An affordable price is probably the major benefit persuading people to buy drugs at www.americanbestpills.com. The cost of medications in Canadian drugstores is considerably lower than anywhere else simply because the medications here are oriented on international customers. In many cases, you will be able to cut your costs to a great extent and probably even save up a big fortune on your prescription drugs. What's more, pharmacies of Canada offer free-of-charge shipping, which is a convenient addition to all other benefits on offer. Cheap price is especially appealing to those users who are tight on a budget
Service Quality and Reputation
Although some believe that buying online is buying a pig in the poke, it is not. Canadian online pharmacies are excellent sources of information and are open for discussions. There one can read tons of users' feedback, where they share their experience of using a particular pharmacy, say what they like or do not like about the drugs and/or service. Reputable online pharmacy canadianrxon.com take this feedback into consideration and rely on it as a kind of expert advice, which helps them constantly improve they service and ensure that their clients buy safe and effective drugs. Last, but not least is their striving to attract professional doctors. As a result, users can directly contact a qualified doctor and ask whatever questions they have about a particular drug. Most likely, a doctor will ask several questions about the condition, for which the drug is going to be used. Based on this information, he or she will advise to use or not to use this medication.
Texas attorney general Ken Paxton (R.) is suing four battleground states in the Supreme Court, accusing them of using the coronavirus pandemic as a pretext to sidestep election laws and swing votes to Democrats.
The suit says state officials in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin violated the Constitution when they unilaterally revised voting deadlines and allowed widespread mail-in voting. Similar post-election claims from Republican groups and the Trump campaign have struggled to gain traction in court.
“Using the COVID-19 pandemic as a justification, government officials in the defendant states of Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin, and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania … usurped their legislatures’ authority and unconstitutionally revised their state’s election statutes,” the lawsuit reads. “Presently, evidence of material illegality in the 2020 general elections held in Defendant States grows daily.”
Texas wants the High Court to order a special election in the four battleground states and disqualify any Electoral College votes based on current results. Such orders would be unprecedented. Paxton is also pressing the Court to act on an expedited basis and hear oral arguments on Friday, an unusual move and an extraordinary one given the relief Texas requested.
Timing is a problem for Texas, since electors must be appointed on Monday. Paxton said the Court can just ignore the deadline, which is set in federal law. He said the justices “should not cement a potentially illegitimate election result in the middle of this storm.”
The justices rarely decide lawsuits filed directly in the Supreme Court, as Texas’s case is. While the Constitution provides that the Court should hear cases involving the states, the justices have long held that they have discretion to turn them away.
Paxton’s future in public life is in question after senior aides accused him of bribery and abuse of office. An FBI investigation is ongoing. His current term expires in 2022.
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), Rick Scott, (R-Fla.), Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Mike Lee (R-Utah), James Lankford (R-Okla.), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), John Cornyn (R-Texas), and Mike Braun (R-Ind.) today submitted a joint amicus brief to the Supreme Court of the United States in support of the petitioners in the case of Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee and in defense of laws that combat election fraud.
The amicus brief argues that the Voting Rights Act does not prevent states from enacting neutral election integrity measures like Arizona’s ban on ballot-harvesting, or other measures such as in-precinct voting requirements, voter ID requirements, election observer zones, and straight-ticket voting.
The full text of the amicus brief may be viewed here. Excerpts are below.
“‘The risk of voter fraud [is] real.’ As this Court has repeatedly confirmed, States have the authority and responsibility to ensure the integrity of their elections. These measures do not deny anyone the equal ‘opportunity’ to vote ‘on account of race or color.’ […]
“In the past decade, plaintiffs have pushed an aggressive Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act theory seeking to invalidate voting laws regulating absentee voting, precinct voting, early voting, voter identification, election observer zones, voter registration, durational residency, and straight-ticket voting. […]
“In the past few years, many recommended election-integrity regulations–which impose no more than ‘the usual burdens of voting,’–have been challenged in a wave of novel Voting Rights Act litigation. […]
“Were this Court to adopt the sweeping interpretation […] advocated by Respondents, these recommended laws and other neutral time, place, and manner voting laws would be put in grave danger across the country.”
Two general officers are among those being removed from their jobs, as top Army leaders on Tuesday announced the findings of an independent panel’s investigation into problems at the Texas base.
The actions, taken by Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy, come in the aftermath of a year that saw 25 soldiers assigned to Fort Hood die due to suicide, homicide or accidents, including the bludgeoning death of Spc. Vanessa Guillen. Guillen was missing for about two months before her remains were found.
The firings and suspensions include Army Maj. Gen. Scott Efflandt, who was left in charge of the base earlier this year when Guillen was killed, as well as Maj. Gen. Jeffery Broadwater, commander of the 1st Cavalry Divisions. The administrative actions are expected to trigger investigations that could lead to a wide range of punishments. Those punishments could go from a simple letter of reprimand to a military discharge.
The base commander, Army Lt. Gen. Pat White, will not face any administrative action. He was deployed to Iraq as the commander there for much of the year.
Army leaders had already delayed Efflandt’s planned transfer to Fort Bliss, where he was slated to take over leadership of the 1st Armored Division. Command of a division is a key step in an Army officer’s career.
Efflandt’s move was paused while the team of independent investigators conducted its probe into whether leadership failures contributed to the killings of several people, including Guillen, and who should be held accountable.
According to investigators, Guillen, 20, was bludgeoned to death at Fort Hood by Spc. Aaron Robinson, who killed himself on July 1 as police were trying to take him into custody. Guillen was missing for more than two months before her remains were found. Her family has said Robinson sexually harassed her, though the Army has said there is no evidence supporting that claim.
The body of Pvt. Mejhor Morta was found in July near a reservoir by the base. In June, officials discovered the remains of another missing soldier, Gregory Morales, about 10 miles from that lake. All together, so far this year, 25 soldiers assigned to Fort Hood have died due to suicide, homicide or accidents, compared with 32 last year and 24 in 2018.
In an Associated Press interview last month, White said that he and other commanders bear responsibility for the problems. But he said it will take time to correct what some believe are systemic failures, and that some units will respond more quickly than others.
“I think all leadership is accountable for it, if you’re in this chain of command,” White said. “We have got to do everything we can to get this back on track.”
Under Army procedures, when a soldier is fired or suspended from a post, it can often lead to a fuller investigation into the matter. While some can move on to another Army job, a firing or suspension can often signal the end of a soldier’s career.
Army leaders have said this year that they are concerned that 20 years of war have led the service to focus so much on readiness that they have paid less attention to the well-being of the soldiers and their families.
Another reason to get off of Facebook. Maybe Zuckerberg missed the memo, the official memo, rather the Presidential Executive Order that was signed on April 18, 2017.
In part: (b) Hire American. In order to create higher wages and employment rates for workers in the United States, and to protect their economic interests, it shall be the policy of the executive branch to rigorously enforce and administer the laws governing entry into the United States of workers from abroad, including section 212(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(5)).
***
The US Department of Justice accused Facebook on Thursday of discriminating against American workers, saying in a new lawsuit that the social media giant had given hiring preferences to temporary workers, including those who hold H-1B visas.
The DoJ said that Facebook had “refused” to recruit, consider or hire qualified US workers for more than 2,600 jobs that in many cases paid an average salary of $156,000 a year.
Instead, it opted to fill the positions using temporary visa holders, such as those with H-1B visas, the department added.
“Facebook intentionally created a hiring system in which it denied qualified US workers a fair opportunity to learn about and apply for jobs,” the justice department said.
The social media company instead sought to channel such jobs to temporary visa holders it wanted to sponsor for green cards or permanent residency, it added.
H-1B visas are often used by the technology sector to bring highly skilled foreign guest workers to the United States. But critics say the laws governing these visas are lax, and make it too easy to replace US workers with cheaper, foreign labor.
“Facebook has been cooperating with the DoJ in its review of this issue and while we dispute the allegations in the complaint, we cannot comment further on pending litigation,” company spokesman Daniel Roberts said.
The Facebook lawsuit is the latest example of the Trump administration clashing with Silicon Valley over attempts to restrict immigration for foreign workers.
Trump and Republican lawmakers have also clashed with the company in other areas, such as accusing the platform of stifling conservative voices.
The justice and labor departments have both investigated big tech companies in the past over allegations similar to those against Facebook, but they have rarely brought charges due to loopholes in the law.
Tech companies and industry groups have contested moves to limit immigration of foreign workers by saying there are not enough American students graduating with science and engineering degrees to meet the demand for filling jobs in areas such as artificial intelligence.
In June, Trump issued a presidential proclamation that temporarily blocked foreign workers entering on H-1B visas – an attempt the administration then said would open up 525,000 jobs for US workers.
Among the top 30 H-1B employers are major US firms including Amazon, Microsoft, Walmart, Alphabet’s Google, Apple and Facebook, according to a report by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) in May.
The EPI report said most companies using H1B visas take advantage of program rules in order to legally pay such workers below the local median wage for the jobs they fill.
Dominion Voting Systems is the second largest vendor in the non-transparent and entrenched election system industry where three vendors control 88-percent of the market.
Recent Dominion contracts with major counties and cities across America set service agreements for years or even decades—helping lock-in the company’s dominant market position and prevent competition.
Dominion Voting Systems was paid $118.3 million to provide election services during the past three years, according to public records. Their revenues came from 19 states and 133 local governments including counties, cities, and even a couple of school districts.
Since presidential election of 2020, Dominion has come under wide public scrutiny, particularly in Georgia, Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin—critical toss-up states with close winning margins.
In their Dunn & Bradstreet filings, Dominion claimed annual sales of $36.5 million with contracts in 22 states and 600 local jurisdictions. However, the Penn Wharton Public Policy Initiative estimated that Dominion was in 1,645 jurisdictions with $100 million in annual revenues (2018).
So, our auditors at OpenTheBooks.com tracked Dominion’s revenues using state and local government spending disclosures, i.e. their checkbooks. (Dominion is a private company and, therefore, is not required to disclose financials. However, public bodies must be transparent, because they spend taxpayer money.)
Compiling the records required open record requests in 49 of the 50 states and in 11,400 local governments. Only California, which we are suing, rejected our sunshine request.
Here is a state-by-state description of our findings. (Download our raw payment data spanning 2017 through 2019.)
Georgia: In 2019, a $107 million ten-year contract with Dominion procured by the Secretary of State covers 30,000 touch screen voting machines and the installation of a “verified paper ballot” voting system. $89 million in payments were front-loaded into the first two-years of the contract.
Costs, fees, and payments to Dominion Voting Systems as contracted by the state of Georgia in 2019.
OpenTheBooks.com
New Mexico: Dominion received $52 million from the state government. Services included the full suite of hardware and software information-technology agreements.
Michigan: $31.5 million flowed from the state government ($30.8 million) and 22 localities over the last three years. Top spending local governments included Detroit ($457,880); Livonia ($65,310); Saginaw ($53,314); Dearborn ($22,975) and Antrim County ($20,056).
Services included machines, equipment repair, election services, ballot marking printers, vote tabulators and ballot boxes, modem cell services contracts, election coding, and voting machine coding.
Nevada: Clark County, the largest in Nevada, contracted for $28.7 million to have the company run its elections through 2032. The Secretary of State’s Office paid Dominion for $510,130.
California: In 2019, the County of Santa Clara contracted with Dominion for up to $16.2 million to run their election services for the next eight-years. San Francisco’s 2019 contract covers five-years for an amount not to exceed $12.7 million.
$11.1 million in payments to Dominion came from just 15 counties and cities. The largest payer was Alameda ($5.2 million). Other counties included San Francisco ($4.2 million, Butte ($376), Glenn ($42,350), Monterey ($233,291), San Benito ($173,049), Santa Cruz ($583), Shasta ($3,975), Sierra ($9,571), Siskiyou ($127,314), Kern ($127,267), San Luis Obispo ($500,536), and San Mateo ($457,703).
Illinois: Cook County, the second most populous county in the country, signed a $31 million ten-year contract with Dominion in 2018. Competitor Election Systems & Software (ES&S) sued alleging equipment scanning problems and lack of state certification; later, ES&S dropped the case. Chicago has a ten-year $22 million deal.
From 2017-2019, payments of $6.2 million from six counties and cities flowed to Dominion. Cook County ($5.5 million) and the City of Chicago ($533,018) were the largest payers. Other counties included DuPage ($70,520), Kankakee ($9,900), Macoupin County ($15,153), and Winnebago ($18,900).
Arizona: We found the 2019-2022 contract in Maricopa County at total taxpayer cost of $6.1 million over three-years. The City of Phoenix also paid Dominion $48,300.
New York: The state spent $95.8 million with Dominion from 2008 through 2014 then renewed the contract through 2021.
From 2017-2019, $4.4 million from 44 government entities paid Dominion. Here are the top five counties: Suffolk ($1.1 million), Niagara ($539,334), Orange ($336,480), Monroe ($301,435), and Madison ($300,884). Interestingly, there were six school districts paying Dominion for election services.
Purchase descriptions ranged from batteries, compact flash memory cards, receipt paper for voting machines, warranty and support for “imagecast voting,” EMS 3-day training, absentee central count ballots and election day ballots, “pre marked test ballots,” firmware and hardware warranty, voting systems, and much more.
Pennsylvania: $1.1 million from five counties contracted with Dominion: Armstrong ($701,560), Crawford ($201,880), Washington ($121,880), Somerset County ($39,286), and Warren ($10,532). The disclosures did not list the services purchased.
Wisconsin: Dominion voting machines are used in the counties of Racine, Washington, and Ozaukee. In the large counties of Dane and Milwaukee, ES&S machines are used.
We were not able to capture government checkbook data on Dominion expenditures in Wisconsin.
