potential future case, plus put investigators in jeopardy or expose potential witnesses to pressure. there s also the long standing practice at the justice department to not say anything about pending cases, especially ones as politically sensitive as this. that said, as the judge in the case recognized, there s public interest involved here. cnn s jessica schneider starts us off. do we know why exactly the judge decided to release this? we don t know for sure, anderson, but it s possible that the doj may have given a little more than they originally thought they could. the judge moved really swiftly today. it was less than four hours after he received prosecutors proposed redactions that he ruled that what they proposed would in fact be sufficient and should be released to the public by noon tomorrow. the reason it s interesting that this judge came to such a quick conclusion is that when doj argued in court last week, they said that any redactions could be so extensive t
Explore the stark realities of mental health within conservative Christianity in Snarky Faith's latest post. We tackle the insufficient "pray it away" mentality and advocate for real, actionable solutions. Join us as we demand more than just prayers.
Why does every Pinterest pin have a tiny heart? Does this seemingly ubiquitous symbol have a deeper meaning or is it just a visual embellishment?Pinterest pins are a universal language, in essence, because they represent the thoughts and feelings of all people. They go beyond mere decoration to allow users to express themselves in a […]
complaint you ve seen from some of them. but this is a case where if you work for a really high-powered law firm, you have to check off with everyone else before you go work in a case as politically sensitive as this one. so i do think the legal strategy will be something to watch the next several weeks. even the document they put to the court, the judge kind of went back with them and said, look, you need to here s what you actually need to put in a document like that. it didn t seem like it was really a strong legal document. it may have had political implications or that may have been the plan. it read a lot like his twitter feed did. and it was making a legal argument, but there s a reason that they go back tomorrow and clarify. they didn t ask for any action beyond. they wanted the special master but didn t put a timeline. typically you d say we want an emergency injunction on this action a pause on this, this done by this date. when it comes to the question of whether or no
but the world health organization estimates it is at least 115,000, that s around 200 deaths a day, although it says the true figure is likely to be much higher, and even though health and care workers were supposed to be prioritised for covid jabs as soon as they became available, only one in eight globally have been fully vaccinated and the vast majority of them are in richer nations. it is and the vast ma ority of them are in richer nations. richer nations. it is a moral responsibility richer nations. it is a moral responsibility that - richer nations. it is a moral responsibility that we i richer nations. it is a moral. responsibility that we should richer nations. it is a moral i responsibility that we should all richer nations. it is a moral - responsibility that we should all be concerned about. we need to go beyond the applause for health workers into action. i beyond the applause for health workers into action. beyond the applause for health workers into action. i had my f