Stand your ground’ law wins Missouri Senate approval

MAY 13, 2016 02:59 PM

UPDATED MAY 13, 2016 03:08 PM

Does cellphone-sweeping “StingRay” technology go too far?

NEW YORK — New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago and Las Vegas are among scores of police departments across the country quietly using a highly secretive technology developed for the military that can track the whereabouts of suspects by using the signals constantly emitted by their cellphones.

Civil liberties and privacy groups are increasingly raising objections to the suitcase-sized devices known as StingRays or cell site simulators that can sweep up cellphone data from an entire neighborhood by mimicking cell towers. Police can determine the location of a phone without the user even making a call or sending a text message. Some versions of the technology can even intercept texts and calls, or pull information stored on the phones.

Part of the problem, privacy experts say, is the devices can also collect data from anyone within a small radius of the person being tracked. And law enforcement goes to great lengths to conceal usage, in some cases, offering plea deals rather than divulging details on the StingRay.

“We can’t even tell how frequently they’re being used,” said attorney Jerome Greco, of the Legal Aid Society, which recently succeeded in blocking evidence collected with the device in a New York City murder case. “It makes it very difficult.”

At least 72 state and local law enforcement departments in 24 states plus 13 federal agencies use the devices, but further details are hard to come by because the departments that use them must take the unusual step of signing nondisclosure agreements overseen by the FBI.

An FBI spokeswoman said the agreements, which often involve the Harris Corporation, a defense contractor that makes the devices, are intended to prevent the release of sensitive law enforcement information to the general public.

The need to keep law enforcement practices secret was cited by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in a February 2016 letter to CBS News, denying a Freedom of Information Act request for records related to StingRay devices.

“We will neither confirm nor deny the service use of (StingRay) technology,” the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said in letter, citing a Freedom of Information Act exemption that “protects law enforcement records if their release would disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigation and prosecutions.”

In New York, use of the technology was virtually unknown to the public until last year when the New York Civil Liberties Union forced the disclosure of records showing the NYPD used the devices more than 1,000 times since 2008. That included cases in which the technology helped catch suspects in kidnappings, rapes, robberies, assaults and murders. It has even helped find missing people.

But privacy experts say such gains come at too high a cost.

“We have a Fourth Amendment to the Constitution,” said Jennifer Lynch, an attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, referring to the protection against unreasonable search and seizure. “Our Founding Fathers decided when they wrote the Bill of Rights there had to be limits placed on government.”

Lawmakers in several states have introduced proposals ranging from warrant requirements to an outright ban on the technology; about a dozen states already have laws requiring warrants. Federal law enforcement said last year that it would be routinely required to get a search warrant before using the technology – a first effort to create a uniform legal standard for federal authorities.

And case law is slowly building. Two months ago, a Washington, D.C., appeals court overturned a conviction on a sex assault after judges ruled a violation of the Fourth Amendment because of evidence improperly collected from the simulator without a proper warrant.

In the New York murder case argued by the Legal Aid Society, a judge in Brooklyn last month ruled that the NYPD must have an eavesdropping warrant signed by a judge to use the device, a much higher bar than the “reasonable suspicion” standard that had previously been required.

“By its very nature, then, the use of a cell site simulator intrudes upon an individual’s reasonable expectation of privacy, acting as an instrument of eavesdropping and requires a separate warrant supported by probable cause,” wrote state Supreme Court Judge Martin Murphy.

New York City police officials disagreed with Murphy’s ruling and disputed that a StingRay was even used in the case, even though there had been a court order to do so. Police officials also said they have since started requiring a higher stander of probable cause when applying for the devices.

Before the ruling, New York officers had not typically been required to get a warrant, which requires probably cause, in order to use StingRay devices, instead they have only needed a pen register order, demonstrating that the information that might get may be relevant to their case.

Legal Aid Society’s Greco said he hoped the ruling will push the nation’s largest department into meeting the higher standard, and help judges better understand the intricacies of more cutting-edge surveillance.

“We’re hoping we can use this decision among other decisions being made across the country to show that this logic is right,” Greco said. “Part of an issue we’re facing with technology, the judges don’t understand it. It makes it easier if another judge has sat down and really thought about it.”

Kids, Divorce, And Manipulation: Parents Who Use Kids As Weapons

high conflict divorce and kids

In divorce, narcissistic parents often buffer the pain of a failed marriage by trying to destroy their ex’s relationship with the children. Unlike healthy parents, who aim to work themselves out of a job by preparing children to live independently, a narcissist sees their kids as extensions of themselves. They cannot tolerate the thought that their children might grow up to chart their own course.

Sharing child custody loosens narcissists’ sense of control. They become terrified that their children might love the other parent more, or be more like that parent. How do they try to regain control? Often, it’s to embark on a mission to get the children back on their “side.”

Some narcissistic parents may actually believe the other parent is evil, and may view themselves as their child’s rescuer. Some may simply have more Machiavellian intentions. Either way, a narcissistic parent won’t hesitate to use children as weapons in the battle against their ex as a way to amp up an already high conflict divorce. Does this describe your ex? Here’s how to tell.

Signs Of A Manipulative Parent

Inappropriate communication Narcissists in their words and actions, often send their children the message that it’s not okay to enjoy time with the other parent. A narcissistic parent will get angry or distraught when kids return from time spent with the other parent – especially if they’ve have had a good time.

Interferes with visitation. A narcissistic parent will give the children choices about visitation or manipulate them into refusing visitation: “Would you rather go to Disneyland or spend a boring weekend stuck at your mom’s?”

Makes up or distorts information. A narcissistic parent will put her own “spin” on details to brainwash the child into thinking the other parent is dangerous or incompetent.

Shares adult-only information about the marriage and divorce. The manipulative parent may even alter the truth in order to get the kids to blame the other parent: “Dad says you wanted the divorce.”

Poor boundaries. A manipulative parent aligns with the child against the other parent. She will not let her kids have their own feelings and experiences. If she hates the ex, the kids must too.

Uses the child as a messenger. “Mom says I don’t have to like your girlfriend/visit your mother/make my own lunch.”

Monitors the kids’ phone conversations with the other parent. A manipulative parent will listen and/or tell the child what to say. If the child is at the other parent’s house, the manipulative parent might try to monopolize his child’s visit with that parent by frequent or lengthy phone conversations at, say, dinnertime.

Threats of self-harm. In extreme situations, manipulative parents will threaten suicide if they don’t get what they want, i.e. sole custody.

Children of divorce who are manipulated by parents suffer long-term psychological consequences. They may have trouble recognizing or feeling entitled to their own feelings. As adults, they may feel smothered in romantic relationships because of growing up with an enmeshed parent. They learn how to create drama, not resolve conflict, so they often duplicate the same tumultuous interpersonal style.

Yet children of manipulative parents can be helped with appropriate interventions, including parents agreeing to a model know as parallel parenting. In an upcoming post, we will discuss strategies for protecting kids whose parents use them as weapons.

high conflict divorce and kids

Elder Abuse Awareness – Top Threats to Investo

Multistate Outbreak of Human Campylobacter Infections Linked to Pet Store Puppies





  • Read Advice to Pet Owners and Advice to Pet Store Workers.
  • The Ohio Department of Health, several other states, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA-APHIS) are investigating a multistate outbreak of human Campylobacter infections linked to puppies sold through Petland, a national pet store chain.
  • The outbreak includes 39 people with laboratory-confirmed Campylobacterinfections or symptoms consistent with Campylobacter infection who live in 7 states (Florida, Kansas, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Wisconsin) and were exposed to puppies sold through Petland stores.
    • 12 are Petland employees from 4 states.
    • 27 either recently purchased a puppy at Petland, visited a Petland, or visited or live in a home with a puppy sold through Petland before illness began.
  • Epidemiologic and laboratory evidence indicates that puppies sold through Petland stores are a likely source of this outbreak. Petland is cooperating with public health and animal health officials to address this outbreak.
  • Campylobacter can spread through contact with dog poop (feces). It usually does not spread from one person to another.
  • This investigation is ongoing. CDC will provide updates as more information becomes available.

Why Chinese Education Companies Are Chasing U.S. Teachers

I write about interesting Chinese companies

Pupils do exercise in a classroom in China’s Hebei province.(Photo by VCG via Getty Images)

If there is one thing Jing Jing thinks her four-year-old daughter Jenny should start learning early on, it would be English. The 31-year-old college professor, who lives in Beijing, wants Jenny to speak the language just like a native, so she can become a global-minded person and have more job opportunities when she grows up.

To that end, Jing doesn’t want just any English teacher for her daughter. She pays 5,980 yuan ($750) for a total of 48 online courses where a certified U.S.-based instructor tunes in through live video to remotely teach Jenny every week.

“Learning from a native speaker will give Jenny the right accent,” Jing told Forbes. “The younger she starts the better, because she will accept English as a normal way of communication.”

In China, there are tens of millions of eager parents like Jing. Unsatisfied with Chinese classrooms’ stilted teaching style – and armed with the belief that good English skills are a necessity in the increasingly global China – they want to connect directly with teachers from the U.S. The demand has given birth to a multi-billion dollar online education market, where Chinese startups scour the U.S. and Canada to bring local language curriculums and instructors to their home country via live streaming technology.

Read More: This Former PhD Student From China Turned A Tutoring Chain Into A Billion Dollar Fortune

The process works like web conferencing. During lessons, which usually last for 30 minutes, students sit in front of their computers and watch their teachers speak while they’re halfway across the world. The tutors will go through teaching materials designed by their Chinese employers, who often borrow from U.S. elementary school curriculums, while using quite a lot of hand gestures to explain basic English to Chinese children mostly aged between 5 and 12.

Last year, the market for online language lessons in China stood at 30 billion yuan ($4.5 billion), according to consultancy firm iResearch. Between now and 2019, it is projected to grow more than 20% a year to reach 52 billion yuan ($7.8 billion), when the country’s entire online education sector will be valued at 270 billion yuan ($41 billion).

“Chinese people, especially those born after 1980, grew up with much more exposure to foreign culture,” said Zhang Yiwei, an analyst with consultancy firm JMDedu. “When they become parents, they want their children to speak English very, very fluently.”

Investors are taking note. In August, VIPKid, a Beijing-based online English tutoring startup, raised $200 million from prominent investors including Chinese gaming and social media giant Tencent Holdings and investment firm Sequoia Capital China. The firm, which says it expects to generate 5 billion yuan ($750 million) in revenue this year, is said to be valued at $1.5 billion, four years after it was founded in 2013. China Online Education Group, also known as 51 Talk, went public in New York last year. And iTutorGroup was valued at $1 billion in a 2015 funding round that included Goldman Sachs and Singapore sovereign wealth fund GIC.

Xiaomi Partners With Google For Mi A1 Smartphone, Targeting Developing Markets




Forbes Staff 

Yue Wang

I write about interesting Chinese companies


After resuming growth this year following repeated setbacks at the hands of local competitors, Chinese smartphone maker Xiaomi has set its sights on international markets to sustain this hard-earned momentum.

Over the past three years, Xiaomi has entered as many as 40 countries across regions, selling its phones and smart devices at cost to compete with brands like Apple and Samsung as well as China’s own Huawei, OPPO and Vivo for the attention of users in countries like India and Russia. The pace of expansion accelerated dramatically this year, with Xiaomi breaking into a dozen countries including Greece, Indonesia, Paraguay and Poland for the very first time, confirmed the company’s Senior Vice President Wang Xiang in a recent interview with Forbes.

In addition to partnering with online marketplaces and physical distributors in new markets, Xiaomi is also linking arms with Google’s parent company, Alphabet, to beef up its appeal. The company announced on Tuesday its $230 Mi A1 smartphone that will run on Google’s Android One operating platform, which will be the first Xiaomi device that doesn’t use the company’s default MIUI system. The handset, initially available in 40 markets including India, Indonesia, Russia and Mexico, is aimed at attracting users who are more familiar with Google-provided services, according to Wang. He also said that Xiaomi and Google have agreed to share revenues, but declined to provide more details. The Mi A1 will be available for purchase on September 12.

“We are at a key phase of global expansion,” says Wang. “Our users have diverse needs, so stock Android is one of the things we want to try.”

Billionaire Lei Jun, chairman and chief executive officer of Xiaomi Corp.(Photo by Qilai Shen/Bloomberg)

Try Xiaomi must, as international expansion becomes a top priority. The Beijing-based company, whose internet flash sales model propelled it to dizzying heights in 2014, became Asia’s most valuable startup after completing a $1.1 billion financing round in the same year. However, the company has since struggled, losing ground to local rivals who have beaten it to the punch in launching more innovative devices.

Read More: The Dramatic Rise (And Fall) Of Xiaomi

Although Xiaomi’s shipments grew almost 60% in the second quarter this year, it still faces stiff challenges in its home market. The company must defend its online sales from competitors’ equally aggressive internet marketing campaigns, while also racing to open signature retail outlets, taking on the vast retail networks built by Huawei and OPPO, as Chinese consumers now prefer to try devices hands-on before making purchases. This battle is especially challenging for Xiaomi, because China’s surging land and labor costs will pressure its already razor-thin margins, according to analysts.

“Growth in China remains limited for Xiaomi,” said Canalys analyst Jia Mo. “It can still grow a bit, but won’t be able to reach its heyday like in 2015, when Xiaomi was China’s biggest smartphone brand.”

Meanwhile, international markets present an alluring opportunity. Smartphone penetration in Central Europe and Southeast Asia, for example, stands at a respective 54% and 38%. This compares with 91% in the mature Chinese market, according to Canalys data. In addition, Xiaomi’s value-for-money brand image is likely to resonate well in these regions, since many users favor models that can pack the latest features such as dual-lens camera and finger print sensors at lower than $300 – less than half of the price of Apple’s iPhone 7.

Xiaomi has a two-pronged global strategy. Of all its diverse product lines, the company sells just four models abroad – the recently announced Mi A1 and three devices from the cheaper Redmi series – so it can better target digitally savvy but cash-strapped young customers, explains Wang. And having learned a thing or two from its Chinese rivals on the importance of establishing a physical presence, the company is investing in brick-and-mortar retailing across the world, seeking to build 2,000 Mi Home retail outlets globally by 2019, a goal that is twice Apple’s current global store count.

“In most foreign countries, online channels actually account for a very small part of total smartphone shipments.” Wang said. “If we sell online only, it would be difficult to achieve big influence.”

In India, Xiaomi is enjoying moderate success. It is now the country’s second largest smartphone brand by shipment, with a 15.5% market share, after Samsung’s 24%, according to Counterpoint Research. The company is targeting $2 billion in India sales by end of this year.

Other markets where Xiaomi is doing well include Indonesia and Poland. In Poland, for example, its shipment more than doubled from the previous quarter to 220,000 units in the April to June period. And global shipment now accounts for 37% of Xiaomi’s total shipments, according to Canalys.

Read More: Xiaomi Takes Its First Real Step Into The US Market

However, Xiaomi lacks progress in more developed markets. In Taiwan, where it started to sell phones in as early as 2013, the company has less than 2% share of the market today, outranked by a wide margin by more aggressive Chinese rivals such as OPPO, according to Gartner analyst CK Lu. In Eastern Europe, the company doesn’t have the prowess to compete with Huawei, as the smartphone and telecommunication giant has stronger relationships with local carriers, which dominate smartphone sales channels there, according to Canalys’s Jia.

As for the U.S., Xiaomi doesn’t distribute its phones at all. For now, it only sells a set top television box through a number of retailers including Walmart. Wang said Xiaomi would bring more smart gadgets to the U.S. within the next two months but doesn’t have plans to sell smartphones there anytime soon.

“The U.S. market is dominated by carriers,” Wang said. “We have to do a lot of customization and lab tests, but we currently don’t have enough engineers for that.”

In the meantime, Xiaomi’s success in emerging markets isn’t guaranteed. The company is currently stretching itself too thin by selling across the globe, according to analysts.

In fact, there are already signs that Xiaomi can’t have it all. In the Philippines, it shipped only 17,000 smartphones in the second quarter, down from 50,000 in the previous quarter, due to the lack of marketing investments, according to Canalys’s Jia. Last year, the company pulled out of Brazil, beleaguered by a volatile economy and high tax costs.

“Most smartphone companies don’t have the ability and resources to pull off immediate globalization,” said Gartner’s Lu. “They are rather cautious in their global strategies.”

What’s more, competition is ratcheting up, as virtually all of China’s top smartphone makers are targeting India and Indonesia for fresh growth. “It is unclear whether Xiaomi will sustain the momentum in these two countries, as other Chinese companies are aggressive with expansion into these markets alongside the market leader, Samsung, and some local players,” said IHS Markit analyst Ying Yang.

Xiaomi’s Wang, however, remains confident. He pointed to the $1 billion syndicated loan that the company raised in July as part of its resource pool, at a time when the company is expanding a fledgling international team, which now has less than 1,000 people.

“We are financially very healthy,” he insists. “We use our disruptive model to carry out our plans. We aren’t a traditional smartphone company but one that does business through our value-for-money model.”

Beware !!! Lead poisoning is it destroying your life?

Beware !!!
Lead poisoning why aren’t we all being tested regularly?Especially those booked for crimes what if lead poisoning disabled them?! Many of these symptoms can be mistaken for other causes! Be aware get tested asap!!!

Short term affects-
Abdominal pain
Loss of appetite
Memory loss
Pain or tingling in the hands and/or feet

long term affects-

Abdominal pain

Legislative Activities july 14th ,2017

House Floor Activities
Legislative Day of July 14, 2017

Watch Session Download XML Calendar RSS

Last Floor Action:
2:01:24 P.M. – The House adjourned pursuant to a previous special order. The next meeting is scheduled for 12:00 p.m. on July 17, 2017.

Floor ProceedingsBillsVotes
Time Bill Activity
9:00:01 A.M. The House convened, starting a new legislative day.
9:00:07 A.M. The Speaker designated the Honorable Michael K. Simpson to act as Speaker pro tempore for today.
9:00:27 A.M. Today’s prayer was offered by the House Chaplain, Rev. Patrick J. Conroy.
9:01:42 A.M. The Speaker announced approval of the Journal. Pursuant to clause 1, rule I, the Journal stands approved.
9:01:46 A.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – The Chair designated Mr. Bost to lead the Members in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
9:01:58 A.M. ONE MINUTE SPEECHES – The House proceeded with one minute speeches, which by direction of the Chair, would be limited to 5 per side of the aisle.
9:06:00 A.M. H.R. 2810 Considered as unfinished business. H.R. 2810 — “To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2018 for military activities of the Department of Defense and for military construction, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes.”
9:06:10 A.M. H.R. 2810 The House resolved into Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for further consideration.
9:07:25 A.M. H.R. 2810 An amendment, offered by Mr. Byrne, numbered 17 printed in House Report 115-217 to classify a vessel being repaired or dismantled to be a “recreational vessel” if the vessel shares elements of design and construction of traditional recreational vessels and is not normally engaged in a military or commercial undertaking when operating.
9:07:28 A.M. H.R. 2810 DEBATE – Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 440, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Byrne amendment No. 17.
9:15:53 A.M. H.R. 2810 POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS – At the conclusion of debate on the Byrne amendment No. 17, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Courtney demanded a recorded vote, and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
9:16:12 A.M. H.R. 2810 An amendment, offered by Mr. Hunter, numbered 18 printed in House Report 115-217 to address forum selection for claims from foreign maritime crews.
9:16:14 A.M. H.R. 2810 DEBATE – Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 440, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Hunter amendment No. 18.
9:26:05 A.M. H.R. 2810 POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS – At the conclusion of debate on the Hunter amendment No. 18, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Nadler demanded a recorded vote, and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
9:26:31 A.M. H.R. 2810 An amendment, offered by Mr. McGovern, numbered 43 printed in House Report 115-217 to require the Secretary of Defense to design and produce a military service medal to honor retired and former members of the Armed Forces who are radiation-exposed veterans
9:26:43 A.M. H.R. 2810 DEBATE – Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 440, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the McGovern amendment No. 43.
9:32:41 A.M. H.R. 2810 POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS – At the conclusion of debate on the McGovern amendment No. 43, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. McGovern demanded a recorded vote, and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
9:33:04 A.M. H.R. 2810 Amendments en bloc offered by Mr. Thornberry, comprised of the following amendments printed in House Report 115-217 as en bloc No. 3: 16, 49, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, and 71.
9:33:11 A.M. H.R. 2810 DEBATE – Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 440, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 20 minutes of debate on the Thornberry en bloc amendment No. 3.
9:53:16 A.M. H.R. 2810 On agreeing to the Thornberry amendments; Agreed to by voice vote.
9:53:40 A.M. H.R. 2810 Amendments en bloc offered by Mr. Thornberry, comprised of the following amendments printed in House Report 115-217 as en bloc No. 4: 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91.
9:53:47 A.M. H.R. 2810 DEBATE – Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 440, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 20 minutes of debate on the Thornberry en bloc amendment No. 4.
10:03:03 A.M. H.R. 2810 On agreeing to the Thornberry amendments; Agreed to by voice vote.
10:03:15 A.M. H.R. 2810 Amendments en bloc offered by Mr. Thornberry, comprised of the following amendments printed in House Report 115-217 as en bloc No. 5: 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107.
10:03:22 A.M. H.R. 2810 DEBATE – Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 440, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 20 minutes of debate on the Thornberry en bloc amendment No. 5.
10:04:31 A.M. H.R. 2810 On agreeing to the Thornberry amendments; Agreed to by voice vote.
10:04:46 A.M. H.R. 2810 Amendments en bloc offered by Mr. Thornberry, comprised of the following amendments printed in House Report 115-217 as en bloc No. 6: 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121.
10:04:52 A.M. H.R. 2810 DEBATE – Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 440, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 20 minutes of debate on the Thornberry en bloc amendment No. 6.
10:23:17 A.M. H.R. 2810 On agreeing to the Thornberry amendments; Agreed to by voice vote.
10:23:31 A.M. H.R. 2810 An amendment, offered by Ms. Tenney, numbered 122 printed in House Report 115-217 to reinstate the Berry Amendment’s longstanding domestic sourcing requirement for stainless steel flatware and provides for a one year phase-in period.
10:23:33 A.M. H.R. 2810 DEBATE – Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 440, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Tenney amendment No. 122.
10:32:36 A.M. H.R. 2810 On agreeing to the Tenney amendment; Failed by voice vote.
10:58:41 A.M. H.R. 2810 On agreeing to the Franks (AZ) amendment; Failed by recorded vote: 208 – 217 (Roll no. 372).
11:02:48 A.M. H.R. 2810 On agreeing to the Lamborn amendment; Agreed to by recorded vote: 235 – 189 (Roll no. 373).
11:06:12 A.M. H.R. 2810 On agreeing to the Byrne amendment; Agreed to by recorded vote: 244 – 181 (Roll no. 374).
11:09:48 A.M. H.R. 2810 On agreeing to the Hunter amendment; Agreed to by recorded vote: 234 – 190 (Roll no. 375).
11:13:13 A.M. H.R. 2810 On agreeing to the McGovern amendment; Agreed to by recorded vote: 424 – 0 (Roll no. 376).
11:13:25 A.M. H.R. 2810 The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 2810.
11:13:58 A.M. H.R. 2810 The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
11:14:27 A.M. H.R. 2810 The House adopted the amendments en gross as agreed to by the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
11:14:55 A.M. H.R. 2810 Ms. Lujan Grisham, M. moved to recommit with instructions to the Committee on Armed Services.
11:15:09 A.M. H.R. 2810 DEBATE – The House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Lujan Grisham (NM) motion to recommit with instructions. The instructions contained in the motion seek to require the bill to be reported back to the House forthwith with an amendment to add a new section to prohibit any funds authorized to be appropriated in the underlying bill from being used to plan, develop, or construct any barriers, including walls or fences, along the international border of the United States.
11:27:29 A.M. H.R. 2810 The previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered without objection.
11:33:29 A.M. H.R. 2810 On motion to recommit with instructions Failed by recorded vote: 190 – 235 (Roll no. 377).
11:40:44 A.M. H.R. 2810 On passage Passed by recorded vote: 344 – 81 (Roll no. 378).
11:40:46 A.M. H.R. 2810 Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
11:40:48 A.M. H.R. 2810 The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
11:40:49 A.M. H.R. 2810 The Clerk was authorized to correct section numbers, punctuation, and cross references, and to make other necessary technical and conforming corrections in the engrossment of H.R. 2810.
11:44:27 A.M. COLLOQUY ON HOUSE SCHEDULE – The Chair recognized Mr. McCarthy for the purpose of engaging in a colloquy with Mr. Hoyer on the expectations regarding the legislative schedule for the House during the upcoming week.
11:52:28 A.M. Mr. McCarthy asked unanimous consent That, when the House adjourns on Friday, July 14, 2017, it adjourn to meet on Monday, July 17, 2017 at noon for Morning-House debate and 2 p.m. for legislative business. Agreed to without objection.
11:53:49 A.M. ONE MINUTE SPEECHES – The House proceeded with further one minute speeches.
12:15:36 P.M. SPECIAL ORDER SPEECHES – The House has concluded all anticipated legislative business and has proceeded to Special Order speeches.
2:01:14 P.M. Mr. Gohmert moved that the House do now adjourn.
2:01:23 P.M. On motion to adjourn Agreed to by voice vote.
2:01:24 P.M. The House adjourned pursuant to a previous special order. The next meeting is scheduled for 12:00 p.m. on July 17, 2017.

Tropical Storm Cindy makes landfall in Louisiana




Tropical Storm Cindy made landfall in southwestern Louisiana near the Texas border early Thursday morning, threatening to bring strong winds, rain and potentially-dangerous floods to several surrounding Southern states.

The National Weather service has warned that the storm could cause “life-threatening flash flooding.”

Cindy is expected to move across western and northern Louisiana and into southeastern Arkansas between Thursday night and Friday morning, according to the National Weather Service. The service also warned that the storm could produce a few tornadoes on Thursday in portions of Florida, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana.

The governors of Alabama and Louisiana both declared a state of emergency earlier this week due to the coming storm.

It is also expected to dump a total of 6 to 9 inches of rain, with as much as 12 inches in isolated spots, over southeastern Louisiana, southern Mississippi, southern Alabama and western portions of the Florida Panhandle through Thursday. The storm’s maximum sustained winds were close to 40 miles per hour when it made landfall early Thursday.

Before the storm made landfall on Thursday, one person had already died from injuries related to its winds.

View image on TwitterView image on Twitter

4 AM Update: has made landfall in SW Louisiana. The Tropical Storm Warning has been discontinued west of High Island.

The deceased person was a 10-year-old boy who died in Alabama on Wednesday. The Baldwin County Sheriff’s Office said the boy had walked outside a waterfront condo where he and his family were staying in Fort Morgan, Alabama, and was standing only a few feet from the door when a large wave knocked a log into him around 10:30 a.m.

The boy, whose identity has not been released, died at the scene, according to police.

Prior to reaching land, the storm brought heavy winds and rain to some southern states, including Florida, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana on Wednesday.

Social media users in Lake Charles, Louisiana, posted images and video of the storm on Wednesday as it battered the area with severe rain. One user even posted a video of people kayaking through the flooded streets of the Lake Charles.

Meanwhile, social media users in near the Florida panhandle shared video on Wednesday showing the shoreline moving closer as unusually large waves crashed on the beaches there.

Kathleen Bertucci of Gulfport, Mississippi, told the Associated Press Wednesday that heavy rainfall sent about 10 inches of water into her business, Top Shop, which sells and installs granite countertops.

“It’s pretty disgusting, but I don’t have flood insurance because they took me out of the flood zone,” said Bertucci, whose store is near a bayou. “We’re just trying to clean everything up and hope it doesn’t happen again.”

ABC News’ Morgan Winsor and Julia Jacobo contributed to this report.



Minnesota Nineteen-Year-Old sues her Father, Hennepin and Carver Counties, along with Social Workers, Guardians at litem, and lawyers for an excess of $240 Million for Deprivation of Civil Rights

03/17/2017 Minneapolis, MN, US

Annelise Rice, a hockey player at UND and graduate of Minnetonka High School, filed a lawsuit on March 17, 2017, in Minnesota federal court seeking damages for deprivation of civil rights by tortuous intervention in a mother-child relationship and deprivation of rights under color of the law (Civil Action No. 17-cv-796 ADM/HB).

Annelise’s father, Brent Rice, branch manager of Merrill Lynch Wayzata, is a defendant on the lawsuit. Employees of Hennepin County (Michael Borowiak, Jolene Lukanen, Michael Garelick, Richard Witucki, Judith Hoy, Jean Peterson) and Carver County (Nicole Mercil, Bethany Koch, Sarah Kulesa, Brenda K. Dehmer, Carole Cole), and Brent Rice’s lawyer, Cory D. Gilmer, are also listed among the eighteen defendants. The defendants include court-appointed Guardians at litem, Social Workers, and lawyers who were involved in the custody evaluation and CHIPS (Child in Need of Protection or Services) proceedings for Annelise Rice. The proceedings began in Hennepin County and were moved to Carver County when the family moved.

Judges, lawyers, and social workers no longer have absolute immunity and can be held responsible for their actions that deprive Constitutional rights, even if they are acting in an official role.

This case is highly unusual due to the large amount of defendants involved. The defendants conspired to deny Annelise access to the courts and intentionally inflicted emotional distress on Annelise while she was still a minor. Defendants knowingly interfered with Annelise’s constitutional right to a relationship with her mother and four siblings, causing inordinate stress and difficulty.

Annelise asks the court for relief in an amount great enough to deter defendants and others in similar positions from engaging in this egregious misconduct in the future.There have been many cases of negligence by social services that have put young lives at risk. Social workers, Guardians at litem, lawyers, and judges need to be held accountable to prevent further neglect, abuse, and deaths of children in protective care. This lawsuit could potentially turn into a class action suit, because of the amount of families that have been mistreated in this way.

Annelise Rice