700 active-duty Marines will withdraw from Los Angeles, Pentagon says
'With stability returning to Los Angeles, the Secretary has directed the redeployment of the 700 Marines whose presence sent a clear message: lawlessness will not be tolerated,' Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said in a statement. 'Their rapid response, unwavering discipline, and unmistakable presence were instrumental in restoring order and upholding the rule of law.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
These Pictures Of Trump's Finished White House Rose Garden Patio Are Going Viral For All Of The Wrong Reasons
As you all know by now, Donald Trump has paved over the White House Rose Garden lawn. Why? Because it's being modeled after his Mar-a-Lago property in Florida, duh. The famous garden was redesigned by Jackie Kennedy in the 1960s to add that lawn, some trees, and more flowers. That layout has remained largely unchanged, like here's a picture from the 2010s: Here's Obama on it: And then, as you may remember, Melania Trump did her own remodel of it in 2020 when she took out some trees and added in that limestone path: Well, now we've got a patio. ABC News' Chief Washington Correspondent posted pictures of the "new Rose Garden:" jonkarl/Twitter: @jonkarl As you can see, the sewer drainage is mini American flags. And it's A LOT of concrete. Perfect for those DC summers! Needless to say, people aren't big fans. "'Garden.' I do not think that word means what you think it means," one person pointed out. "Who in god's name thought this was a good idea?" another person asked. And a bunch of people are wondering what the heck is up with the hatred of grass: "Why do they hate grass?" Then you have the comparisons. This person said it looked like a food court during Covid. Another person said it looked like a drained pool at a bankrupt casino. And this person said it reminded them of an "overpriced wedding venue in New Jersey." One small detail people are pointing out is the position/design of the sewer drain, "Trump put his Presidential seal right next to a sewer drain. Feels right." "The 'Stars & Stripes' drainage seems appropriate.'" And finally, you have the people hoping the next President tears it up: "We're tearing it out and putting the roses back in beginning on January 21, 2029, right?" "The next president should rip this up and put the garden back. He really has no sense of taste, and I say this as a guy whose house is a monument to my love of kitsch and mid-century American barcaloungers." Thoughts?
CNBC
12 minutes ago
- CNBC
Appeals court keeps order blocking Trump administration from indiscriminate immigration sweeps
A federal appeals court ruled Friday night to uphold a lower court's temporary order blocking the Trump administration from conducting indiscriminate immigration stops and arrests in Southern California. A three-judge panel of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held a hearing Monday afternoon at which the federal government asked the court to overturn a temporary restraining order issued July 12 by Judge Maame E. Frimpong, arguing it hindered their enforcement of immigration law. Immigrant advocacy groups filed suit last month accusing President Donald Trump's administration of systematically targeting brown-skinned people in Southern California during the administration's crackdown on illegal immigration. The lawsuit included three detained immigrants and two U.S. citizens as plaintiffs. In her order, Frimpong said there was a "mountain of evidence" that federal immigration enforcement tactics were violating the Constitution. She wrote the government cannot use factors such as apparent race or ethnicity, speaking Spanish or English with an accent, presence at a location such as a tow yard or car wash, or someone's occupation as the only basis for reasonable suspicion to detain someone. The appeals court panel agreed and questioned the government's need to oppose an order preventing them from violating the constitution. "If, as Defendants suggest, they are not conducting stops that lack reasonable suspicion, they can hardly claim to be irreparably harmed by an injunction aimed at preventing a subset of stops not supported by reasonable suspicion," the judges wrote. A hearing for a preliminary injunction, which would be a more substantial court order as the lawsuit proceeds, is scheduled for September. The Los Angeles region has been a battleground with the Trump administration over its aggressive immigration strategy that spurred protests and the deployment of the National Guard and Marines for several weeks. Federal agents have rounded up immigrants without legal status to be in the U.S. from Home Depots, car washes, bus stops, and farms, many of whom have lived in the country for decades. Among the plaintiffs is Los Angeles resident Brian Gavidia, who was shown in a video taken by a friend on June 13 being seized by federal agents as he yells, "I was born here in the states, East LA bro!" They want to "send us back to a world where a U.S. citizen ... can be grabbed, slammed against a fence and have his phone and ID taken from him just because he was working at a tow yard in a Latino neighborhood," American Civil Liberties Union attorney Mohammad Tajsar told the court Monday. The federal government argued that it hadn't been given enough time to collect and present evidence in the lawsuit, given that it was filed shortly before the July 4 holiday and a hearing was held the following week. "It's a very serious thing to say that multiple federal government agencies have a policy of violating the Constitution," attorney Jacob Roth said. He also argued that the lower court's order was too broad, and that immigrant advocates did not present enough evidence to prove that the government had an official policy of stopping people without reasonable suspicion. He referred to the four factors of race, language, presence at a location, and occupation that were listed in the temporary restraining order, saying the court should not be able to ban the government from using them at all. He also argued that the order was unclear on what exactly is permissible under law. "Legally, I think it's appropriate to use the factors for reasonable suspicion," Roth said The judges sharply questioned the government over their arguments. "No one has suggested that you cannot consider these factors at all," Judge Jennifer Sung said. However, those factors alone only form a "broad profile" and don't satisfy the reasonable suspicion standard to stop someone, she said. Sung, a Biden appointee, said that in an area like Los Angeles, where Latinos make up as much as half the population, those factors "cannot possibly weed out those who have undocumented status and those who have documented legal status." She also asked: "What is the harm to being told not to do something that you claim you're already not doing?" Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass called the Friday night decision a "victory for the rule of law" and said the city will protect residents from the "racial profiling and other illegal tactics" used by federal agents.
Fox News
12 minutes ago
- Fox News
MIKE DAVIS: Confirmation of Emil Bove a triumph of new over old
The Senate's confirmation this week of President Trump's pick, Emil Bove, to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit with a razor-thin 50–49 vote was a huge win for conservatives, despite the cheap shots from Democrats and nominal Republican senators Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski. Bove isn't just qualified, he's exceptional. He clerked for top judges and made his name as a sharp, tough prosecutor in New York. Even the left-leaning American Bar Association gave him their highest rating: "Well Qualified." That's a big deal coming from an organization that rarely plays fair with conservative nominees. So why all the pushback? Simple. Bove stood up when it mattered. When President Trump was under constant legal attack, Bove was one of the few who fought back. He played a key role in keeping the radical left from throwing Trump in prison on bogus charges. That alone made him a target for Trump-haters across the spectrum: Democrats, Never Trumpers, and the establishment legal elite. As principal associate deputy attorney general, Bove also helped stop the politically motivated prosecution of New York City Mayor Eric Adams. And he did it by standing up to out-of-control federal prosecutors in the Southern District of New York, the ones who like to pretend they run their own "sovereign district" separate from the rest of the country. Bove told them to follow orders or leave. They left. That's leadership. Some in the conservative legal world weren't thrilled with Bove's confirmation to a lifetime term, either. The Wall Street Journal recently ran a piece worrying that Bove's confirmation might make some Republican-appointed judges refuse to retire. Here's the truth: Those judges had their chance to retire during Trump's first term and didn't. That's on them, not Bove. Others breathlessly claimed Bove's confirmation marked the end of the conservative legal movement. That's nonsense. If Kamala Harris had won wthe presidency and stacked the courts with left-wing radicals, the damage would've been catastrophic. Instead, President Trump is putting solid, constitutionalist judges on the bench, judges like Emil Bove. Of course, the opposition resorted to the same tired smear tactics they always do. So-called "whistleblowers" came forward with flimsy claims. One former DOJ lawyer, Erez Reuveni, accused Bove of telling officials to ignore court orders, then turned around and signed legal documents confirming the orders were followed. On top of that, Reuveni undercut the Trump administration's immigration cases and violated attorney-client privilege. He was fired, and rightfully so. This is who the anti-Bove crowd chose as their star witness. Two more "whistleblowers" popped up just before the final vote — classic last-minute character assassination. One had no firsthand knowledge. The other's allegations were never made public by Senate Democrats. Sound familiar? It should. It's the same playbook they used against Justice Kavanaugh. Remember the ridiculous accusations, including the one about a gang-rape boat? All lies. All desperate. All failed. The Article III Project proudly fought for Bove's confirmation. This wasn't just about one seat. This was about pushing back against the old guard — the milquetoast Republicans and the liberal machine — and ushering in a new generation of bold, fearless constitutionalists. Tuesday's vote showed the old tricks don't work anymore. The left couldn't smear their way to a win. The establishment couldn't stall this one. Trump's nominee made it through. They'll keep trying to derail the president's agenda, especially when it comes to the courts. But we'll keep fighting. Because what's at stake isn't just the next judge. It's the future of the Constitution, the rule of law, and the rights of the American people. The old guard lost. America won. And this is only the beginning. Mike Davis is the founder and president of the Article III Project.
