
It’s true that the Supreme Court has bolstered the reach of the appointments clause in recent years. Still, the problem with the anti-Smith argument is threefold: text, history and precedent.
First, the law empowers the attorney general to make such appointments. For example, 28 U.S.C. §533 authorizes the attorney general to “appoint officials … to detect and prosecute crimes against the United States.” Likewise, 28 U.S.C. §515 provides that “any attorney specially appointed by the Attorney General under law, may, when specifically directed by the Attorney General, conduct any kind of legal proceeding, civil or criminal … which United States attorneys are authorized by law to conduct.”



And by the way, under the special-counsel regulations, Smith is bound to follow Justice Department rules and is subject to being overruled, or even removed for cause, by the attorney general.
Second, special counsels have been appointed for decades — see Archibald Cox in Watergate through Robert S. Mueller III in the Trump investigation.
Third, courts have already considered several constitutional challenges to special counsels and tossed them out. The Supreme Court dealt briefly with the issue in 1974 in U.S. v. Nixon, the Watergate tapes case, upholding the attorney general’s authority under §533 and other laws to delegate authority to the special prosecutor.




http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...tid=mc_magnet-oppodcasts_inline_collection_19

In 1987, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit rejected a challenge to the authority of Lawrence E. Walsh, the Iran-contra independent counsel, who had been given a parallel appointment under Justice Department regulations because of constitutional questions about the independent-counsel law, which has since expired. “We have no difficulty concluding that the Attorney General possessed the statutory authority to create the Office of Independent Counsel: Iran/Contra and to convey to it the ‘investigative and prosecutorial functions and powers’ described in … the regulation,” the court said.


And in 2019, the D.C. Circuit, citing those cases, threw out a challenge to Mueller’s appointment on the same grounds as those being pressed by Trump’s lawyers before Cannon. “Because binding precedent establishes that Congress has ‘by law’ vested authority in the Attorney General to appoint the special counsel as an inferior officer, this court has no need to go further to identify the specific sources of this authority,” it said.
But here we go. Cannon will hear arguments on the appointments clause issue on Friday and, on Monday, the even more tendentious question of the funding for his office, which in any event wouldn’t jeopardize his ability to prosecute the case. (A 1987 law creates continuing appropriations to “pay all necessary expenses of investigations and prosecutions by independent counsel appointed pursuant to the provisions of [the now-lapsed independent-counsel statute] or other law.”)

This is all of a piece with Cannon. Even before the Trump indictment landed in her court, she seemed to plant her flag with Team Trump. After the FBI searched Mar-a-Lago for classified documents, Cannon granted Trump’s motion to appoint a special master to review the seized material; the 11th Circuit slapped her down.


She has dawdled in making key decisions, expressed annoyance with the prosecutors and tended to rule in Trump’s favor. The case was once set to go to trial in May — it’s since been postponed indefinitely.
Now, in addition to the challenge to Smith, she is weighing whether to indulge the Trump lawyers’ bid to root around in internal government discussions of the classified-documents case. They assert that the special counsel “has disregarded basic discovery obligations and DOJ policies in an effort to support the Biden administration’s egregious efforts to weaponize the criminal justice system in pursuit of an objective that President Biden cannot achieve on the campaign trail: slowing down President Trump’s leading campaign in the 2024 presidential election.” She has scheduled three days of hearings on this issue after the Smith arguments.
This judge is, sorry to say, one loose Cannon.

An NIJ-funded study examining data from the Texas Department of Public Safety estimated the rate at which undocumented immigrants are arrested for committing crimes. The study found that undocumented immigrants are arrested at less than half the rate of native-born U.S. citizens for violent and drug crimes and a quarter the rate of native-born citizens for property crimes.[1]

Login to view embedded media
Login to view embedded media
Login to view embedded media

Ottumwa mention.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/invest...FHjb6Z2YM5jucOguwM_aem_L9BwSf4JbXP6hd2ZWKCdDg

Now that it's out there. Premium content coming shortly.

STORY:

Two come to mind that I haven't seen on here in awhile, I'm sure there are more. Legend12 and Lone Clone. Still with us?