Buffalo_Gal

I wonder if there will be any unscripted Q&As? You thought the Clinton campaign was controlled? Bet the Biden campaign is gonna make that look accessible.

You clearly have issues. Volumes even.

Sullivan must have some mighty big skeletons in his closet.

Yeah, they left for more yard and space... nothing to do with rioting, defund the police, or any other of de Blasio's crazy. This will be interesting to watch. Will they come back after things settle down? Rents still are not cheap, but concessions are rising. Empty Manhattan apartments reach record levels, landlords slash rent * More than 10,000 apartments were listed for rent in Manhattan in June, an increase of 85% over last year, according to a report from Miller Samuel and Douglas Elliman. * The official vacancy rate hit a record 3.67% but is far higher in many New York City buildings, according to brokers. * In an effort to fill all those vacant apartments, landlords are dropping prices and offering ever-larger incentives. </snip> Analysts say the rising number of empty apartments is due in large part to the lockdown, which prevented brokers from showing apartments until June 22. But the exodus from New York City has left a rising number of vacant apartments and fewer new renters arriving to fill them. </snip> Yet nearly half of all new leases in June came with concessions or discounts, and landlords typically offered free rent for 1½ free months. The weakest segment of the rental market is large, family-sized rentals. Brokers say many families that normally would be renting in the city have left for the suburbs where they can have a yard and more space. </snip>

Jobless claims at better-than-expected 1.3 million, total getting benefits falls to 18 million Weekly jobless claims were lower than expected last week as workers slowly returned to their jobs in the wake of rising coronavirus cases. Claims for the week ended July 4 totaled 1.314 million, compared with the 1.39 million expected from economists surveyed by Dow Jones. The total marked a decrease of 99,000 from a week earlier, according to the Labor Department. </snip> Continuing claims fell sharply, dropping 698,000 from a week earlier to 18.06 million. The previous week’s total itself was revised down by 530,000. Wall Street had been expecting 18.9 million continuing claims, according to FactSet. </snip>

Agreed. Now, will the SC see it that way? You know this ends up back there at some point.

Not an attorney, and I do not play one on the internet... reading the decision, Congress was smacked around a lot. That one is unlikely to fly. The NYS one appears more troublesome for Trump.

Ah ok, thank you.

He backed out some deaths leaving 85. Maybe classification or cause?

85 deaths? Possibly the elderly? (his chart is interesting... the google chart in the first tweet is his I "think")

The first page is what people feared about the lock down... that people put off surgeries, medial care, etc and now are sicker because of that. (I posted the first interaction some pages back.)

These cases were both punted back to lower courts for more litigation. If NYS does get them eventually, that will be under grand jury, so it will be confidential.

Ooooh a typo... will this get reported (Without evidence...)

That is hilarious:

You could always employ the ignore function if it bothers you so much.

Lot of border swapping back then... one of my g-grandfather's had an Austrian birth certificate due to where the border was at the time. He was a Polish citizen.

Did NJ do some numbers adjustment yesterday?

@B-Man reports what he finds... kinda like an aggregator. It is appreciated by many.

Mazars asks whether 3 House committees can subpoena Trump's financial records as part of congressional investigations. Again by Roberts, again 7-2: From the syllabus: "The courts below did not take adequate account of the signficant separation of powers concerns implicated by congressional subpoenas for the President's information." When Congress seeks information “needed for intelligent legislative action,” it “unquestionably” remains “the duty of all citizens to cooperate.” Watkins, 354 U. S., at 187 (em-phasis added). Congressional subpoenas for information from the President, however, implicate special concerns regarding the separation of powers. The courts below did not take adequate account of those concerns. The judgments of the Courts of Appeals for the D. C. Circuit and the Second Circuit are vacated, and the cases are remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Vance will determine whether an NYC grand jury can obtain Trump's financial records as part of a criminal investigation. Article II and the Supremacy Clause do not categorically preclude, or require a heightened standard for, the issuance of a state criminal subpoena to a sitting President. "Given these safeguards and the Court's precedents, we cannot conclude that absolute immunity is necessary or appropriate under Article II or the Supremacy Clause. Our dissenting colleagues agree," the chief writes. "Rejecting a heightened need standard does not leave Presidents with 'no real protection.' To start, a President may avail himself of the same protections available to every other citizen." "The arguments here and in the Court of Appeals were limited to absolute immunity and heightened need. The Court of Appeals, however, has directed that the case may be returned to the District Court, where the President may raise further arguments as appropriate." In a footnote, Roberts notes that the "daylight between our opinion" and the Thomas "dissent" is "not as great as that label might suggest." "We agree that Presidents are neither absolutely immune from state criminal subpoenas nor insulated by a heightened need standard." Here's some key language: "We agree that Presidents may challenge specific subpoenas as impeding their Article II functions." "And although we affirm while Justice Thomas would vacate, we agree that this case will be remanded to the District Court." End of majority says issue here was limited to absolute immunity and heightened need, and 2d Circuit ordered case returned to District Court for other possible issues. So SCOTUS remands and presumably the case still goes back to 2d Circuit and then District Court. It is by Roberts. The vote is 7-2.