But Seriously...

I believe the point is that, normally, the K9 unit would search the area and they would detain and question anyone dressed as in the description , running away, or acting suspiciously.

Because of the new laws they can no longer proceed that way. The police either have to see a suspect themselves who have someone point them out. So,theoretically, if they found someone a block over who was dressed that way, maybe winded from running, etc they no longer have probable cause to detain and question.

 

That's it exactly. Unless they actually see the criminal act they have no probable cause to use force of any kind. I'm sure from here on out all murderers, rapists, burglars,et al...will comply to being arrestted so the cops don't have to use any force.

 

Does anybody know about the deal with the officer killed at the Pentagon? More nuts rushing the Capitol police?

 

Motive is unknown at the moment, but it sounds like a lone nut job. It happened at a bus station outside the Pentagon.
https://apnews.com/article/pentagon-lockdown-gunshots-846e71a1b78370611ba13beb28aa77a9

 

The pentagon bus station is literally on top of the subway station. It's a major commmuter transfer hub for the DC metro area, so there's a high volume of traffic during morning and evening rush, but can be fairly deserted otherwise

 

Can someone explain this to me? If the CDC doesn't have elected officials and doesn't have legal authority, how are they making Federal Legislation?
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-eviction-declaration.html

 

The actual order blocking evictions can be viewed here https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/communication/Signed-CDC-Eviction-Order.pdf (pdf warning)
The order states it has the power under section 361 of the Public Health Services Act (42 U.S.C. 264) (This can be found on page 7 of 19 in the pdf. The pdf has blocked cutting and pasting and I can't be bothered to screenshot and post it somewhere.

The order actually outlines much of the logic behind the order as well as the current state of COVID and vaccinations in the US.

 

Fema has similar authority for sheltering, and evacuation, but its functionally never used. I forget the exact circumstances, but we have the ability to "override" some stuff in the name of an emergency.

 

This is why "The FEMA camps" always gets brought up in every doomsday scenario in the US. It's crazy extreme, but FEMA could theoretically skate around some constitutional laws in the event of a large scale emergency, but as downndirty said, it's not really something that's ever used.

 

The FEMA camps shit makes me laugh every time. We are in a nationwide housing crisis, and FEMA has a "direct housing" program that allows us to buy trailers and "build" a trailer park. When that mission is over, it reverts to the state or is sold for pennies on the dollar. The states love it because the program is long, expensive and 100% federally funded, which is rare(most of our stuff has a cost share). We've put up thousands of trailers in LA alone, over the years. The funny part is the idea that we're forcing people into this, and the horror that people respond with when they think the government is giving people a free trailer. Also, compared to what happens in shelters when we're not involved, and some of the spontaneous, temporary homeless camps that pop up after people are displaced, we're at least providing some measure of security, cleanliness and dignity. I think the actual intent of the program is to give the handy a free travel trailer to park in their yard while they work on their own homes.

Also, a few times, we've responded to the "border crisis", which literally means FEMA personnel oversaw the construction of some of the migrant facilities, in a perversion of our mandate. We've been asked to do shit like this a few times, and depending on the political winds, we either resist it (Republican administrations, generally) or welcome it (Democratic administrations, again, generally). We refer to it as "non-traditional missions", like COVID-19. The conspiracy theories about some of the most ridiculous shit we do get shared in office emails. Apparently, FEMA has a facility outside Area 51, where we force the wizards and witches to consolidate and use magic to make disasters go away, and we're looking for people who claim to pray hurricanes away to force them there(I wish this was a joke), so don't get too good at praying away the storms.

So, legally, for us to do things that clearly fall into another agency's statutory authority, there's a provision that grants us emergency authorities. A lot of times, it's used to suspend restrictions/enforcement on things like building codes, so we can do temporary repairs on people's homes, so they don't have to remain in a shelter, especially during hurricane season when there's another storm pending/threatening.

The governors request federal help and the president agrees. So, if we piss either of those two entities off, we're usually smacked down hard, typically from the governor. Our powers are similar to the CDC's, but again, there's functionally not a situation where we would use it, we'd just ask the governor to do it.

 

Can you elaborate on this? If it’s a perversion of the mandate, why would it be welcomed? Is there a difference in the actual construction depending on the administration?

 

It's a perversion of the mandate in the sense that it's not an emergency or a crisis, it's a legal and administrative cock-up, of cosmic proportions. We get asked to do shit like this because of tactical expertise (sheltering thousands of people at a time, registering them in person, conducting search and rescue, providing emergency medical care, etc.), not statuory authority. A border crisis isn't a disaster in the most literal sense, but if the governor and the president agree it is....off we go, fuckery afoot. Inside the federal government, we're kind of a multi-tool for crises and emergencies(few other agencies are ready to do ALL of that, much less this instant), and we come pre-packaged with special authorities that ICE or CBP don't have, so we can override some stuff under emergency powers. It's one of the reasons we exist: to prevent the abuse of emergency powers by states or other Federal agencies, they have to involve us.

Generally speaking, our senior politically-appointed officials fall along those lines, largely due to politics and optics. Republicans want to run lean, stick to the basics and avoid the literal quagmire of something like the border mission. Democrats welcome the opportunity to get engaged, welcome the optics, and will agree to whatever the WH says. To be fair, they most often follow the lead of whoever's running DHS at the time. For example, the Flint Water Crisis could have been our problem under another administration....California's drought is getting the attention of some of our planning folks, because it theoretically could fall to us. It's those "this could go either way" kind of things that I'm referring to.

Nah, there's no difference in the construction at all. Just about all of that goes through contractors, we don't have a hammer-swinging division for that kind of thing. Even the money doesn't differ, we spend about the same under both. The difference comes in making the decision of what's the federal government's problem and what isn't. Also, culturally, no one in this field wants to be seen as unwilling or lazy. So, the decision-making is usually backdoor politicking, to persuade some of the higher ups that we dont' need to bring water to fucking Michigan. If that effort fails, we stfu and do the best we can by those folks.

For the front-line staff, a deployment is welcome, because it's overtime, per diem, and opportunities for advancement. To a certain extent, that's true of leadership as well: a mission is a good thing to have to request more staff, bigger budget, etc. So, even if it's truly miserable, we still pack up and go.

 

Thanks for that, it was exactly what I was needing to better understand what you meant.

You okay by me!

 

The police now using qualified immunity as a job perk to hire people.

 

They arrested some guy for lighting fires in northern California.

College professor suspected of setting fires near Dixie Fire, held on arson charge

Seven fires between July 6 and Aug. 7 near the Lassen National Forest and Shasta-Trinity National Forest, according to court documents.

They need to string this asshole up by the balls if he is guilty.

 

I remember years ago reading something about how homeland security was absolutely terrified about the prospect of terrorists starting wildfires because it was so easy to do, so hard to prevent, and could wreak such massive devastation. Turns out we didn't need foreign terrorist, we just needed our own homegrown assholes and gender reveal parties.

 

Seems to me that they should be charged with murder.

 

Agreed. And terrorism.

This bastard has been excused of setting up to SEVEN wildfires and intentionally trying to kettle in smoke jumpers.. Jail is the only thing that will protect him from what he deserves in a perfect world, and I hope it’s as unpleasant as humanly possible for him either in there or out here.

 

bet his classes were straight fire tho