The walkout had been due to start at 07:00 BST on Monday and last all week.
Source link
Resident doctors cancel strike after new offer from government
NYC pilot, passenger rescued after wave slams seaplane near Throggs Neck Bridge
A seaplane pilot and his passenger had to be rescued from the East River Saturday in Queens after their craft briefly took off — but then crashed after it was struck by a wave which cracked the windshield, the pilot and authorities said.
The aircraft was near Riverside Drive and 158th St. in Whitestone, near the Throggs Neck Bridge, when the incident happened around 9:20 a.m., an FDNY spokesman said.
A private boater who was nearby rescued the two people, who were not seriously hurt, from the plane, officials said.
“I was taking off and I hit a big wave and the windshield cracked,” pilot Giuseppe Oppedisano told The Post, adding the plane started taking on water.
Oppedisano, 67, owns the popular Il Bacco restaurant in Little Neck, Queens, and is the same pilot who was at the controls in October 2020 during a fatal crash that killed a woman and left three others hurt.
During that crash six years ago, witnesses said the plane was traveling fast along the water when it hit a pier, which cracked the plane in two, according to official.
A National Transportation Safety Board investigation listed poor pilot judgment as the cause of the tragedy.
Oppedisano was left in critical condition after that crash and had to undergo 10 surgeries.
He lives near the spot where his plane crashed and keeps the craft in a hangar behind his Riverside Drive mansion, official have said in the past.
Taylor Frankie Paul admits she’s ’emotionally numb’ as Dakota Mortensen legal battle rages on
Taylor Frankie Paul confessed she’s “gone emotionally numb” as her ongoing custody battle with her ex Dakota Mortensen rages on.
The “Secret Lives of Mormon Wives” star, 32, shared the update via her Instagram Stories on Saturday in response to a fan who wrote, “I’m going through your exact situation I wish I could talk more on it! I’m so stuck.”
“I don’t know what to say anymore other than I’m right there with a lot of you,” Paul shared. “Wish I could be more helpful. Not sure when the nervous system switched… I can’t even cry lately which is very unlike me.”
She closed, “There is emotional overwhelm or numbness, both are coping mechanisms.”
Paul and Mortensen remain embroiled in a heated custody battle over their 2-year-old son, Ever, after the couple were both involved in several domestic violence incidents and police investigations.
In March, Mortensen took Paul to court after he claimed she had been physically violent with him and was granted sole custody of their shared son. Paul is also mom to two children whom she shares with her ex-husband, Tate Paul.
Paul was later granted supervised visitation with her toddler son during a court appearance on April 7. But due to the judge’s concern regarding her “volatility,” she was limited to six hours of visitation time a week until her April 30 court date.
At which point, both reality stars were ordered to stay 100 feet away from each other, according to the terms of their mutual protective orders they both petitioned the courts for.
“What I’ve seen from the evidence even post last hearing, there seems to be a continuing attraction that they have for each other,” the judge noted during their hearing, criticizing their “toxic relationship.”
“You guys have to figure out a lot here. You have to figure out how to function as coparents.”
Mortensen publicly acknowledged his bitter legal battle with his ex in April prior to the judge’s most recent ruling, telling his followers that he took “a step back” amid the “chaos” of their situation for some much needed “clarity.”
The reality star added that his “focus now is where it should have been all along — on [his] son, [Ever], and creating a stable, healthy environment for him moving forward.”
He continued, “I regret not stepping away from a difficult cycle sooner. I’m not perfect, and I take accountability for my part. I’m sincerely sorry to those I’ve hurt.”
If you or someone you know is affected by any of the issues raised in this story, call the National Domestic Violence Hotline at 1-800-799-SAFE (7233) or text START to 88788.
Dems’ dirty donation platform shows they don’t give a damn about clean elections
Last week exposed the utter hypocrisy of Democrats who scream about “free and fair elections” and demand that we get dark money out of politics.
Specifically, the House Administration Committee shined a spotlight on the Dems’ major fund-raising platform, ActBlue, and its apparent efforts to end-run the federal laws that Dems insist are all about “clean campaigns.”
The Justice Department is investigating ActBlue’s role in the use of straw donors to launder illegal giving; a larger federal probe is looking into the platform’s alleged efforts to help funnel illegal foreign donations to Democratic candidates.
ActBlue CEO Regina Wallace-Jones appeared Wednesday to answer questions about how her company abetted illegal donations — only to repeatedly plead the Fifth.
A terrible look, but probably wise, since she gave false testimony to the same committee in 2023.
ActBlue’s record is filthy: For years, it failed to follow basic security procedures (like requiring 3-digit CVV numbers on credit cards), leading its own internal anti-fraud team to sound the alarm — leaving huge loopholes for, in the company’s own words, “a big attack where each individual donation fell below the [fraud review] threshold.”
A 2023 House analysis of more than 200 million FEC records of ActBlue-processed “giving” found hundreds of small donations from the same individual, donations in amounts far greater than the donor could afford, and unusually frequent donations from elderly people or first-time contributors — all telltale signs of “smurfing,” or using fake info to give illegally to campaigns.
That prompted the House committee to ask Wallace-Jones how secure her platform really was: She insisted, “our approach is multilayered, with checks and confirmations occurring throughout the donation process” to “root out potential foreign contributions, and protect donors from financial fraud.”
That was three years ago — and it was false when she said it, per an investigation conducted last year by law firm Covington and Burling.
A Democratic superlawyer and ex-Obama official, Dana Remus, was Covington’s point person on that probe; Obama-era Attorney General Eric Holder is a senior counsel at the firm. This wasn’t about partisanship.
Wallace-Jones’ false testimony to Congress “presents a substantial risk for ActBlue,” the investigation found. The CEO’s response? To fire Covington, even as senior-level lawyers and other top people within ActBlue headed for the hills.
Meanwhile, the company lowered its already-lax standards for the 2024 election cycle — not once but twice, to let hundreds of illegal donations from foreign nationals flow through, and missing more than 6% of fraud (at the most conservative estimate).
Pretty bold, when Wallace-Jones knew she was under federal scrutiny.
Democrats should be up in arms about this crooked setup; they’ve spent the past decade screaming about election integrity — and yelling about the pernicious power of money in politics for even longer.
Hah! Dems at Wednesday’s hearing dismissed the investigation as just a partisan attack, with serial liar Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md) droning, “This hearing is part of a political vengeance and vendetta campaign.”
Rep. Terri Sewell (D-Ala.) saw racism at work: “Over and over again, Donald Trump’s Department of Justice has harassed Black women with bogus lawsuits.”
Yes, Wallace-Jones is black — but it’s the Democrats who chose to make her the face of ActBlue, the source of the stink. (Did they hire her expressly so they could play the race card when ActBlue got caught?)
If Democrats actually gave a damn about the crisis of public trust, they’d be the ones hammering ActBlue into oblivion.
Instead, they’re running interference for it — fresh proof that, for all their lip service about clean politics, all the Dems really care about is power.
Haiti vs. Scotland prediction: World Cup odds, picks, best bets for Saturday
You can expect one of the most vibrant atmospheres for the entire World Cup when Haiti takes on Scotland at Gillette Stadium on Saturday night.
These fanbases are known for their ability to bring the noise, but things will go up several decibels for this tilt. It’s Scotland’s first World Cup match since 1998, and just the second ever appearance for Haiti, which hasn’t qualified for the big dance since 1974.
Neither country has ever made it past the group stage.
And given how this group stacks up — Brazil and Morocco are the other two teams in the set — this is a massive match for both the Tartan Army and Les Grenadiers.
It may be their first match of the tournament, but this is essentially a must-win for both teams.
Scotland is a -180 favorite on the three-way moneyline at FanDuel Sportsbook.
Scotland vs. Haiti odds, picks
Tactics nerds are in for a treat for this matchup, should these teams play true to form.
Haiti could be the worst team in this field of 48, but they don’t play the type of soccer that we’ve come to equate with long shots at the World Cup. Most of the time, these also-rans play a very conservative style and try to nick a result by defending deep and hitting on the counter or getting a goal off a set piece. Costa Rica famously deployed this tactic en route to winning a group ahead of Uruguay, England, and Italy.
If we’ve learned anything about Les Grenadiers from their rise in CONCACAF, they will not be parking a bus. Haiti defends high, deploys a press up the field, and tries to turn the ball over as close to the opponent’s goal as they can. Against the likes of Honduras, El Salvador, or St. Lucia, this bold strategy can work.
Scotland may not be a world-beater, but The Tartan Army is miles and miles better than those teams, and they also play a direct style of soccer that makes pressing high up the pitch quite a dangerous approach.
Steve Clarke wants Scotland to play direct. He doesn’t want any nonsense. He instructs his charges to get on the ball, fling it up the field or out wide, and bomb crosses into the box. That means if you get caught with too many numbers high up the pitch, the Tartan Army will make you pay, especially since their best player, Scott McTominay, is a master at arriving late and picking up the pieces on a counter-attack.
McTominay, once of Manchester United, has developed into one of the best players in the world, and his skillset is perfectly suited for this stylistic matchup.
It’s also important to note that Scotland will be highly incentivized to rack up as many goals as possible in this match. With Morocco and Brazil on deck, the Scots will want to pad their goal differential in this tilt to protect themselves against a rout against the two favorites in this group.
Everything in this one is pointing to a crooked number for Scotland, and you get +630 at FanDuel on the Tartan Army to go over 3.5 goals. McTominay at +950 to score twice is also worth a hard look.
The Plays: Scotland Team Total Over 3.5 (+630, FanDuel) | Scott McTominay to score 2+ goals (+950)
Why Trust New York Post Betting
Michael Leboff is a long-suffering Islanders fan, but a long-profiting sports bettor with 10 years of experience in the gambling industry. He loves using game theory to help punters win bracket pools, find long shots, and learn how to beat the market in mainstream and niche sports.
California Democrats destroy trust in elections
Well done, California Democrats.
We weren’t sure you could do it, but you came through.
In just one primary election you managed to pull off a rare trifecta of political infamy for the Golden State: the embarrassment of a vote-counting system that takes so long it would have looked obsolete in colonial Virginia; the shame of an election process that invites deep suspicion about the integrity of the democratic order at a time of historically low public trust; and the misery of an outcome that just about guarantees the same misrule by the same people responsible for the dysfunction and chaos that is steadily bleeding the state dry.
Last month, Gavin Newsom issued a call to election officials across the state. “We must continue building confidence in our elections and ensure that not only every vote is counted but every vote is trusted,” he wrote, hailing new rules and procedures that were supposed to speed up the vote counting.
How’s that working out for you?
The state that is home to companies whose technologies can perform the most complex tasks in nanoseconds was still counting votes a week after the polls closed.
To Gov. Newsom and his party, this is progress. To the rest of the planet, it just looks like a joke.
Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton was right to say that “the world is laughing” at California’s snail-paced ballot counting, but for Californians, it’s no laughing matter.
By midnight in Florida on election night, almost all the votes are counted and results declared. In California, they’re barely getting started.
For a state already losing the reputation battle to more dynamic, nimbler rivals, the electoral shambles is more evidence that California is failing.
But it’s not just embarrassing. It undermines faith in democracy itself.
There’s no hard evidence of widespread fraud in this month’s primary, but the way California conducts its election seems almost designed to undermine public trust in the process.
The manner in which Los Angeles mayoral candidate Nithya Rahman steadily overtook Spencer Pratt’s solid lead days after the initial vote count may just about be explicable by the disproportionately high number of Democrats who mail in their ballots –– and whose votes are counted late.
But it had a distinct throwback quality to the days when Democratic machines in American cities would hold back their vote counts until they new exactly how many their candidate “needed” to pull ahead.
In classic California fashion, the panoply of rules supposedly designed to make ballots fairer and more trusted have the opposite effect: allowing seven days for mailed-in ballots to arrive; elaborate signature verification processes; forms of identity with laughably weak security like gym memberships, ballot harvesting and great dumps of votes garnered by partisan activists.
No wonder trust in the process is slumping.
But worse than the process of this year’s primary election, of course, is the seemingly inevitable result it produced once again.
In LA, Pratt’s defeat and the prospect of a runoff between two Democrats is not only a depressing reminder of the rancid stagnation you get when one party has virtually unaccountable control.
It’s another indictment of the way in which the state picks its leaders.
The jungle primary model was supposed to benefit moderate candidates in both parties by encouraging them to seek voters across the political spectrum. Instead, it more often deprives voters of real choice.
Instead of separate party primaries which produce two candidates who then offer genuinely competing platforms in the general election –– when more people vote –– we have a system that frequently eliminates true choice.
Karen Bass and Raman now face no restraining alternative from the other side of the political spectrum.
For a city that has been ravaged by homelessness, crime, failed public responses to emergencies and chronically poor educational opportunities, this is a travesty: The answer to four-plus years of mismanagement is an invitation to choose between the candidate who’s been responsible for it with ruinous Democratic policies, or the candidate offering to outflank her with Democratic policies guaranteed to be more ruinous.
At the state level, at least the jungle primary produced a general election contest with a real choice. Thanks to Republican voters consolidating behind Hilton, he gets to go head to head against quintessential establishment Democrat Xavier Becerra.
At least Hilton has an opportunity to lay out the promise of a turn away from the endless, vicious vortex of tax and spend policies that have harmed the state’s economy and driven wealthy creators away while doing nothing to improve public services.
If you want a look at what more Democratic rule would mean, just take a glance at Measure ER in LA County, which as of this writing is ahead. It’s yet another tax increase –– this one a sales tax surcharge supposedly to fund health care but which seems certain to cause only more pain to hard-pressed consumers.
That’s quite a trifecta, Democrats. While you’re celebrating, California is 0-for-3.
Gerard Baker is editor at large of The Wall Street Journal.
Download The California Post App, follow us on social, and subscribe to our newsletters
California Post News: Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, X, YouTube, WhatsApp, LinkedIn
California Post Sports Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, YouTube, X
California Post Opinion
California Post Newsletters: Sign up here!
California Post App: Download here!
Home delivery: Sign up here!
Page Six Hollywood: Sign up here!
Embattled USC dean lands new gig after faculty revolt
An embattled University of Southern California business school dean has quietly landed a new advisory role in the president’s office after facing a faculty revolt over his leadership.
USC Marshall School of Business Dean Geoffrey Garret came under fire last month after professors blamed him for declining enrollment and cuts to graduate programs.
The backlash exploded after 52 faculty members signed a scathing April 4 letter criticizing his leadership. Garrett responded by holding a town hall in May — but the meeting only deepened the unrest.
Professors told LA Material the “disappointing” session left them even more frustrated.
“It’s incredibly tone-deaf to waste the time of 260+ people,” one professor said.
Another added that it seemed like “a waste of time.”
Some even pointed out his seven-figure salary in the webchat for the talk. Garret had a salary of $1.16 million in fiscal year 2023, according to ProPublica.
A staffer suggested Garret only dug a deeper hole for himself.
“It felt like in the movies, where you need to rush onstage and pull the person off because it’s getting worse and worse,” one staffer who witnessed the blowup said. “Just cut the lights. Kill it.”
The school announced Wednesday that Garret will leave his position in August to assume a newly created role as Special Advisor to the President for Global Strategy and Engagement. He’ll be asked to “strengthen USC’s relationships,” “expand our international reach,” and “advance opportunities,” according to a Wednesday memo obtained by LA Material from Provost Andrew Guzman.
The move will make sure Garret dodges a vote of no confidence Marshall faculty had scheduled for July.
Beong-Soo Kim, the university’s president, expressed confidence that he’s a good fit for the role.
“He’s someone who thinks globally and has as good a sense as anyone as to how things are going to unfold geopolitically — and what the challenges and opportunities are for USC,” he said.
Andrew Call, the dean of USC’s accounting school, will serve as interim dean for the business school.
Garret had led the USC business school since they appointed him to the position in 2020 after he served six years as dean of the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania.
Restaurant owners in World Cup cities take matters into their own hands’ over fears customers won’t tip
As restaurants in several FIFA World Cup host cities welcome an influx of international visitors this weekend, some operators are adding automatic gratuities to customers’ checks — citing concerns that guests from countries without a strong tipping culture may unknowingly undercompensate workers.
Fox News Digital reported last month that the Missouri Restaurant Association advised Kansas City establishments to temporarily implement automatic gratuities of 20% during the soccer tournament.
Now, some restaurants in other World Cup cities like Atlanta and Philadelphia are among those doing the same, according to Food & Wine.
Supporters say the move is intended to protect workers who rely heavily on gratuities and avoid confusion for visitors unfamiliar with American tipping norms.
Some restaurant operators told TheTravel that they’ll display notices informing customers of the surcharge.
“We’ll have that posted on the menus themselves. We’ll have it posted in the restaurant,” Bob Riekhof, general manager of La Bodega in Kansas City, said in a statement.
“Probably the biggest part is just making sure our servers are communicating to the guests that the gratuity has been included on the check.”
Ben Fileccia, senior vice president of operations and public affairs for the Pennsylvania Restaurant & Lodging Association, told the publication that business owners “don’t want the servers or bartenders or the tipped employees to have to explain what the tipping custom is.”
He said the notices will make “for a much smoother transaction and no awkward conversations.”
Others, however, worry that mandatory gratuities could add to growing consumer frustration over fees and surcharges.
“Restaurant traffic has been declining, and anything that is perceived to increase the cost does risk some consumer backlash, particularly if it’s not well-publicized or if consumers feel there’s an expectation to tip on top of the automatic tip,” David Henkes, senior principal at Technomic, a food industry research firm in Chicago, told Fox News Digital.
Michele Bermuvez, co-owner of Atlanta’s Brewhouse Café, told Food & Wine that it’s “really important for us to take care of our staff.”
Said Bermuvez, “I definitely think there’ll be some pushback, but, you know, it’ll really streamline things for us.”
“We believe guests should tip based on the service they receive, not because of a major event.”
Not every restaurant operator believes automatic gratuities are necessary.
“At Mahon Hospitality, we will not be changing our gratuity policies during the World Cup,” Robert Mahon told Fox News Digital.
“We believe guests should tip based on the service they receive, not because of a major event.”
Mahon said his company is also taking a different approach to pricing as many businesses prepare for increased demand. At London & Martin Co., the hospitality group’s English pub in New York City, customers will be able to purchase $6 pints of Guinness throughout the World Cup.
“Our goal is simple: Create a great atmosphere, offer fair value and give fans a reason to come back throughout the tournament,” he said.
The debate highlights a broader question facing restaurants: whether protecting workers from cultural differences in tipping expectations requires automatic charges, or whether strong service and transparent pricing are enough to encourage customers to tip voluntarily.
Fox News Digital reached out to the National Restaurant Association for comment.
Funeral for Iran’s late supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei will start on July 4th
Bring the fireworks!
Iran has finally scheduled state funeral proceedings for slain Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei to begin on July 4 — the same day the US throws its 250th birthday bash.
The ayatollah was assassinated on Feb. 28, when the US and Israel slammed his Tehran compound with airstrike launching the Iran war. But the Islamic Republic dragged its feet on holding farewell ceremonies for more than three months since his death out of fear of being attacked again.
Now, with a peace deal expected to be signed in the next 24 hours, Iranian state media has announced details of the burial for the 86-year-old cleric.
Three days of funeral ceremonies will be held in the capital Tehran starting on July 4, at the prayer hall of Imam Khomenei — the founder of the Islamic Republic — before a funeral procession will leave on July 6.
Then on July 7, another funeral ceremony will be held in the holy city of Qom, south of Tehran.
The proceedings will conclude with a burial in Khamenei’s hometown, the northeastern holy city of Mashhad, on July 9.
Khamenei, who was the leader of the Islamic Republic for 36 years, will be buried at the shrine of Imam Reza, a holy place for Shiite Muslims.
Funerals for his daughter and son-in-law, who were also killed in the deadly Feb. 28 strike, will be held on the same day.
Despite Islamic law requiring the dead be buried within 24 hours ideally, the Islamic Republic is believed to have avoided Khamenei’s funeral for so long for fear of potential airstrikes, nationalist counter-rallies similar to the nationwide uprisings earlier this year, and the regime’s need to explain the absence of his son Mojtaba Khamenei.
The younger Khamenei’s son was severely disfigured in the strikes that killed his father and has not been seen in public since his appointment. It is unclear whether he’ll be attending the ceremonies starting.
The Islamic Republic initially planned a three-day state funeral beginning on March 4, but it never materialized once the country was rocked by large-scale Israeli and US bombing campaigns.
With Post Wires
House Dems claim race, jury selection may have played role in Karmelo Anthony verdict
House Democrats are raising concerns about how race and jury selection may have impacted the guilty verdict in the Karmelo Anthony case, with several arguing the verdict highlights the racism they believe exists in the criminal justice system.
“A travesty, two lives ruined, and what struck me most is that you had an all-White jury,” Rep. Christian Menefee, D-Texas, said when asked his thoughts on the guilty verdict.
“You had preemptive strikes that were used in order to achieve an all-White jury.”
After Anthony was sentenced to 35 years in prison on Tuesday for the stabbing and killing of 17-year-old Austin Metcalf at a high school track event, many activists and Democratic lawmakers have claimed the trial to be unfair and racist.
Many are claiming the jurors were all White, and that this contributed to the rejection of Anthony’s self-defense claim.
“Juries should represent the diversity of this country, and if a White kid was convicted of murder and it was an all-Black jury that did the conviction, people would say this is patently unfair,” Menefee said.
“So why should it be fair if it’s the other way around?”
But sources close to the trial told Fox News Digital that there were three jurors who were racial minorities. They said that of the 18 total jurors, including alternates, six were minorities. Additionally, four Black men testified in defense of Metcalf, saying Anthony was not provoked in any way to justify stabbing the 17-year-old.
Supporters of Anthony claim that he stabbed Metcalf as an act of self-defense, arguing he did not receive a fair trial. Some activists and Democratic lawmakers have called for further review of the case and urged Anthony to pursue an appeal.
“Here is a case where a young man certainly appears to have been being attacked and defended himself,” Rep. Troy Carter, D-La., said about the case.
“It does bring in light the imbalance in our judicial system, as it relates to African Americans and people of color” Carter continued. “And that’s a shame. So hopefully, there’ll be an opportunity for some appeal and some further discussion.”
“Case after case, after case you see that if it is a young Black person, they’re not allowed to be fearful, they’re not allowed self-defense, they don’t get the same standard ground opportunities that other people get,” Menefee said. “But then other races do.”
Some lawmakers were less likely to directly blame the trial as unfair due to race, but were still sympathetic toward Anthony and were not blatantly opposed to the idea of looking further into the evidence in the case despite a verdict already being made.
“We’ve got to stop this loss and the killing of these young children, number one,” Rep. Jonathan Jackson, D-Ill., said. “First of all, they need to reopen it and all the evidence needs to come forward.”
“I think it’s an unfortunate circumstance all the way around,” Rep. Shomari Figures, D-Ala., said.
He continued, “You have one young man who was killed. His family will never get to be with him again. You have another young man who, for all intents and purposes, thrown a lot of years of his life. A lot of the years of this life. If he does 35 years, he’ll be 50 — in his 50s — when he gets out. And it’s just totally unfortunate.”
Throughout their criticism of the verdict, several lawmakers framed the case as part of a larger debate over race, self-defense claims and equal treatment for minorities under the law.
“The American justice system does not work equally for everybody,” Menefee said.