Orange County reached settlement that allows cops to arrest homeless people in some areas || TGP
“Orange County, Calif., reached a settlement Tuesday that will allow law enforcement to immediately arrest homeless people in certain locations, including the John Wayne Airport, flood control channels and high-risk wilderness areas.
The Orange County Board of Supervisors settled two federal lawsuits filed last year aimed at efforts to clear out hundreds of homeless people who were camped out along the Santa Ana riverbed near Angel Stadium, Los Angeles’s Fox 11 reported.
The settlement reached Tuesday allows Orange County to create two zones to enforce nuisance laws—one in which homeless people can be arrested immediately, another that requires police to first seek help from social workers.
Homeless individuals will be arrested immediately in areas that include John Wayne Airport, flood control channels and high-risk wilderness areas. Police in other designated areas will have to first reach out to social workers to place homeless people in shelters. If transients refuse services, police are allowed to put them in jail.
“If it seems obvious that a patient has a medical condition then they will be transported to a county clinic for assessment” before being placed in a shelter, Orange County Supervisor Andrew Do said.”
American Airlines mechanic in Miami charged with sabotaging plane. It aborted takeoff || Miami Herald
Story by Jay Weaver:
“An American Airlines mechanic appeared in federal court Friday on a sabotage charge accusing him of disabling a navigation system on a flight with 150 people aboard before it was scheduled to take off from Miami International Airport earlier this summer.
The reason, according to a criminal complaint filed in Miami federal court: Abdul-Majeed Marouf Ahmed Alani, a veteran employee, was upset over stalled union contract negotiations.
None of the passengers and crew on the flight to Nassau were injured because his tampering with the so-called air data module caused an error alert as the pilots powered up the plane’s engines on the runway July 17, according to the complaint affidavit.
As a result, flight No. 2834 was aborted and taken out of service for routine maintenance at American’s hangar at MIA, which is when the tampering with the ADM system was discovered during an inspection. An AA mechanic found a loosely connected tube in front of the nose gear underneath the cockpit that had been deliberately obstructed with some sort of hard foam material.
Alani, 60, of Tracy, California, near San Francisco, is charged with “willfully damaging, destroying or disabling an aircraft” and made his first appearance in Miami federal court on Friday. Alani, who was arrested Thursday morning by federal air marshals and FBI agents at MIA where he worked as an AA mechanic, will be held at a federal lock-up at least until his detention hearing next Wednesday.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Maria Medetis said her office will seek to detain Alani, who was appointed a federal public defender by Magistrate Judge John J. O’Sullivan after he found the mechanic was unable to pay for his own defense.
At Friday’s first appearance, Alani spoke halting English and the judge asked for an Arabic interpreter to translate. Alana, who is from Iraq but has lived in the United States for decades, told the judge that he was making $7,000 to $8,000 a month from his job as a mechanic for American Airlines. He said he owned a property in Sarasota and leased a couple of cars, a 2018 Honda and 2016 Camaro.
O’Sullivan asked Alani if he was still employed. He didn’t respond immediately.
Medetis, the prosecutor, then interjected: “It is our understanding that he is going to be suspended without pay.”
After the hearing, Assistant Federal Public Defender Anthony Natale declined to comment about the sabotage allegations in the criminal complaint.
“Obviously, we just got the paperwork,” said Natale, a veteran federal public defender who was involved in the high-profile terrorism trial of Jose Padilla in Miami more than a decade ago. “That’s all I can say.”
For now, Alanis is being held on a criminal complaint but is expected to be indicted soon on a sabotage-related charge by a federal grand jury. His arraignment is scheduled for Sept. 20.
According to the complaint affidavit, Alani glued the foam inside the tube leading from outside the American Airlines plane to its air data module, a system that reports aircraft speed, pitch and other critical flight data. As a result, if the plane had taken off that day from MIA, the pilots would have had to operate the aircraft manually because the ADM system would not have received any computer data.
After his arrest Thursday, the affidavit says that Alani told federal air marshals assigned to the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force that “his intention was not to cause harm to the aircraft or its passengers.”
He said that his motive in tampering with the navigational system was because he was “upset” over stalled contract negotiations between the mechanics’ union and American Airlines that has raged for months — that “the dispute had affected him financially.”
He further said he only tampered with the plane’s air data module “in order to cause a delay or have the flight canceled in anticipation of obtaining overtime work,” according to the affidavit.
Relations have become so strained between the 12,000-employee mechanics’ union and American Airlines that the organization vowed a “bloody” battle over the course of the summer that has led to bitter legal fights in Texas, where the company is headquartered.
In a message to employees, David Seymour, American’s senior vice president of operations, said the airline works with authorities and other experts to improve safety procedures. He said American maintains full trust and confidence in its employees.
“Fortunately, with appropriate safety protocols and processes, this individual’s actions were discovered and mitigated before our aircraft flew,” Seymour said. “We have been cooperating with authorities in this matter and will continue to do so.”
The Associated Press contributed to this report.”
….read more at:
What screening measures? Accused Somali war criminal found working security at Dulles Airport || Washington Times
“Americans have a right to question our government’s ability to screen and vet immigrants and refugees coming into the country. For real gaps exist, which can pose severe security risks to our country.
Take for example, Yusuf Abdi Ali, an accused war criminal from Somalia, now living in the U.S. and working as a security guard at Dulles International Airport near Washington, D.C. A simple Google search on Mr. Ali would have turned up the atrocities he is accused of committing during Somalia’s bloody civil war.
So what did Mr. Ali allegedly do? According to a human rights group which filed a lawsuit against him, Mr. Ali is accused of personally overseeing torture, as well as being a torturer.
“He arrested people, stole their stuff, burned villages, executed masses of people,” Kathy Roberts, an attorney for the Center for Justice and Accountability, which is leading the suit against him, told CNN. “At one point he had a school come out to view an execution.”
A CNN investigation found that Mr. Ali has been “living a normal suburban life just outside of the nation’s capital, in Alexandria, Virginia. He shares an apartment with his wife and works as a security guard at one of the busiest airports in the country.”
American Airlines Mechanic Abdul-Majeed Marouf Ahmed Alani Charged with Sabotaging Plane || The GatewayPundit
“American Airlines mechanic Abdul-Majeed Marouf Ahmed Alani was arrested Thursday after sabotaging the navigation system of a flight to Nassau with 150 passengers on board. Alani admitted on Thursday that he tampered with the controls of the flight.
An American Airlines mechanic was arrested Thursday on a sabotage charge accusing him of disabling a navigation system on a flight with 150 people aboard before it was scheduled to take off from Miami International Airport earlier this summer.
The reason, according to a criminal complaint affidavit filed in Miami federal court: Abdul-Majeed Marouf Ahmed Alani, a veteran employee, was upset over stalled union contract negotiations.
None of the passengers and crew on the flight to Nassau were injured because the tampering with the so-called air data module caused an error alert as the pilots powered up the plane’s engines on the runway July 17, according to a criminal complaint affidavit filed in Miami federal court.”
They’re Not Sending Their Best: African Migrants on way to US FIGHT MEXICAN POLICE in Wild Border Brawl in Tapachula (VIDEO) || TGP
“Military police officers clash with migrants from Africa, Haiti and other countries during a protest in front of an immigration center in Tapachula, Mexico, demanding free transit through the country to reach the United States, Tuesday, August 27. (AFP)”
DOJ: 64% Of Federal Arrests In 2018 Were Of NON-U.S. Citizens | TGP
“In fiscal 2018, 64% of all the arrests made by the federal government were of non-U.S. citizens, according to a report released Thursday by the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics.
For comparison, In 1998, 63% of all federal arrests were of U.S. citizens.
“The country of citizenship of persons arrested by federal law enforcement changed notably over time. From 1998 to 2018, Mexican citizens’ share of federal arrests rose from 28% to 40%. Citizens of Central American countries’ share of federal arrests rose from 1% to 20% during the same period, while U.S. citizens’ share of federal arrests fell from 63% to 36%. Federal arrests of Central Americans rose more than 30-fold over two decades, from 1,171 in 1998 to 39,858 in 2018. The number of federal arrests of Mexican citizens (78,062) exceeded the number of federal arrests of U.S. citizens (70,542) in 2018,” said the Department.
“Our California Counts collaborative will host a U.S. Senate debate with California Attorney General Kamala Harris, Rep. Loretta Sanchez, Duf Sundheim, Tom Del Beccaro and Ron Unz 7 p.m. at KPBS in San Diego Tuesday, May 10. The debate will air live on 88.5FM and stream on KQED.org.”
Video: Illegal Alien Deported Three Times Killed After Shooting at Deputy; Illegal Was Reportedly Protected by CA Sanctuary Laws From Multiple ICE Detainers
“Javier Hernandez-Morales, 43, a Mexican national thrice-deported from the U.S. who was shot to death by Napa County sheriff’s Deputy Riley Jarecki after he fired at the deputy during a traffic stop Sunday night, was protected from further deportations by California’s sanctuary laws which blocked the federal government from detaining him on four separate occasions in recent years when he was arrested there according to a statement issued Thursday by ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement).
The Napa County Sheriff’s Office released a video Wednesday of the shooting which shows Hernandez-Morales pulling a handgun on the deputy and firing at her as she spoke to him on the driver’s side. The deputy, who was not wounded, went to the other side of the car and returned fire, killing him. The screen image above is from before the shooting. The deputy first approached from the passenger side, then went to the driver’s side where she was fired on. The video was accompanied by this statement:
“Warning: This post contains graphic video content and is not suitable for children. This Body Worn Camera footage depicts the Attempted Murder of Napa County Sheriff’s Deputy Riley Jarecki on February 17th, 2019. The decedent, Javier Hernandez Morales, fired the first shots. Deputy Jarecki returned fire. She was not physically injured. Hernandez Morales died at the scene.”
Obama Declared 13 National Emergencies — 11 Are Still Active
“There are a lot of national emergencies going on. In fact, there are 31 active national emergencies declared under the National Emergencies Act.
Bill Clinton used this authority 17 times. President Trump has only used it three times so far.
Sorry Democrats, this “national emergency” business is not quite the work of “dictators.”
Conservative Tribune reports: “Of Obama’s 11 continuing national emergencies, nine of them were focused exclusively on foreign nations, while only one seemed focused on protecting America — a declaration aimed at punishing individuals “engaging in significant malicious cyber-enabled activities.”
All of the rest of Obama’s national emergencies were focused on blocking property or prohibiting transactions/travel for individuals engaged in various activities in — by order of the date of enactment — Somalia, Libya, transnational criminal organizations, Yemen, Ukraine, South Sudan, Central African Republic, Venezuela and Burundi.
The American people stand with President Trump following his amazing Oval Office address explaining the human cost of illegal immigration.
If President Donald Trump uses the U.S. military to build the border wall along the United States’ international with Mexico by declaring a national emergency, won’t liberals simply run to a Federal judge whom they believe to be left-wing within the Ninth Circuit and block Trump? Can Congress vote to overturn Trump’s declaration of an emergency?
No. If the federal courts actually follow the law, President Trump cannot be prevented from “reprogramming” funds appropriated for the U.S. Department of Defense and actually using the military (such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) to build the border wall.
As noted in the first installment on this topic, Congress has given a president the power to declare a national emergency by 50 U.S.C. 1621 and 50 U.S.C. 1622. A declaration of an emergency allows the President to reprogram funds in the military budget. See 33 U.S. Code § 2293 “Reprogramming during national emergencies.”
Trump could reprogram funds from other parts of the Department of Defense budget — including from other DoD construction projects such as on bases, military housing, etc. — and engage in construction in areas of need for the national defense. The statute says that explicitly (although statutes are never easy reading).
But Democrats are threatening and commentators are warning that such an action would be challenged in court and in Congress immediately. Can such a plan be blocked?
First, 50 U.S.C. §1622 allows the Congress to over-turn a president’s declaration of an emergency. If both the Senate and the House each pass s resolution terminating the President’s declaration of an emergency, than the emergency status terminates under 50 U.S.C. §1622. But clearly the Republican-controlled U.S. Senate would not join the Democrat-controlled U.S. House of Representatives. Unless a significant number of Republican Senators vote against a border wall built by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or contractors with military funds, Congress could not block Trump’s efforts.
(Note, although I argue in the next section that this power has been invalidated by the U.S. Supreme Court, if a court disagrees on that, a legislative veto power should block a lawsuit. Where Congress has provided a specific method for challenging a declaration of an emergency, the federal courts would normally hold that that method becomes the exclusive remedy. A lawsuit would be blocked by the fact that Congress provided a non-litigation remedy.)
Second, however, the Congressional veto process described above has been ruled unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court, in INS v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919 (1983), finding a legislative veto of Executive Branch action unconstitutional. Congress passed many laws which specifically enabled Congress to veto regulations or actions under that law. The U.S. Supreme Court found a legislative veto violates the structure or architecture of the Constitutional system.
Laws go to the President for signature or veto. Congress cannot reach over and pull a law back. Congress must pass a new law and present it to the President for signature if dissatisfied with how the law is working out. The U.S. Supreme Court had no hesitation finding that the Congress had over-reached, based only on the implied architecture of the Constitution.
In Chadha, 50 U.S.C. 1622 was one of the laws explicitly discussed. The dissenting opinion specifically warned that the Chadha decision invalidated Congress’s ability to overturn a presidential declaration of a national emergency.
Therefore, Congress cannot overturn a declaration by President Trump that the open border is a national emergency. Even if the U.S. Senate were to side with the Democrats, Chadha explicitly ruled the Congressional veto (termination) of a presidential declaration to be an unconstitutional distortion of the familiar “Schoolhouse Rock” means by which laws are passed and signed by presidents. Once a law is signed, there is no “claw back” right by Congress.
Third, of course, critics are discussing whether Trump’s actions would be constitutional. Here, however, Congress passed a specific statute, in fact a series of statutes. So there is no question about the President’s power to do what the Congressional statute has explicitly empowered him to do.
Some even point to a rather famous Constitutional landmark case — Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952) — in which the U.S. Supreme Court explicitly ruled that President Dwight D. Eisenhower did not have the power to temporarily nationalize the U.S. steel industry to avert a strike for national defense. However, Youngstown was not that simple. Youngstown analyzed the inherent powers of Commander in Chief as modified by Congressional agreement by statute.
The U.S. Supreme Court explicitly analyzed that the President’s powers are at their greatest (zenith) when he acts not only by his inherent powers as President but also by the agreement of a statute passed by Congress. In Youngstown, Eisenhower did not have any statute supporting his action and the Court reasoned that he was actually acting in conflict with relevant statutes.
Here, the Congress has already enacted and President George W. Bush signed into law, the Secure Fence Act of 2006. It is already the law of the land that a border wall shall be built along the United States’ Southern border. Neither Congress nor any private plaintiff can challenge the official determination that a border wall or barrier shallbuilt. That is the law. That is the official determination of both the U.S. Congress and the Commander in Chief.
The Secure Fence Act of 2006 was never implemented (other than a few miles) because Congress did not appropriate the funds to pay for it. There are two steps: Authorization and Appropriation of funds. The decision to build a border wall is final. The only question is applying funds to make it happen.
Building of a border wall under the 2006 Act was also not completed because the Swamp and Deep State sabotaged it. Using classic bureaucratic games, the bureaucracy and open borders legislators followed “designed to fail” steps that ground the construction to a halt.
Note that in spite of the word “fence” in the title, the law does not actually mandate a “fence” in particular. The wording of the Act is not about a “fence” but about any kind of barrier customized to the particular terrain in each location to the extent necessary to “the prevention of all unlawful entries into the United States, including entries by terrorists, other unlawful aliens, instruments of terrorism, narcotics, and other contraband.” That is “all.” As in “all.”
So the Secure Fence Act of 2006 requires building “whatever it takes” — not a “fence” per se. The Act does require specific enhanced barriers and lights, cameras, and sensors, in some named locations.
Fourth, could liberals run to the courts to block Trump from using the military to build a border wall? No. Only those with “standing” can bring a lawsuit. How is anyone harmed?
The federal courts have been waging Jihad against citizens bringing lawsuits for decades. The federal courts have been raising the bar higher and higher to make it nearly impossible for anyone to challenge the actions of government agencies or public officials. Specifically a complaint that is shared generally by much of the population cannot establish standing.
Contrary to strongly-held popular belief, the U.S. Supreme Court has clearly ruled that taxpayers do not have standing to challenge government spending, revenue, or action merely because they are taxpayers. See, Daimlerchrysler Corp. v. Cuno, 126 S.Ct. 1854, 164 L.Ed.2d 589, 547 U.S. 332 (2006). So the Left cannot block Trump’s plans by suing as taxpayers. (The only exceptions involve use of funds to establish a religion or local government taxpayers.)
To bring a lawsuit, one must show that they are tangibly harmed, personally, not just in disagreement with a policy. If Trump uses some of the $700 billion in the omnibus bill to build a border wall, everyone will be more safe. How is anyone harmed?”