Click here if you are having trouble viewing the photo gallery or video on your mobile device.

SAN JOSE — A UPS driver abducted during a carjacking on Thursday is being lauded for having nerves of steel.

The armed carjackers seized his delivery truck and forced him to drive it, with law enforcement officers in pursuit. But he drove slowly so that the police could keep up and then, in an attempt to derail his captors’ escape, purposely hit the metal spikes officers had placed on the road.

“When you are accosted, taken at gunpoint, and made to drive, like something that comes out in the movies, you can’t train for the calmness that man had,” San Jose Police Chief Eddie Garcia said.

Police say the UPS driver was caught in the middle of a violent sequence that began with a chance encounter at a South San Jose transit station and ended with the fatal shooting of a suspect by police Thursday night.

Sources identified the man who was killed as Mark Morasky of Saratoga. Morasky was on parole after serving four years in prison for a 2012 carjacking and two robberies in San Jose and Saratoga, court records show.

Joanna Mae Macy-Rogers, 23, of San Jose, was arrested Feb. 14, 2019 after a police chase and standoff that ended with the fatal police shooting of another suspect near North First Street and Trimble Road, authorities said. (San Jose Police Dept.) 

Garcia said Morasky and Joanna Mae Macy-Rogers, 23, were inside a black SUV, parked illegally at the Valley Transportation Authority light-rail station at Pearl and Chynoweth avenues around 5 p.m. Thursday. The SUV attracted the attention of plainclothes deputies with the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office. The Sheriff’s Office provides transit police for VTA.

As the deputies approached the vehicle to issue a ticket, the car’s occupants spotted them and drove away. A few minutes later, when the deputies caught up to the SUV, Macy-Rogers fired at them with a shotgun, Garcia said.

The car entered Highway 87 and Macy-Rogers allegedly fired multiple times at law enforcement officers who were in pursuit, which now included San Jose Police Department officers and a police helicopter.

“Several rounds struck the sheriff’s vehicle,” Garcia said. “Deputies were not injured and did not return fire.”

At some point, the fleeing SUV drove the wrong way on the freeway before exiting at Curtner Avenue, toward Communications Hill, Garcia said. The suspects abandoned their vehicle, saw the UPS truck and threatened the driver with the shotgun, then forced him to drive them in his truck.

Around 6 p.m. Thursday, the truck made it to North First Street and Trimble Road where dozens of police cars immediately surrounded it.

Pictured is a shotgun allegedly used by a suspect in a police chase and fatal police shooting in North San Jose on Feb. 14, 2019. (San Jose Police Dept.) 

Soon after, the UPS worker was released, and Macy-Rogers also left the truck and surrendered to police. At one point, friends of Morasky went to the scene and told police that they were in contact with the suspect by phone. Referring to the “three strikes” law that mandated life imprisonment for multiple felony offenders, the friends told reporters that Morasky was a “two-striker” who wanted to surrender.

Garcia said police did have brief phone contact with Morasky, but did not comment on whether he signaled any intention to give up.

“He had every opportunity to give up peacefully, and he chose not to,” Garcia said.

Just before 7 p.m., Morasky started the truck and drove it a few feet. As police maneuvered two armored vehicles into the truck’s path, he jumped out of the truck, carrying the shotgun, and tried to flee.

Then, in a scene partially captured by television cameras, Garcia said a San Jose police officer fired a single shot that hit and killed the suspect as he ran “toward officers and civilians.”

Matthew O’Connor, a spokesman for UPS, declined to identify the driver or comment on his actions, but said the company was providing support for him and for other employees who work with him.

“We’re giving our driver some privacy after yesterday’s incident, and we’re offering grief counseling to the driver and our other employees in the area,” he said.

The officer who opened fire, described as a 12-year veteran with the SJPD, was placed on paid administrative leave. As is the case with every officer-involved shooting in the county, an investigation was launched by the police department in conjunction with the District Attorney’s Office, with the DA’s office expected to issue a report in six to eight months.

Macy-Rogers was booked into the Santa Clara County jail on suspicion of attempted murder of a police officer, carjacking, kidnapping and shooting at an occupied vehicle.

Besides driving into the police-laid spike strips, Garcia said the UPS driver apparently convinced his abductors that the delivery truck was equipped with a device that prevented it from going over 50 mph.

“The things this guy did, it’s pretty amazing stuff,” he said. “He definitely saved lives, including his own.”

Staff writers Nico Savidge, Mark Gomez, George Avalos, and George Kelly contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/02/15/sources-chance-encounter-at-light-rail-station-set-off-chase-ups-carjacking-police-shooting/

<!– –>

Special counsel Robert Mueller urged a federal judge in Virginia on Friday to sentence ex-Trump campaign chief Paul Manafort to between about 19 years to 24 years in prison.

Mueller, in a court filing, also suggested the judge fine Manafort between $50,000 to $24 million, order the longtime Republican operative to pay restitution of more than $24 million, and forfeit more than $4 million.

The special counsel’s recommendation is in line with a pre-sentencing report conducted by federal probation officials.

Mueller’s filing came hours after he asked the judge in the case, T.S. Ellis, to set a sentencing date for Manafort“as soon as practicable.”

“For a decade, Manafort repeatedly violated the law,” the filing said. “Considering only the crimes charged in this district, they make plain that Manafort chose to engage in a sophisticated scheme to hide millions of dollars from United States authorities.”

Manafort was convicted at trial last Aug. 21 in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia of eight felony counts, which included tax fraud, failure to file a report of a foreign bank and financial accounts, and bank fraud. A jury deadlocks on other counts.

The case was related to income Manafort earned while doing consulting work for pro-Russia politicians in Ukraine. That work predated his tenure of leading the Trump campaign for several months in 2016.

Manafort already is due to be sentenced March 13 in a related criminal case in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. He pleaded guilty in that case in September, days before a scheduled trial, to two counts of conspiracy.

As part of his gulty plea, Manafort agreed to cooperate with Mueller’s ongoing probe of Russian interference in the 2016 election, and possible efforts by members of Trump’s campaign to aid that interference.

However, in November, Mueller accused Manafort of breaking that plea deal by lying to federal authorities about multiple subjects.

Earlier this week, the judge in the Washington case, Amy Berman Jackson, said that Manafort had lied several times to the FBI, the special counsel’s office and a grand jury. But she also said Mueller had failed to provide enough evidence to prove Manafort had lied about several other issues.

Jackson’s finding means that the special counsel is no longer bound to recommend any leniency for Manafort when he is sentenced.

Manafort’s legal team had disputed Mueller’s claim that he broke the plea deal.

Earlier Friday, Trump’s spokeswoman, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, said she has been interviewed by Mueller’s team.

Manafort, 69, has been in jail without bail since last June, when Mueller asked him and a former business associate, Konstantin Kilimnik, of trying to tamper with witnesses in what was at the time his upcoming criminal trials.

Mueller has accused Kilimnik of being a Russian spy. Kiliminik has denied that claim, but he remains abroad, and out of reach of American authorities.

Source Article from https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/15/special-counsel-robert-mueller-wants-ex-trump-campaign-boss-paul-manafort-imprisoned-for-up-to-24-years.html

President Trump, leaving the White House on Friday afternoon, waved to reporters but ignored shouted questions about the still developing Aurora shooting.

Some reporters also asked questions about border security. He also ignored those questions, too.

Trump and first lady Melania Trump boarded Marine One minutes later, followed by several aides including acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney and Dan Scavino, his social media aide. 

They are on their way to Florida for the weekend.

Source Article from https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/active-shooter-aurora-illinois/index.html

[President Trump declared a national emergency. What happens now?]

In addition to a legislative effort to stop Mr. Trump, the issue will almost certainly be taken to court, either by congressional Democrats, liberal advocacy groups or both. Legal experts have said the administration can make serious arguments to justify its move, but added that courts may decide that it is stretching the intent of the law. The Supreme Court is controlled by a five-member conservative bloc but in recent years has reined in Republican and Democratic presidents who were judged to be exceeding their authority.

White House officials rejected critics who said Mr. Trump was creating a precedent that future presidents could use to ignore the will of Congress. Republicans have expressed concern that a Democratic commander in chief could cite Mr. Trump’s move to declare a national emergency over gun violence or climate change without legislation from Congress.

“It actually creates zero precedent,” Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff, told reporters on Friday morning. “This is authority given to the president in law already. It’s not as if he didn’t get what he wanted and waved a magic wand to get some money.”

Presidents have declared national emergencies under a 1970s-era law 58 times and 31 of those emergencies remain active. But most of them dealt with foreign crises and involved freezing property or taking other actions against national adversaries, not redirecting money without explicit congressional authorization.

White House officials cited only two times that such emergency declarations were used by presidents to spend money without legislative approval — once by President George Bush in November 1990 during the run-up to the Persian Gulf War and again by his son, President George W. Bush, in November 2001 after the terrorist attacks on New York, Washington and Pennsylvania.

In both of those cases, the presidents were responding to new events — the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and Al Qaeda’s assault on America — and were moving military money around to use for military purposes. Neither was taking action specifically rejected by Congress.

In Mr. Trump’s case, he is defining a longstanding situation at the border as an emergency even though illegal crossings have actually fallen in recent years. And unlike either of the Bushes, he is taking action after failing to persuade lawmakers to go along with his plans through the regular process.

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/15/us/politics/national-emergency-trump.html

Thursday on the Senate floor, Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer President Donald Trump declaring a national emergency to build a wall on the Mexican border would be “a lawless act.”


“If President Trump’s decides to go forward with a disaster declaration he will be making a tremendous mistake,” Schumer said. “Declaring a national emergency would be a lawless act, a gross abuse of the power of the presidency, and a desperate attempt to distract from the fact that President Trump broke his core promise that to have Mexico pay for the wall. It would be another demonstration of President Trump’s naked contempt of the rule of the law and congressional authority.”


“Congress just debated this very issue. There was no support for the president’s position. Congressional intent on this issue is very clear. The president’s wall has been before Congress several times and has never guarded enough votes to even merit consideration. For the president to declare an emergency now would be unprecedented subversion of Congresses constitutional prerogative,” he said

Source Article from https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/02/15/schumer_declaring_national_emergency_a_lawless_act_gross_abuse_of_presidential_power.html

“);var a = g[r.size_id].split(“x”).map((function(e) {return Number(e)})), s = u(a, 2);o.width = s[0],o.height = s[1]}o.rubiconTargeting = (Array.isArray(r.targeting) ? r.targeting : []).reduce((function(e, r) {return e[r.key] = r.values[0],e}), {rpfl_elemid: n.adUnitCode}),e.push(o)} else l.logError(“Rubicon bid adapter Error: bidRequest undefined at index position:” + t, c, d);return e}), []).sort((function(e, r) {return (r.cpm || 0) – (e.cpm || 0)}))},getUserSyncs: function(e, r, t) {if (!A && e.iframeEnabled) {var i = “”;return t && “string” == typeof t.consentString && (“boolean” == typeof t.gdprApplies ? i += “?gdpr=” + Number(t.gdprApplies) + “&gdpr_consent=” + t.consentString : i += “?gdpr_consent=” + t.consentString),A = !0,{type: “iframe”,url: n + i}}},transformBidParams: function(e, r) {return l.convertTypes({accountId: “number”,siteId: “number”,zoneId: “number”}, e)}};function m() {return [window.screen.width, window.screen.height].join(“x”)}function b(e, r) {var t = f.config.getConfig(“pageUrl”);return e.params.referrer ? t = e.params.referrer : t || (t = r.refererInfo.referer),e.params.secure ? t.replace(/^http:/i, “https:”) : t}function _(e, r) {var t = e.params;if (“video” === r) {var i = [];return t.video && t.video.playerWidth && t.video.playerHeight ? i = [t.video.playerWidth, t.video.playerHeight] : Array.isArray(l.deepAccess(e, “mediaTypes.video.playerSize”)) && 1 === e.mediaTypes.video.playerSize.length ? i = e.mediaTypes.video.playerSize[0] : Array.isArray(e.sizes) && 0

Washington (CNN)Former Massachusetts Gov. Bill Weld said he’s launching a presidential exploratory committee to run in 2020 as a Republican.

Source Article from https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/15/politics/bill-weld-2020-exploratory-committee/index.html

A former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee says that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellBill Kristol resurfaces video of Pence calling Obama executive action on immigration a ‘profound mistake’ Winners and losers in the border security deal House passes border deal, setting up Trump to declare emergency MORE (R-Ky.) is eating a “manure sandwich” over President TrumpDonald John TrumpBill Kristol resurfaces video of Pence calling Obama executive action on immigration a ‘profound mistake’ ACLU says planned national emergency declaration is ‘clear abuse of presidential power’ O’Rourke says he’d ‘absolutely’ take down border wall near El Paso if he could MORE‘s decision to declare a national emergency over illegal border crossings while signing a deal to keep the federal government open.

Former Rep. Mike RogersMichael (Mike) Dennis RogersLawmakers quiz officials on 2020 election security measures Hillicon Valley: House panel takes on election security | DOJ watchdog eyes employee texts | Senate Dems urge regulators to block T-Mobile, Sprint deal | ‘Romance scams’ cost victims 3M in 2018 Hillicon Valley: Dems pounce on Trump fight with intel leaders | FBI taps new counterintelligence chief | T-Mobile, Sprint tap former FCC Dem commish to sell merger | Dem bill would crack down on robocalls | Family sues over Uber self-driving fatality MORE (R-Mich.) told CNN on Friday that McConnell was not happy to endorse Trump’s plan to declare a national emergency in order to reallocate funding for construction of a border wall.

“You’re watching Mitch McConnell eat a manure sandwich in this whole process,” Rogers said, adding that McConnell was most concerned with averting another government shutdown.

“You can tell, in the mannerisms, in the body language, in the language itself, of Mitch McConnell … he’s where he is because he thought it would be expedient to make sure the government didn’t shut down,” he added.

“He’s not yet enjoying that manure sandwich this morning,” he quipped again, moments later.

McConnell announced Thursday that Trump planned to sign a compromise bill engineered by House and Senate negotiators that would provide $1.375 billion in funding for barriers at the U.S.-Mexico border, while at the same time declaring a national emergency to speed construction of his long-promised border wall.

Despite previously expressing skepticism for the plan, McConnell announced Thursday that he would support the president’s move.

“I think he ought to feel free to use whatever tools he can legally use to enhance his effort to secure the border, so no I would not be troubled by that,” the Senate leader told reporters.

Source Article from https://thehill.com/homenews/house/430169-former-gop-house-intel-chair-mcconnell-eating-manure-sandwich-on-trump-calling

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is participating in a private conference with other justices Friday after missing several high-court meetings and dates for health reasons.

Ginsburg is working from her chambers Friday, according to a court spokesperson, and will participate in the in-person closed-door conference Friday morning. She had been working from home and participating in the Court’s caseload while recovering from surgery.

Ginsburg, 85, has been recuperating in her home in Washington D.C. from a pulmonary lobectomy at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York after two nodules were discovered in the lower lobe of her left lung, the Supreme Court said in a statement last month. The discovery came incidentally during tests after she fractured several ribs during a fall in November.

The court said both nodules removed during the lung surgery were found to be malignant, but scans performed before surgery indicated no evidence of disease elsewhere in the body. No further treatment has been planned.

The Supreme Court returns from a four-week recess on Tuesday, and it is unclear whether Ginsburg will be on the bench.

RUTH BADER GINSBURG MAKES PUBLIC APPEARANCE, FIRST SINCE SURGERY

After sustaining a fall in November, Ginsburg initially missed a non-argument session when justices took the bench for routine business.

Ginsburg has missed several oral arguments due to her health setback. Prior to her last few absences, Ginsburg had never missed an oral argument since being confirmed to the high court in 1993.

Ginsburg has dealt with a series of health concerns in recent years. She broke two ribs in 2012, and previously battled two bouts of cancer, in 1999 and 2009. She also had a stent implanted in her heart to open a blocked artery in 2014.

The Harvard Law School-educated justice was nominated to the Supreme Court by former President Bill Clinton in 1993 to replace retiring Justice Byron R. White. Ginsburg was Clinton’s first Supreme Court pick.

Prior to ascending to the Supreme Court, Ginsburg became the first woman to receive tenure at Columbia University Law School and is also the co-founder of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Women’s Rights Project.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Ginsburg is the oldest member on the Supreme Court, and her retirement has been a topic of great speculation. However, she reportedly hired clerks for the term that extends into 2020, indicating she has no plans to leave soon.

According to a new Fox News Poll, Ginsburg is the best-liked member of the Supreme Court.

Earlier this month, Ginsburg attended a concert called “Notorious RBG in Song” in Washington, D.C. at the National Museum of Women in the Arts. It was her first public appearance since undergoing lung surgery in December.

 The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://www.foxnews.com/politics/justice-ginsburg-makes-first-visit-to-supreme-court-since-lung-cancer-surgery


Amid the mounting pressure at home and abroad, Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro said he won’t give up power as a way to defuse the standoff. | Federico Parra/AFP/Getty Images

Foreign Policy

02/15/2019 06:13 AM EST

CARACAS, Venezuela — President Nicolas Maduro said in an AP interview Thursday that his foreign minister recently held secret talks in New York with the U.S. special envoy to Venezuela, even as the Trump administration was publicly backing an effort to unseat the Venezuelan president.

While harshly criticizing Donald Trump’s confrontational stance toward his socialist government, Maduro said he holds out hope of meeting the U.S. president soon to resolve a crisis over America’s recognition of opponent Juan Guaido as Venezuela’s rightful leader.

Story Continued Below

Maduro said that while in New York, his foreign minister invited the Washington, D.C.-based envoy, Elliott Abrams, to come to Venezuela “privately, publicly or secretly.”

“If he wants to meet, just tell me when, where and how and I’ll be there,” Maduro said without providing more details. He said both New York meetings lasted several hours.

A senior administration official in Washington who was not authorized to speak publicly said U.S. officials were willing to meet with “former Venezuela officials, including Maduro himself, to discuss their exit plans.”

Venezuela is plunging deeper into a political chaos triggered by the U.S. demand that Maduro step down a month into a second term that the U.S. and its allies in Latin America consider illegitimate. His opponent, the 35-year-old Guaido, burst onto the political stage in January in the first viable challenge in years to Maduro’s hold on power.

As head of the Congress, Guaido declared himself interim president on Jan. 23, saying he had a constitutional right to assume presidential powers from the “tyrant” Maduro. He has since garnered broad support, calling massive street protests and winning recognition from the U.S. and dozens of nations in Latin America and Europe who share his goal of removing Maduro.

The escalating crisis is taking place against a backdrop of economic and social turmoil that has led to severe shortages of food and medicine that have forced millions to flee the once-prosperous OPEC nation.

Two senior Venezuelan officials who were not authorized to discuss the meetings publicly said the two encounters between Abrams and Foreign Minister Jorge Arreaza came at the request of the U.S.

The first one on Jan. 26 they described as hostile, with the U.S. envoy threatening Venezuela with the deployment of troops and chastising the Venezuelan government for allegedly being in league with Cuba, Russia and Hezbollah.

When they met again this week, the atmosphere was less tense, even though the Feb. 11 encounter came four days after Abrams said the “time for dialogue with Maduro had long passed.” During that meeting, Abrams insisted that severe U.S. sanctions would oust Maduro even if Venezuela’s military stuck by him.

Abrams gave no indication the U.S. was prepared to ease demands Maduro step down. Still, the Venezuelans saw the meetings as a sign there is room for discussion with the Americans despite the tough public rhetoric coming from Washington.

At turns conciliatory and combative, Maduro said all Venezuela needs to rebound is for Trump to remove his “infected hand” from the country that sits atop the world’s largest petroleum reserves.

He said U.S. sanctions on the oil industry are to blame for mounting hardships even though shortages and hyperinflation that economists say topped 1 million percent long predates Trump’s recent action.

“The infected hand of Donald Trump is hurting Venezuela,” Maduro said.

The sanctions effectively ban all oil purchases by the U.S., which had been Venezuela’s biggest oil buyer until now. Maduro said he will make up for the sudden drop in revenue by targeting markets in Asia, especially India, where the head of state-run oil giant PDVSA was this week negotiating new oil sales.

“We’ve been building a path to Asia for many years,” he said. “It’s a successful route, every year they are buying larger volumes and amounts of oil.”

He also cited the continued support of China and especially Russia, which has been a major supplier of loans, weapons and oil investment over the years. He said that backing from Russian President Vladimir Putin runs the risk of converting the current crisis into a high-risk geopolitical fight between the U.S. and Russia that recalls some of the most-dangerous brinkmanship of the Cold War.

Amid the mounting pressure at home and abroad, Maduro said he won’t give up power as a way to defuse the standoff.

He called boxes of U.S.-supplied humanitarian aid sitting in a warehouse on the border in Colombia mere “crumbs” after the U.S. administration froze billions of dollars in the nation’s oil revenue and overseas assets.

“They hang us, steal our money and then say ‘here, grab these crumbs’ and make a global show out of it,” said Maduro. “With dignity we say ‘No to the global show.’ Whoever wants to help Venezuela is welcome, but we have enough capacity to pay for everything that we need.”

Opponents say the 56-year-old former bus driver has lost touch with his working-class roots, accusing him of ordering mass arrests and starving Venezuelans while he and regime insiders — including the top military brass — line their pockets through corruption.

But Maduro shrugged off the label of “dictator,” attributing it to an ideologically driven media campaign by the West to undermine the socialist revolution started by the late Hugo Chavez.

He said he won’t resign, seeing his place in history alongside other Latin American leftists from Salvador Allende in Chile to Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala who in decades past had been the target of U.S.-backed coups.

“I’m not afraid,” he said, adding that even last year’s attack on him with explosives-laden drones during a military ceremony didn’t shake his resolve. “I’m only worried about the destiny of the fatherland and of our people, our boys and girls….this is what gives me energy.”

Source Article from https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/15/nicolas-maduro-venezuela-us-envoy-1170987

Amazon has abandoned its plans to set up part of its second headquarters in New York City, citing fierce opposition from state and local lawmakers.

This is a political triumph for state Sen. Michael Gianaris, D-Queens, and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y. It’s also a big defeat for Gov. Andrew Cuomo and Mayor Bill de Blasio, both of whom had offered the online retailer the moon and the stars to set up shop in the Big Apple.

Then again, maybe “triumph” should come with an asterisk next to it. Gianaris and Ocasio-Cortez may have gotten their way, besting far more powerful political figures, but at the cost of the estimated 25,000 jobs that the Amazon deal was projected to bring to their part of the city.

“After much thought and deliberation, we’ve decided not to move forward with our plans to build a headquarters for Amazon in Long Island City, Queens,” Amazon announced Thursday in a statement.

It added, “While polls show that 70 percent of New Yorkers support our plans and investment, a number of state and local politicians have made it clear that they oppose our presence and will not work with us to build the type of relationships that are required to go forward with the project we and many others envisioned in Long Island City.”

Ocasio-Cortez, who has denounced the deal repeatedly, took a victory lap Thursday.

“Anything is possible: today was the day a group of dedicated, everyday New Yorkers & their neighbors defeated Amazon’s corporate greed, its worker exploitation, and the power of the richest man in the world,” her office bragged on social media.

It’s unclear where the 25,000 jobs are going to go. Amazon may decide to double up on its investment in Crystal City, Va., but it may also send the jobs out toward Nashville.

At any rate, despite the massive corporate welfare involved, New York never really made sense in the first place, aside from the possible benefits from cozying up to Wall Street. The city has oppressively high taxes, terrible commutes, terrible public transportation, limited living space, insanely high cost of living for workers (meaning the company would have to pay more and they’d still be poorer), and aggressively anti-business lawmakers.

Amazon would be better off setting up basically anywhere else in the U.S. Maybe it should try one of those down-on-its-luck Midwest towns, or a right-to-work state with no income tax. Lord knows some of those towns could use a major economic boost like an Amazon headquarters.

Cuomo and de Blasio must be furious to see that their efforts to court Amazon have gone up in smoke. Given the immensity of their $3 billion package they just offered the company, only to be rebuffed, they look pretty dumb and desperate. In the future, companies looking at New York have every reason to make greedy demands. The deal had been clouded in such secrecy, and it appeared to award Amazon such disproportionately lucrative incentives to the number of jobs it promised to bring to the area, that it fed the already bake-in opposition from state officials. Cuomo tried his best to keep fellow Democrats in line, but it was no use.

When it was first reported that Amazon was considering backing out of New York City, the governor tried to downplay the opposition to it, telling the Washington Post that it was coming from a “very small group of politicians who are pandering.”

That supposedly “very small group” includes Gianaris, who serves on the state board that has final say on approving the Amazon deal. Gianaris was joined in his very vocal opposition to the deal by a number of community activists and municipal officials.

“The problem is the state Senate has adopted that position, and that’s what could stop Amazon. And if they do, I would not want to be a Democratic senator coming back to my district to explain why Amazon left,” Cuomo said in a failed attempt to calm Amazon’s nerves.

On Thursday, after Amazon has announced its withdrawal from the deal, the governor really let loose.

“[A] small group [of] politicians put their own narrow political interests above their community — which poll after poll showed overwhelmingly supported bringing Amazon to Long Island City — the state’s economic future and the best interests of the people of this state,” Cuomo said in a statement. “The New York State Senate has done tremendous damage. They should be held accountable for this lost economic opportunity.”

And to think it was just days earlier that governor said in defense of the deal, “You want to diversify your economy? You don’t want to just be Wall Street and finance? We need Amazon.”

Perhaps. But it looks like Amazon doesn’t need you, Cuomo.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/amazon-abandons-hq-plans-in-nyc-a-win-for-aoc-and-a-black-eye-for-andrew-cuomo-and-bill-de-blasio

We are a constitutional republic which grants Congress the power of the purse. This ensures democratically supervised expenditure of the people’s money.

Congress has said no to President Trump’s border wall, and democratic authority matters. And by declaring a national emergency on a domestic policy issue in the traditional preserve of Congress, which makes this different than most other national emergencies, “future President Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez” now has a remit to bypass Congress to get her ” Green New Deal.”

In short, this is good short-term politics for Trump, bad long-term politics for Republicans, and a bad precedent for the nation.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/why-in-100-words-trump-is-wrong-to-declare-a-national-emergency

Mr. McConnell and his staff were especially annoyed by Mr. Mulvaney’s performance on Sunday on the political talk shows, saying he seemed giddy and enthusiastic about the possibility of another shutdown, according to three people familiar with the situation.

After Mr. Mulvaney on Sunday refused to rule out a shutdown, an incensed Mr. Shelby referred to Mr. Mulvaney as “dangerous” in the negotiations during a check-in session with lawmakers, according to a member of the conference committee. He was infuriated all over again on Thursday, believing Mr. Mulvaney was behind Mr. Trump’s change of heart.

Mr. Shelby, asked about his views on Mr. Mulvaney, declined to comment.

The majority leader, sentimental as a scythe and not one for small talk, decided it was up to him. He began speaking with Mr. Trump three or four times a day, and urged others to do the same, according to several people close to the negotiations.

“I want you all to start calling the president directly,” Mr. McConnell told a group of senior Republicans last week after a conference lunch, according to two people in attendance. “He’s easy to get on the phone.”

Mr. McConnell viewed his role as equal parts cajoler and instructor. He patiently (and fruitlessly) argued against the emergency declaration, which he sees as usurping congressional authority to splinter Senate Republicans. He also used the check-ins to collect intelligence about Mr. Trump’s mind-set.

To sell the president on the deal, he argued that it was a “big down payment” on the wall and offered to support moves by the president to transfer some funding from other agencies to border barrier projects if he ditched the emergency declaration. But the core of his case, people close to Mr. McConnell said, was the argument that the deal reached by negotiators was actually a “victory” over Ms. Pelosi, thanks to his success in fighting attempts to reduce the number of detention beds.

Mr. Trump never really bought it.

But Mr. McConnell is nothing if not adaptable. During his final call with Mr. Trump, he looped in the White House counsel, Pat Cipollone, who expressed misgivings about the emergency declaration, telling an annoyed Mr. Trump that it would prompt several serious lawsuits.

Mr. McConnell, quickly shifting from opposing the declaration to managing its rollout, snapped back, “Who cares? This is America — everybody sues everybody else,” according to a person the leader spoke to late Thursday.

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/15/us/politics/border-wall-deal.html


Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (left) and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo talk as they attend the conference on Peace and Security in the Middle East in Warsaw on Feb 14. | Janek Skarzynski/AFP/Getty Images

Foreign Policy

Even as U.S. officials pressured European allies this week to break with Tehran, there was little indication the Islamist regime is worried about survival.

02/14/2019 06:55 PM EST

WARSAW — The Trump administration is warning Iran’s Islamist rulers that, after 40 years, their time in power is almost up. But the Iranian government is betting Trump will be gone first.

Even as top Trump officials traveling in Europe this week threatened to hit Iran with more economic sanctions and pressured allies to break with Tehran, there was little indication that the country’s theocratic regime fears it is in mortal peril.

Story Continued Below

In fact, on the same day the Trump administration hosted a conference in Poland unofficially intended to rally global opposition against Tehran, Iran’s president was meeting his Russian and Turkish counterparts, in part to discuss new international financial mechanisms to evade U.S. sanctions.

Meanwhile, in Poland, Trump’s closest aides and a top ally, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, unfurled unexpected comments that likely left Iran with even more leverage and incentive to run out the clock on the Republican president.

First, Netanyahu set off alarm bells with a tweet suggesting a coming “war” with Iran, undermining the administration’s effort to portray its Poland event as a peace conference. Then, Vice President Mike Pence went off script to demand that the Europeans quit the Iran nuclear deal, a call sure to be dismissed. It also did not go unnoticed that Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, called for regime change in Iran at a separate gathering in Warsaw.

The developments come as a flock of Democrats have launched White House bids, a probe into Trump’s 2016 campaign continues to encircle the president and Republicans wonder if Trump will face a primary challenge or even not run again.

“Both sides are waiting and hoping for regime change in one another’s countries, but the clock in Washington is running faster than the clock in Tehran,” said Ali Vaez, an Iran analyst with the International Crisis Group.

For now, Trump’s top advisers are certainly not willing to countenance the possibility that their boss may be a one-term president. Instead, the administration is doubling down on what it calls a “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran.

But the conference in Warsaw — which faced numerous stumbles, including boycotts by allies and crucial players in the Middle East — cast serious doubt that the pressure campaign would succeed anytime soon.

For much of this week, the administration sought to capitalize on the 40th anniversary of the revolution that brought Islamists to power in Tehran. Trump himself sent out tweets in both Farsi and English slamming the regime.

“40 years of corruption. 40 years of repression. 40 years of terror. The regime in Iran has produced only #40YearsofFailure,” he tweeted on Monday. “The long-suffering Iranian people deserve a much brighter future.”

Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif replied with his own tweet, claiming the U.S. has shown “#40YearsofFailure to accept that Iranians will never return to submission.”

National security adviser John Bolton released a video message attacking Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. “You are responsible for terrorizing your own people and terrorizing the world as a whole,” Bolton said. “I don’t think you’ll have many more anniversaries to enjoy.”

But despite its heated rhetoric, the Trump administration still insists it is not seeking to oust the Iranian regime. Instead, it said, the regime must change its behavior.

Such assertions have proven tough to swallow for U.S. allies, especially Britain, France and Germany. The three countries have worked to preserve the 2015 Iran nuclear deal in the months since Trump abandoned it. And on Thursday, Federica Mogherini, the European Union’s foreign policy chief, flatly rejected the idea of Europeans ditching the deal.

“For us it is a matter of priority to keep implementing it at full,” Mogherini said.

The Europeans have set up an economic mechanism called INSTEX that is designed to allow companies to do business with Iran without violating the U.S. sanctions Trump reimposed on the country after walking away from the nuclear deal. Under the deal, the Obama administration had rolled back economic sanctions in exchange for strict curbs on Iran’s nuclear program.

Pence on Thursday slammed the financial work-around, calling it “an ill-advised step that will only strengthen Iran, weaken the E.U. and create still more distance between Europe and the United States.”

Supporters of the nuclear deal say its survival hinges on biding time — and especially on Tehran’s willingness to stick with the agreement, officially called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA.

One ex-official who helped draft the deal said the Iranian government appears to be calibrating its approach by trying to gauge Trump’s political prospects.

“Iran is driving this in the sense that I think Iran believes that if it looks like Trump is not going to be reelected maybe they should stay where they are, and then resurrect some form of the JCPOA,” the ex-official said. “If it looks like Trump is going to get reelected, then it’s a different ballgame. So I think they are trying to assess what their best posture is.”

As evidence of Iran’s struggle to find the right balance, the ex-official pointed to threats last month by Iran nuclear chief Ali Akbar Salehi that Iran could enrich uranium up to 20 percent within four days — well above the 3.67 percent enrichment cap set in the JCPOA.

The ex-official said such proclamations were a way for the Iranian government to answer hardliners, including those in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, who are insisting their country should just abandon the deal in response to Trump’s withdrawal.

Such threats, the ex-official said, are “a way for them to say to the IRGC, ‘We’re being tough. We’re … not going to get pushed around. We hold all the cards,’ while at the same time, not actually taking action that would abrogate the deal.”

“Right now, the world is mad at the Trump administration, not mad at Iran,” the ex-official added. “If they start doing things that undercut the deal, then Iran becomes the bad guy quite quickly.”

The Trump administration, too, has been trying to strike its own balance.

It is warning the world that Iran — through its sponsorship of terrorism, its human rights violations, its ballistic missile program and its military activity in neighboring countries — is a menace that must be confronted.

But it’s also trying to do so while insisting that Trump made the right move by walking away from what he deemed a terrible nuclear agreement. The latter is an argument that many U.S. allies don’t support.

“For us, the implementation of the nuclear deal with Iran is a matter of European security … and we see it is working,” said Mogherini, the EU’s foreign policy chief, who skipped the Warsaw conference. “On other issues, we can work very closely together with the United States.”

Tensions between the U.S. and other countries were on full display throughout the Warsaw conference this week.

The gathering was originally designed to focus on Iran, but after it became clear many U.S. allies might not attend, the Trump administration sought to broaden the agenda to look at security and stability in the Middle East. Even then, many top European officials declined to participate.

Poland, which has been trying to curry favor with Trump for a variety of reasons, was a conference co-host. But the country officially still supports the Iran nuclear deal. Polish diplomats repeatedly had to explain that stance, making for several awkward, tongue-tied moments.

Netanyahu, perhaps America’s most staunch supporter in its anti-Iran campaign, raised eyebrows before leaving for Warsaw when declared “Iran” would be the focus of the event, contradicting U.S. claims. Once at the event, Netanyahu again startled with a tweet saying he looked forward to sitting with Arab leaders to “advance the common interest of war with Iran.” The tweet was later changed to say “combating” Iran, but Zarif, the Iranian foreign minister, still lashed out at “Netanyahu’s illusions.”

Meanwhile, Russian President Vladimir Putin was hosting a rival gathering with Iran President Hassan Rouhani and Turkish leader Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, further adding to the sense that U.S. influence in the Middle East is eroding.

At the Russian-hosted event in Sochi, Erdoğan, reportedly said that not only is Turkey willing to join the European’s INSTEX financial vehicle, but it may also create a bilateral mechanism to facilitate trade with Iran.

Rouhani, for his part, tried to turn the tables by criticizing Washington. “While we are taking new steps for boosting stability in the region and fighting terrorism in Syria,” he said in a statement, “some who are sponsoring terrorists are hatching plots against the region in Warsaw.”

The main message out of Sochi, however, seemed to be that these three countries — far more than the Americans — would determine the future of the Middle East.

Back in Warsaw, Trump administration supporters stressed some of the strides made in holding the conference. For one thing, Israel’s leader was in the same space as a number of prominent Arab officials, all of whom have grown weary of Iran’s military assertiveness and other meddling throughout the Middle East.

The conference also gave Trump’s son-in-law and adviser Jared Kushner a venue to discuss his efforts to craft a new peace deal for the Israelis and Palestinians. Kushner told officials that the plan will likely be unveiled after Israeli elections in April.

Toward the end of the conference, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo noted that more than 60 countries sent representatives to the event.

“No country, no country spoke out and denied any of the basic facts that we all had laid out about Iran — the threat it poses, the nature of the regime. It was unanimous,” he insisted.

Source Article from https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/14/iran-pompeo-netanyahu-warsaw-conference-1170719

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s announcement that not only would President Trump declare a national emergency to build a border wall, but that he would support it, is going to come back to haunt conservatives.

As I noted last month, the possibility of an emergency declaration became a lot more likely when Trump caved on border wall funding to end the government shutdown, thus making him feel he had to find another way to show his base that he was willing to use all the tools at his disposal to try and deliver on his campaign promise.

The idea of Trump taking such an action was then, and remains now, a terrible idea with dangerous consequences for limited government conservatives. McConnell’s blessing makes matters even worse.

Those who seek to limit the size and scope of government should want it to be more difficult for the executive to arbitrarily use power. That Trump is taking this action means that a Republican president will have been on board with using emergency powers to undertake a massive infrastructure project without the consent of Congress. What’s more, the Republican leader in the Senate, along with no doubt plenty of other Republicans, will have signed on this action, along with, no doubt, plenty of conservative Trump cheerleaders.

For the past week, we’ve been debating infeasibility of the Green New Deal. But many of its provisions suddenly become a lot more politically possible if a president is allowed to seize emergency powers in such a way. If Trump succeeds, it would not be difficult for a Democrat to declare an emergency based on the National Climate Assessment, and then go about using the military for massive infrastructure projects in clean energy.

The only hope for limited government conservatives is that any emergency declaration gets quickly enjoined, and eventually nixed, in federal court. At least then, the silver lining would be that a legal precedent would be set that the president cannot attempt such an end around Congress.

Either way, however, Trump’s action and the likely overwhelming support by Congressional Republicans will shred their ability to resist any sort of attempt by a future Democratic president seeking to broadly employ executive power.

And all for what? Even in the event of an eventual victory in court, any legal process is going to take at least a year to be resolved, without much time to do actual construction before the 2020 election, which Trump could lose. So basically there’s a non-zero chance that Trump will have gotten Republicans to go along with him setting a precedent for the next Democratic president, only to not even have a border wall to show for it.

This is a dangerous, rash, reckless, and myopic decision that should be passionately opposed by all principled conservatives.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/trump-declaring-a-national-emergency-to-build-border-wall-with-mcconnells-support-will-come-back-to-haunt-conservatives

An attack last week against former Chicago police Officer Jason Van Dyke in his Connecticut prison cell reflects “the mentality out there … that people won’t rest until he is either given a life sentence or killed in prison,” his lead trial attorney said Thursday.

Daniel Herbert joined Van Dyke’s wife, Tiffany, in demanding to know why Van Dyke was transferred to an out-of-state federal prison and why he was placed in the general inmate population, where he was beaten in the face within days of his arrival.

“They put my husband in a setting to be harmed because of the fact that he was a white man who harmed a black gentleman in the line of duty,” Tiffany Van Dyke said at a news conference. “He is a police officer who was convicted for doing his job, and at the basic minimum they were supposed to keep him safe.”

Attorneys stressed the danger Van Dyke faces in custody — just days after prosecutors filed a legal petition before the state Supreme Court that, if successful, could significantly lengthen his sentence.

Source Article from https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-met-jason-van-dyke-laquan-mcdonald-prison-attack-20190214-story.html

SAN JOSE (CBS SF) — An armed suspect who held a UPS driver hostage Thursday after stealing his truck and leading police on a chase through San Jose was shot dead just yards from a KPIX crew.

The suspect, who was identified by police sources as Mark Morasky, was shot once by law enforcement in a parking lot as he ran from the UPS truck holding a firearm.

The standoff began as a car chase at Chynoweth and Pear Avenues just before 5:30 p.m. A Santa Clara County Sheriff’s spokesperson did not say why they were trying to pull over the suspect and his female passenger in the first place.

Investigators said the two suspects fired shots at deputies — hitting a patrol car — then ran out of the black SUV they in and carjacked a UPS truck, taking the driver hostage and speeding off through the streets of San Jose.

Deputies deployed spike strips at Highway 87 and Taylor but the truck continued to move for miles until it came to a stop at the busy intersection on Trimble and First. The area is surrounded by businesses and restaurants which were all put on lockdown as the standoff unfolded. VTA service was also affected.

“We were just told to hunker down until the time came,” said Marilyn Jansen, who works in the area, but was holed up inside a Starbucks across from where the UPS was parked.

Sakid Ahmed, who was working across the street from the incident, said officers told workers to stay indoors.

“They said there was a hostage situation, stay in the building, be safe,” he said.

For nearly 90 minutes, the suspect could be seen inside the UPS truck making hand signals, looking out the window and talking on the phone. He also could be seen holding a rifle and at times pointing it toward his head.

At one point the suspect drove the truck a couple feet forward but he was surrounded by a barricade of law enforcement who had their guns drawn.

The female suspect surrendered and was taken into custody and, soon afterward, the UPS driver was released. He appeared in good condition.

Morasky refused to surrender. KPIX has learned he was arrested in 2012 for an alleged carjacking and two armed robberies.

Moments before a KPIX live shot, Morasky jumped out of the truck with his rifle as law enforcement zeroed in on him with their vehicles. Morasky ran into an adjacent parking lot where he was shot dead.

“And then you could see him run out with he was carrying something ran across the street and then we heard a pop,” said witness Jacinto Laney.

“Shocking and very unfortunate,” Ahmed said.

Mike Glish, who works across the street from the incident, was among many who were not allowed to get to their cars when the standoff turned fatal.

“It’s terrible when somebody would do something like that,” he said.

Source Article from https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2019/02/14/suspect-standoff-san-jose-police-ups-truck/

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has decided to embrace his inner Harry Reid and greenlight President Trump’s emergency declaration.

As John Yoo noted earlier this month, the courts may find that Trump is within his rights to mobilize the military to build the wall when his gambit is inevitably challenged for its legality. Even Youngstown v. Sawyer, which reversed former President Harry Truman’s seizure of private steel mills to supply the military during the Korean War, wouldn’t necessarily imply that Trump would be out-of-bounds building the wall on land not privately owned.

Congress has failed to define the legal bounds of what is or isn’t an emergency, but surely, the term was never meant to deal with this.

Hundreds of thousands of immigrants are apprehended at our nation’s southern border every year, meaning that the number of immigrants illegally entering the country could be greater by an order of magnitude. A sovereign nation, even one which embraces the free flow of labor, must defend its borders for security’s sake, and Democrats calling a physical barrier “immoral” either don’t understand the few hundred miles along our border that would see fewer illegal crossings with a wall, or they simply don’t care.

But we know that this is not a national emergency for the same reason we knew it wasn’t a national emergency a month ago, when Trump first touted this idea: We’re all still here.

The threat of illegal immigration mirrors that of climate change. Both must be dealt with at some point, and both loom large as possible catastrophes. But neither issue is immediate. We teach children that 911 is only for instant dangers. We have to teach the president that emergency powers are the same.

What sort of precedent are we willing to accept here? Do we want “President Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez” to declare a state of emergency to slaughter all the farting cows and ground the entire airline industry in 2028? Just like then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid nuking the filibuster has since backfired against Democrats who can no longer block Trump’s judicial nominees, this emergency declaration could bite Republicans in the near future.

Furthermore, the declaration of a state of emergency will essentially punt the border security issue to the courts. This will help Democrats shirk accountability over their unwillingness to protect Americans and do their jobs. Just as the Democratic Party seemed on the edge of crumbling under the weight of their own extremism and economic illiteracy, Trump had to come along and steal back the spotlight.

It’s past time for Congress to step up to the plate and pass an update to the National Emergency Act. The law needs a clear definition of the conditions under which the president can declare a national emergency. If members of Congress don’t step up with this, they ought not issue a single gripe, tweet, or moan decrying Trump’s power grab, because it might well be legal even if it’s not in line with the historical consensus.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/this-is-not-a-national-emergency-congress-must-update-the-national-emergency-act

CLOSE

After a bipartisan vote on border security legislation, senators appeared split over President Donald Trump’s plan to declare a national emergency, allowing him to build more of his border wall. (Feb. 14)
AP

WASHINGTON – There’s always a tweet. 

In 2014, President Donald Trump railed against then President Barack Obama over his use of executive power on immigration. Fast forward five years and Trump is expected to do the same thing. 

“Repubs must not allow Pres Obama to subvert the Constitution of the US for his own benefit & because he is unable to negotiate w/ Congress,” Trump said in a tweet on Nov. 20, 2014. 

Trump is now planning to use his executive powers in declaring a national emergency to obtain additional funds for a wall along the southern U.S. border. The White House announced Thursday he would make the declaration after signing a bipartisan funding bill that will provide $1.375 billion for a 55-mile border barrier – much less than the $5.7 billion that Trump has demanded. The funding bill would prevent the government from shutting down as it did in December, spurring the longest-ever shutdown on record. 

The move will allow Trump to sidestep Democratic opposition to get more wall funding, but it could draw legal challenges from lawmakers and others who viewed the move as a power grab and something that violates the Constitution. 

More: Government shutdown: Trump to sign border security bill and declare a national emergency

More: Trump’s emergency declaration would trigger a drawn-out legal fight

In 2014, Trump seemed to have similar beliefs. 

His tweet attacking Obama for using executive authority on immigration specifically targeted an executive order that shielded up to 5 million immigrants from deportation and bolstered protections for “DREAMers,” people who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children. 

Although the positions were reversed, Obama was also frustrated by a lack of congressional action for what he viewed as a broken immigration system. 

Obama’s order followed an impasse with the Republicans in Congress, who during elections that month took control of both the Senate and House. The White House at the time said allow Obama’s orders were steps to “fix our broken immigration system.”

More: Democrats, Republicans warn Trump against declaring emergency over border wall funding

More: How congressional Democrats could fight a Trump wall national emergency declaration

Trump was far from alone in attacking Obama in 2014. 

Republicans blasted the former president for acting unilaterally, and the Supreme Court ultimately struck down the plan in 2016.   

Even Trump’s vice president, Mike Pence, denounced Obama’s decision. 

Speaking on a Republican Governors Association panel in 2014, Pence attacked the idea of using presidential powers to act unilaterally in the face of congressional opposition. 

The then governor of Indiana said that “barnstorming around the country defending” such measures was “not leadership.” Leadership, he argued, came with negotiating and finding “common ground.”

Pence said Obama’s order was a “profound mistake” and said he didn’t believe that the president should be able to “overturn American immigration law with the stroke of a pen.” 

 

 

Source Article from https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/02/14/donald-trump-2014-president-shouldnt-use-executive-authority/2875541002/

An attack last week against former Chicago police Officer Jason Van Dyke in his Connecticut prison cell reflects “the mentality out there … that people won’t rest until he is either given a life sentence or killed in prison,” his lead trial attorney said Thursday.

Daniel Herbert joined Van Dyke’s wife, Tiffany, in demanding to know why Van Dyke was transferred to an out-of-state federal prison and why he was placed in the general inmate population, where he was beaten in the face within days of his arrival.

“They put my husband in a setting to be harmed because of the fact that he was a white man who harmed a black gentleman in the line of duty,” Tiffany Van Dyke said at a news conference. “He is a police officer who was convicted for doing his job, and at the basic minimum they were supposed to keep him safe.”

Attorneys stressed the danger Van Dyke faces in custody — just days after prosecutors filed a legal petition before the state Supreme Court that, if successful, could significantly lengthen his sentence.

Source Article from https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-met-jason-van-dyke-laquan-mcdonald-prison-attack-20190214-story.html

A bloc of Democratic freshman congresswomen will break with their party and vote against the negotiated border security spending package being pushed through Congress.

Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., and Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., issued a blistering joint statement Thursday afternoon ahead of a late vote on the measure. The bill, which keeps nine departments and dozens of agencies open until the end of fiscal 2019, needs to be passed ahead of a Friday deadline to avoid a second partial government shutdown.

“This Administration continues to threaten the dignity and humanity of our immigrant population. The Department of Homeland Security has separated thousands of children from their parents, denied asylum to those fleeing danger, and used taxpayers dollars as a slush fund to incite terror in immigrant communities,” the lawmakers said in the statement.

“By any reasonable measure, Donald Trump’s weaponization of ICE and CBP has been a failure. The Department of Homeland Security does not deserve an increase in funding, and that is why we intend to vote no on this funding package,” they wrote, referring to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection.

The quartet, who praised the contribution of immigrants to the country, condemned the bill’s $500 million increase in spending on ICE and the $950 million injection into CBP, respectively. They also criticized the $1.37 billion provision for a physical barrier along 55 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border and the boost in powers and resources for ICE to detain illegal immigrants.

“The funding bill on the floor today does not address any of our concerns and instead, gives more money to these abusive agencies,” they said. “We want to be abundantly clear: this is not a rebuke of federal workers or those who depend on the services they provide, but a rejection of the hateful policies, priorities, and rhetoric of the Trump Administration.”

The group’s dislike for the package is unlikely to derail it from being approved by both the House and Senate. President Trump on Thursday gave assurances to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., that he would sign the bill into law, but McConnell also said the president would also issue a national emergency declaration at the same time in order to divert funding away from the Department of Defense to erect impediments along the entire southern border, given the allocation failed to meet his $5.7 billion demand.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/aoc-ilhan-omar-join-other-freshmen-democrats-in-rejecting-spending-bill-abusive-dhs-does-not-deserve-a-funding-increase

SAN JOSE (CBS SF) — A massive police presence surrounded a UPS truck following a pursuit and standoff in San Jose on Thursday evening, closing down the road and backing up traffic.

Multiple lines of San Jose Sheriff and SJPD patrol vehicles blocked the truck on the road at North First St. and West Trimble Rd, near VTA light rail tracks. Commuters were trapped as they were trying to get onto I-880 and Highway 101; VTA lines were also affected.

CHP confirmed that the vehicle was involved in a shooting. The incident started near Highway 87 at Chynoweyh Ave and Pearl Ave in South San Jose.

CHP said the suspect carjacked the UPS truck and had hostages in the vehicle, including the truck’s driver.

A driver and a passenger were seen sitting at the front of the truck. A female passenger got out of the truck and approached police with hands up around 5:40 p.m. and was taken into custody. It wasn’t known yet whether the person in custody was a hostage or was involved in the shooting.

San Jose UPS truck pursuit passenger surrenders to police (CBS)

Police seemed to be negotiating with individuals still in the truck, indicating that the person was armed and could harm the hostages.

A side shot on the ground showing the driver of the UPS truck.

At 6:20 p.m., one hostage was reported safe by the Santa Clara County Sheriff. They said the suspect was still in the vehicle and has shot at deputies during the pursuit.

At around 6:45 p.m., the driver of the truck got out and walked backward toward police with his hands up. At 7:00 p.m., the suspect attempted to flee the vehicle, but quickly went down. Officers quickly converged on the vehicle and the suspect, who they handcuffed on the ground.

Gunshots were fired, but it is currently unknown whether the suspect shot himself or if police shot him. He was pronounced dead at around 7:20 p.m.

Aerial shot of the suspect down on the ground. He was pronounced dead at the scene.

KPIX 5 reporter Maria Medina said that the suspect was seen making a phone call minutes before he fled.

The front passenger wheel of the truck appeared to have blown out.

“UPS is grateful that our driver was released, and we’re thankful to local police who responded to the situation. The safety of our people is our top priority. We are assisting local authorities as we can,” said a UPS spokesperson.

Commuters traveling eastbound and westbound were most heavily affected by the road closure.

The incident caused a VTA Light Rail service disruption between Karina and Tasman stations. Alternate bus service is being provided in San Jose for both the Alum Rock/Santa Teresa and the Mountain View/Winchester light rail lines.

This is a breaking news development. Stay with CBS SF as we update with the latest information. 

Source Article from https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2019/02/14/suspect-standoff-san-jose-police-ups-truck/