I came across this is little story today, it's not breaking news. I suspect that a member of the housekeeping staff knows something about the bomb threat that required the sweep for weapons.
According to police in Secaucus, the bomb threat — which later was determined to be bogus — was called in to Hudson Regional Hospital on July 18. During a search, bomb detection dogs led investigators to an unlocked office closet containing dozens of firearms.
Among the weapons were 11 handguns and 27 rifles or shotguns, according to police. The closet also contained a .45 caliber semi-automatic rifle with a high-capacity magazine that was determined to be an assault rifle, and a 14-round high-capacity handgun magazine.
The arrested the guy the next day.
What the heck do you think this guy was doing? It sounds very ominous that he was keeping those weapons there.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
5 hours ago, Beerman said:
Last time this was brought up, just a few weeks ago, Chare asked,
"How would you define "excess corporate profits?" And have you considered what effects this might have on retirement accounts that might be invested in these corporations?"
Her questions were ignored. If you're going to bring up this topic again, maybe you could give us your thoughts?
They were ignored? Maybe you missed the response. Regardless, excess profits is not a new area for focus and we don't have to start from scratch or reinvent the wheel... congress can just update the wheels.
"Former SinoHawk holdings chief Tony Bobulinski – who was partners in that China-linked company with Biden family members – praised Kentucky Republican Congressman James Comer's newly-launched probe into the First Family's business deals."
Her questions were not ignored. I proposed that excess profit be defined after congressional research. And profits are still allowed so stock owners will receive dividends. Are you saying a middle income family deserves to be price gouged so that an imaginary retiree won’t lose stock value? Last I heard, stocks carry risk.
It's something we are going to have to deal with eventually because of the increasing divide between the super wealthy and the middle class which is losing ground to the wealthy. It's a third rail issue and no one wants to touch it politically but something that has to happen. It's one of those existential questions and I'm not in the intellectual rank to even think of an answer except more taxes for the wealthy or just eating them:)
Last time this was brought up, just a few weeks ago, Chare asked,
[...]
Her questions were ignored. If you're going to bring up this topic again, maybe you could give us your thoughts?
Actually, she is a he. This is why I generally use both (e.g., ,he or she, her or his, etc.) unless I know the poster's preferred pronouns/gender, which I typically don't.
This is why I was a huge fan of the gender neutral pronouns.
Actually, she is a he. This is why I generally use both (e.g., ,he or she, her or his, etc.) unless I know the poster's preferred pronouns/gender, which I typically don't.
This is why I was a huge fan of the gender neutral pronouns.
I apologize. I too am in favor of gender-neutral pronouns. Old habits die hard. Thank you for this gentle poke.
They trusted the wrong employee. Story removed; employee fired. Time to move on. No conspiracy here. Even Fox News has no facts to refute anything; just innuendo. Not the first reporter to release a false story. Check our Stephen Glass. This isn't the first time a reporter was caught with their pants down.
Probably. However, other news employee's have done much worse and caused million dollar law suites and were not fired. But yeah, no conspiracy theory involved, just a thought.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
8 minutes ago, HiddenAngels said:
Yea it won’t let me read it since I’m not a subscriber. There’s and ad that blocks the entire article unless you click to subscribe
Quote
Ademola Adedeji tried to picture what the jury saw when they looked at him.
Could they tell that he was the school president? The captain of the rugby team? The older brother who made dinners for his siblings and read them bedtime stories?
Or did they see only Defendant No. 7 in a trial of 10 Black teenagers charged with conspiracy to murder? A gangster, the prosecutors claimed, who waged war on his rivals?
Mr. Adedeji, a very dark, very tall 18-year-old, had a lot riding on his testimony that morning in April this year. It was the sixth week of his trial, and this was his only chance to tell his side of the story.
If the jury believed him, he could graduate from high school and attend one of the universities that had offered him admission. If they didn’t, he could spend the next two decades in prison.
Quote
For weeks, Mr. Adedeji tried to follow the prosecutors’ arguments. They accused him of conspiring with the nine other defendants to murder and maim others.
But here is what baffled Mr. Adedeji: The prosecutors knew that he had not attacked anyone. He had never owned a gun, a knife or any other weapon. He had never thrown gang signs or dealt drugs. He had helped with the investigation, told detectives what he knew and volunteered his phone. He certainly had not killed anyone.
In fact, there was no murder victim.
What connected him to the case, and a major reason he was labeled a gang member, prosecutors said, were six text messages that he had sent when he was 17. Six texts sent within 20 minutes.
Quote
With that, he fell into the depths of a criminal justice system in Britain that, by several measures, disproportionately prosecutes and jails Black people. Black people are six times more likely to be stopped and searched than white people, and three times more likely to be arrested. A 2021 bipartisan parliamentary report found years of systemic failure to improve the country’s troubled record on policing and race.
Prosecutors have broad latitude when it comes to calling someone a gang member, a designation that legal experts say helps persuade jurors of guilt and can be used to seek longer sentences. With no clear, legal definition for a gang, the label tends to be applied disproportionately to groups of young Black men. In London, for example, nearly 80 percent of people in a police gang database are Black.
To dismantle gangs, the Crown Prosecution Service, the public body in charge of prosecutions in England and Wales, tells prosecutors that “consideration should be given to conspiracy charges in order to demonstrate the overall criminality.”
Doing so gives prosecutors key advantages. They can charge people who have done little or nothing to carry out a crime, and they can introduce evidence that might otherwise be excluded. In Mr. Adedeji’s conspiracy trial, that meant his posts on Instagram, his Snapchat texts, even the drill rap videos he watched on YouTube could be used to paint him as a hoodlum.
Mr. Adedeji agonized over all this when he testified that morning in Manchester in what is the country’s first special court for gang-related cases. He wore a white shirt, a rain jacket and a comically short tie. He was polite to a fault and so quiet that the judge twice told him to lean closer to the microphone.
“Mr. Adedeji, you’re essentially, absolutely not a member of a gang?” the junior prosecutor, Andrew Smith, asked, sounding incredulous.
HiddenAngels
1,085 Posts
I wanted to read this one but it’s only for subscribers