WASHINGTON — 

President Trump’s decision to pull remaining U.S. troops back from northeastern Syria could revive the Islamic State terrorist group and destabilize the volatile region, senior U.S. officials said Monday, while senior Republicans in Congress angrily rebuked the president as he fights an impeachment inquiry.

Trump abruptly announced the move late Sunday without consulting top Pentagon or State Department advisors, sparking a cascade of warnings that withdrawing even the token U.S. force — up to 100 special operations troops — will allow Turkey to launch a long-planned military operation aimed at eliminating the Kurdish fighters long backed by Washington, the officials warned.

Without U.S. support, the Kurdish fighters who form the bulk of the U.S.-led coalition fighting Islamic State are expected to shift to fighting Turkish troops and to release some of the 12,000 Islamic State fighters they now hold in camps, the U.S. officials warned. The militant group has lost its territory but could pose a potent threat if reinforcements return.

Trump portrayed his decision as fulfilling his pledge to disentangle America from what he called “ridiculous, endless wars,” especially in the region’s ethnic and sectarian conflicts. But the political backlash in Washington was swift, harsh and bipartisan.

“A precipitous withdrawal of U.S. forces from Syria would only benefit Russia, Iran and the Assad regime. And it would increase the risk that ISIS and other terrorist groups regroup,” said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), normally one of Trump’s staunchest allies. (Islamic State is also known as ISIS.)

“As we learned the hard way during the Obama administration, American interests are best served by American leadership, not by retreat or withdrawal,” he added.

Trump later appeared to issue a stark warning to Turkey, although for what was unclear. “If Turkey does anything that I, in my great and unmatched wisdom, consider to be off limits, I will totally destroy and obliterate the Economy of Turkey,” he tweeted.

Trump spoke by phone with Turkey’s president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, on Sunday. After the call, acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney called Defense Secretary Mark Esper to advise him of the president’s decision to withdraw from the border, a U.S. official said.

Later Sunday, the White House announced that the U.S. would not interfere with Turkey’s plans send troops into Syria to battle Kurdish fighters arrayed near the border, saying American forces would “no longer be in the immediate area.”

The White House statement said Turkey would “be responsible” for all Islamic State fighters captured over the last two years. The statement did not suggest how, when or where Turkey would take custody of the thousands of militants held by the Kurds.

But in a sign of the chaos, Erdogan said at a news conference in Ankara that the United States “is working to decide how to handle” the prisoners.

Erdogan also said he plans to visit Washington in mid-November to discuss the “depth of the operation,” according to a Turkish newspaper, Daily Sabah. The White House declined Monday to confirm the visit.

By early Monday, American forces had begun evacuating from the border towns of Ras al-Ayn and Tal Abyad to positions outside the roughly 18-mile-wide security zone they had been patrolling, officials said.

Administration and White House officials scrambled to stem the fallout, insisting that Trump had not given Erdogan a green light to invade Syria.

“The Department of Defense made clear to Turkey — as did the president — that we do not endorse a Turkish operation in northern Syria,” Pentagon spokesman Jonathan Hoffman said in a statement. “We will work with our other NATO allies and coalition partners to reiterate to Turkey the possible destabilizing consequences of potential actions to Turkey, the region and beyond.”

Turkey has built up its forces along the Syrian border and taken other steps indicating it plans to launch an incursion into northern Syria, perhaps in the next few days, according to a U.S. official familiar with the latest U.S. intelligence assessments.

Ankara has said it wants a 20-mile-wide “safe zone” along the border to combat what it described as Kurdish terrorists and to resettle some of the 3.6 million refugees it has hosted since the Syrian civil war erupted in 2011.

Pentagon officials are seeking to persuade Turkey to keep its troops from moving more than a few miles into Syria, instead of carving out a wider tract. In that case, Kurdish fighters probably would rein in counterattacks on Turkish forces, said the officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal assessments.

“If there’s a limited incursion, there could be a limited response,” said a U.S. official.

Trump has long sought to remove U.S. troops from Syria, even announcing a total pullout in December. He backed down after Defense Secretary James N. Mattis resigned in protest and White House advisors warned too fast a withdrawal would let Islamic State regroup.

About 1,000 U.S. troops are deployed in the country. Although Islamic State lost its last bit of territory in March, the Pentagon has maintained a presence for counter-terrorism operations and to prevent the Syrian government and its Iranian ally from taking over.

After Islamic State emerged in 2014, seizing a third of both Syria and Iraq for its so-called caliphate, Kurdish militias became the most dependable U.S. partners in Syria under both the Obama and Trump administrations.

The Kurds quickly carved out a self-administered enclave in northeastern Syria that U.S. officials touted as an alternative to the autocratic government of Syrian President Bashar Assad, who is backed by Iran and Russia in the country’s civil war.

Trump’s pullout was “a stab in the back,” Kino Gabriel, a spokesman for the Syrian Democratic Forces, the U.S.-backed Kurdish force, told Jordan’s Al Hadath TV.

The SDF said in a statement that any Turkish operation in northern and eastern Syria would have “a huge negative effect” on the war against Islamic State.

Turkish troops are unlikely to reach Al-Hol, the main Kurdish-run detention center. Located about 50 miles south of the border, it holds an estimated 70,000 Islamic State family members and sympathizers.

The Kurds also are holding about 2,000 foreign fighters who had joined Islamic State and were captured on the battlefield, as well as 10,000 Iraqi and Syrian members of the group, Pentagon officials say.

A major battle with Turkey is liable to pull SDF fighters away from guarding the detention centers, however.

Prisoners already have reportedly attempted mass escapes, and Islamic State’s fugitive leader, Abu Bakr Baghdadi, recently exhorted adherents to help break them out.

The U.S. troops in Syria are not a large enough force to take custody of the detainees from the Kurds, or to prevent an Islamic State resurgence if they are set free in large numbers, U.S. officials said.

Without the Kurds, “we will no longer have a partner” to fight Islamic State, said an official involved in Syria policy.

Trump’s decision could garner support from his political base, which backs his efforts to end America’s foreign wars and stand up to the national security establishment, especially if Islamic State does not surge back anytime soon.

But it generated a torrent of opposition from Republican lawmakers on Capitol Hill — allies Trump needs as House Democrats head toward a potential impeachment vote over his efforts to get Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden, who is running for president.

Some of Trump’s closest allies criticized the move as a misguided pullout comparable to then-President Obama’s decision to pull out of Iraq in late 2011, a move that left a security vacuum that Islamic State later exploited.

The Trump pullback gave Republicans — who do not support impeachment but have largely remained silent as new allegations of wrongdoing have emerged — ample opportunity to show they can be critical of the president.

“I like President Trump, I’ve tried to help him. This to me is just unnerving to its core,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), one of Trump’s strongest allies on Capitol Hill. “To say to the American people ISIS has been destroyed in Syria is not true.”

Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.), a Trump ally and member of House GOP leadership, called it a “catastrophic mistake.”

“This decision ignores lesson of 9/11,” she said on Twitter. “Terrorists thousands of miles away can and will use their safe-havens to launch attacks against America.”

Graham said he would prepare a Senate resolution, or perhaps two, urging Trump to reconsider his decision and threatening sanctions on Turkey if its troops enter northeastern Syria.

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

He predicted that Congress would approve them by a veto-proof margin, a potential embarrassment for Trump, although a resolution would not change policy.

Even some of Trump’s former administration officials were critical of the decision.

“We must always have the backs of our allies, if we expect them to have our back,” said Nikki Haley, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. “The Kurds were instrumental in our successful fight against ISIS in Syria. Leaving them to die is a big mistake.”

Republicans who have grown accustomed to Trump retreating under fire are hoping he may back down again on Syria.

“If the president sticks with this retreat, he needs to know that this bad decision will likely result in the slaughter of allies who fought with us, including women and children,” said Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.). “I hope the president will listen to his generals and reconsider.”

The only Republican who publicly backed Trump’s decision was Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), an ardent opponent of U.S. involvement in foreign wars.

Paul said he supported Trump “as he once again fulfills his promises to stop our endless wars and have a true ‘America first’ foreign policy.”

Amid the opposition from Republicans, Trump defended his decision and pushed back on the idea that he had taken Turkey’s side against the Kurds long backed by Washington.

“I’m not siding with anyone in Syria,” Trump told reporters at the White House.

“Syria was supposed to be a short-term hit, just in and out,” he said. He said the continued containment of Islamic State should fall to countries in the region.

“We’re 7,000 miles away,” Trump said. “Let them take care of it. We want to bring our people home.”

Cloud and Haberkorn reported from Washington. Bulos reported from Amman, Jordan.

Joe Biden is calling for making community and technical college free while making existing federal college loan programs more generous as he continues charting a policy course that moves left but stops short of his more progressive rivals for the Democratic presidential nomination.

The former vice president’s $750-billion higher education plan represents a major expansion of the federal government’s role in educating Americans beyond high school. But Biden’s pitch Tuesday is not as sweeping as proposals from his 2020 rivals Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, both of whom offer plans exceeding the $1-trillion mark.

The competing approaches reflect Democrats’ efforts to address spiking tuition costs in the United States and the $1.5-trillion-plus in student debt held by about 45 million Americans. The party’s education policy divide is similar to the gap that separates Biden from the two progressive senators on healthcare, with the former vice president proposing to expand the federal government’s role in the existing health insurance market, while Warren and Sanders propose a single-payer insurance system that would see the federal government essentially replace private insurance altogether.

Jill Biden, the candidate’s wife and a longtime community college professor, explained her husband’s approach.

“My students inspire me,” she said in a conference call with reporters, “and they ask for one thing in return: opportunity.”

The crux of Biden’s higher education plan is a federal-state partnership to cover community college tuition and technical training. Biden calls for the federal government to cover 75% of the tuition costs, with states covering the rest. That’s a similar financing concept to the Medicaid insurance program for the poor and the disabled, with states required to cover some costs to qualify for federal money to cover the majority of the program.

Biden proposes that the federal government cover 95% of the community college tuition cost at Native Americans’ tribal campuses.

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

Sanders and Warren propose universal, free access to all undergraduate public colleges and universities.

On student debt, Biden’s more limited approach calls for doubling the Pell Grant program for low-income Americans and cutting in half the income percentage caps on student loan repayments. Borrowers now must pay up to 10% of their discretionary income. Biden calls for capping payments at 5% of discretionary income, while also delaying payments for anyone making less than $25,000, with the borrower accruing no additional interest.

Biden’s plan would forgive any remaining debt after 20 years of payments and would allow borrowers to get out of their debts as part of personal bankruptcy.

Sanders, conversely, proposes eliminating all student loan debt, while Warren calls for broad debt relief based on income. Warren’s idea would cancel $50,000 in debt for each person with household income under $100,000, with additional proportional relief for those making up to $250,000 annually.

Biden and Warren have another noticeable split on for-profit colleges, which have come under scrutiny because their graduates have a much higher default rate on loans as they struggle to find quality jobs. Biden proposes tighter regulations on those colleges to stop them “from profiteering off of students.” Warren calls for banning such businesses from getting federal money altogether.

All three Democratic hopefuls point to proposed tax increases to pay for their spending. Sanders would tax Wall Street transactions. Warren points to her “wealth tax,” 2 cents on every dollar of a household’s net worth beyond $50 million. Biden calls for eliminating certain breaks in inheritance taxes and capping itemized deductions for the wealthiest Americans.

WASHINGTON — 

House Democrats are considering additional measures to protect the identity of the whistleblower whose complaint spurred an impeachment inquiry into President Trump, according to the Washington Post.

To prevent efforts to expose the whistleblower, Democrats are weighing having the individual testify from a remote location and obscuring the person’s appearance and voice, three officials told the Post.

The unusual measures come amid an impeachment investigation focused on President Trump’s interactions with Ukraine after the whistleblower complaint raised concerns that Trump was leveraging U.S. foreign policy for personal political gain ahead of the 2020 presidential election.

Despite legal protections for anonymity, President Trump has made repeated calls for the whistleblower — whom he has called a “partisan hack” and “close to a spy” — to be revealed. This has raised concerns that the whistleblower’s identity could be leaked by those in the investigation’s orbit who would typically have unaltered access to the testimony.

Once a federal employee discloses wrongdoing through proper channels, they are granted whistleblower protections. These protections are meant to shield whistleblowers from retaliation that could affect their job duties, responsibilities, working conditions and their eligibility for access to classified information.

Additional anonymity measures reportedly could include holding a staff-only session that lawmakers would not be able to attend to ask questions, as well as having the whistleblower testify via video conference in a way that would obscure his or her appearance and voice. Options such as sitting the whistleblower behind a partition or conducting audio-only testimony also are being examined, according to the Post.

The suggestions came after a lawyer representing the whistleblower raised “serious concerns” in a September letter to Joseph Maguire, acting director of national intelligence, about his client’s safety, citing the president’s attacks. The letter also said a $50,000 “bounty” had been established for information relating to the client’s identity.

“Unfortunately, we expect this situation to worsen, and to become even more dangerous for our client and any other whistleblowers, as Congress seeks to investigate this matter,” wrote Andrew P. Bakaj, the whistleblower’s attorney.

The legal team representing the original whistleblower recently announced they were representing a second whistleblower but provided no further information.

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

WASHINGTON — 

The White House has issued a formal objection to House Democrats’ impeachment probe into President Trump without an official vote.

In a blistering letter to House Democrats, the White House’s lawyer said President Trump “cannot participate in your partisan and unconstitutional inquiry under these circumstances.”

MORE COVERAGE: Defiant letter marks a major milestone in the impeachment drama

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) announced two weeks ago that a formal impeachment inquiry would focus on the president’s outreach to foreign governments to help him win reelection in the 2020 presidential election. However, she did not seek the consent of the full chamber. In response, Republicans have used the lack of a vote to argue the probe isn’t legitimate.

A House vote was held for impeachment investigations into Presidents Nixon and Clinton. When the House impeached President Andrew Johnson in 1868, there wasn’t one. Some experts say that while the House voted to open an inquiry in the past, that doesn’t mean it must always do so.

“There’s no real technical reason for a full House vote,” Brookings Fellow Margaret L. Taylor recently told The Times. “The Constitution does not prescribe how the House impeaches.”

The letter from the White House follows comments by President Trump on Friday that Democrats in the House “have the votes” to begin a formal inquiry, even if they don’t have enough votes to convict him in the Senate. But he added that he believes the move would backfire politically.

“I really believe that they’re going to pay a tremendous price at the polls,” he said.

When asked last week about whether she had taken a full House vote on the impeachment inquiry off the table, Pelosi said she hadn’t.

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

“There is no requirement that there be a floor vote. That’s not anything that is excluded. By the way, there are some Republicans that are very nervous about our bringing that vote to the floor,” Pelosi said at a press conference.

They passed him the ball, handed him the ball, passed to him again and handed off to him again.

And that was just in the first five plays Sunday, the Chargers intent on reintegrating Melvin Gordon as quickly as possible in an attempt to compensate for nine weeks of holding out because of a contract dispute.

“We wanted to get him lathered up and get him going,” coach Anthony Lynn explained this week. “These are his reps. He missed a lot of time. We’ve got to get him back up to date.”

Gordon missed training camp, the preseason and the first four games while failing to secure the extension he sought.

Following the Chargers’ 20-13 loss to Denver, Gordon said he felt fine physically but admitted he struggled with late on-field calls from quarterback Philip Rivers.

He said the toughest adjustment returning this late will be refining the sort of small details that typically are ironed out during training camp practices and preseason games.

“We have to get him involved,” Lynn said. “He’s our starting running back. He’s missed a lot of time. This is the only time we have. We don’t have a preseason anymore. So he’s going to get his game reps right now.”

The Chargers have gladly welcomed back Gordon, wide receiver Keenan Allen posting a video on social media of the warm locker-room reception the exact moment the running back walked in.

But his return did not boost the offense as expected. In fact, the opposite happened. The Chargers failed to establish any consistency against the Broncos and finished with a season-low 246 yards.

Afterward, Lynn dismissed the suggestion that Gordon rejoining the team somehow negatively affected the chemistry on offense.

“No, not at all,” he said. “Melvin’s a good football player. … He didn’t have many opportunities, I can tell you that. But he played OK.”

Gordon carried 12 times for 31 yards and caught four passes for seven yards. As a team, the Chargers generated only 35 yards on the ground in 16 attempts.

With Gordon back, Austin Ekeler was used more as a receiver, Denver’s defense backing off in a scheme that successfully eliminated big plays. Ekeler caught 15 passes but gained only 86 yards. He carried only three times for seven yards. While Gordon was out, Ekeler averaged 14 carries a game.

“To me, I could care less about carries,” Lynn said. “It’s touches.”

Against the Broncos, Ekeler had 18 touches and Gordon 16. When the Chargers play Pittsburgh on Sunday night at Dignity Health Sports Park, Gordon’s workload is expected to increase.

One of Gordon’s carries that netted no gain Sunday came on a third-quarter play near the goal line after the Chargers inserted Tyrod Taylor at quarterback and split Rivers out wide right.

Immediately after that failed bit of trickery, Rivers was intercepted in the end zone, one of four Chargers red-zone trips that failed to result in a touchdown Sunday.

It wasn’t the first time they’ve employed Rivers and Taylor at the same time this season. So far, those plays have been largely unsuccessful.

“With Tyrod in there you have to defend him,” Lynn said. “You can’t stack the box as much. Just trying to create an advantage there in the blocking scheme, that’s all.

“I thought the exchange was a little sloppy, and it could have been from the backup quarterback being in the game or it could have been from a new runner. Other than that, nothing wrong with the concept.”

Another notable breakdown came on the final play of the first half when Ekeler, on fourth down from the one-yard line, took a short pass from Rivers and tried to score on a sweep around the left edge.

The Broncos forced Ekeler wider than he wanted to go, and he eventually was stopped near the front pylon and fumbled for a touchback.

Asked whether he was OK with the play call, Lynn said, “Hell, I called it, so I guess I was OK with it.

“Looking back at that play, should I have kicked the field goal? Maybe so. But I wanted a touchdown. I wanted to give this team some momentum going into the locker room knowing we were going to get the ball back.”

Instead, the Chargers went into halftime trailing 17-0. After receiving the third-quarter kickoff, they gained four yards in three plays and punted.

52 pickup

On a day when the Chargers produced very little down the field, wide receiver Andre Patton drew two pass-interference calls that totaled 52 yards. Both plays contributed to drives that resulted in field-goal attempts.

“He did a good job of fighting back toward the ball and creating it,” Lynn said. “That’s just a smart move by him. I liked the way he played. I like some of the things that he’s doing.”

Because of injury, Patton has been active for three games this season. He has two catches for 22 yards. Patton, 25, spent the past two seasons and the start of this one on the Chargers’ practice squad.

“He’s a good young prospect who’s stepped up the past couple weeks,” Lynn said.

Flag picked up

One indignity the Chargers narrowly avoided Sunday was losing another touchdown because of a penalty.

Desmond King’s 68-yard punt return was upheld only after officials waved off a flag that had been thrown, apparently for what initially was thought to be an illegal block.

“I mean, the thought crossed my mind,” Lynn said of having another score wiped out. “I’m glad they picked it up. I wish that would have helped us win the game, but …”

The Chargers have had four touchdowns nullified by penalties this season.

A Los Angeles Unified School District investigation into an allegation of academic misconduct involving a Harbor City Narbonne football player confirmed that a player on last year’s team was ineligible after Oct. 4 because he did not have a grade-point average above 2.0, according to Michael Romero, superintendent for Local District South.

Narbonne reported to the City Section on Tuesday that there was a violation of LAUSD academic policy involving the player last season. Now it will be up to City Section Commissioner Vicky Lagos to apply CIF rules and determine whether any sanctions are warranted against this year’s team, such as a playoff ban.

Lagos said she will be “reviewing and processing” and consulting with CIF legal staff. One of the first priorities would be to see whether the player was in a game after Oct. 4. The City Section has banned teams from the playoffs in the past when ineligible players were discovered the previous year.

Narbonne is the five-time defending City Section Open Division champion and heavily favored to win a sixth time. The Gauchos are 6-1 overall and won their Marine League opener last week against San Pedro 53-0. But the fact the Gauchos used an ineligible player places them in serious jeopardy of sanctions by the City Section.

Romero said in March of this year that a teacher reported to the administration his concern regarding the grades of a football player. “We did determine he was ineligible to participate after Oct. 4,” Romero said.

The teacher reported that the player’s grades in the computer system did not reflect his true grades, according to Peter Hastings, administrator for operations in Local District South.

“We uncovered documents that there were irregularities,” Romero said. “His eligibility was compromised due to failure to meeting the 2.0 grade-point average.”

The LAUSD confirmed in May that it was investigating an allegation of academic misconduct at Narbonne. Two staff members were reassigned, and the entire football team was brought into the school library to be interviewed. Football coach Manuel Douglas was reassigned at the end of May for an allegation of “misconduct involving interference with an on-going District investigation,” according to a lawsuit Douglas filed last month against LAUSD.

Sign up for our free sports newsletter >>

While the investigation into academic misconduct was completed by the local district office, the inspector general’s office of the LAUSD has since launched an ongoing investigation that led to Douglas’ lawsuit.

Douglas’ frustration grew to a breaking point in August when he flew on a private charter jet paid for by a Narbonne booster to see the team play in Clovis in its season opener and put on his Twitter avatar, “Head coach of team outcast.” He is not expected to return to coach this season. He continues to be paid while assigned to his home.

A letter was sent to Narbonne parents Tuesday from principal Sara Aiello that said:

“Today Narbonne High School submitted a letter to the CIF reporting the findings of its investigation of academic misconduct. At this time, we cannot provide further information due to student privacy issues, but our investigation has determined that a student athlete was made eligible to play football as a result of academic placement that failed to comply with LAUSD policy. LAUSD is in the process of taking corrective action as a result of these findings. CIF will make a determination based on the details of this report.”

Aiello also sent a letter to Lagos:

“The Los Angeles Unified School District has concluded its investigation of academic misconduct for Narbonne High School. The investigation has determined that a … football player was made eligible to play as a result of academic placement that failed to comply with LAUSD policy. The modifications to the student’s schedule resulted in an inaccurate recording of his academic marks, making him eligible to play when, in fact, he was not. [He] should have been deemed ineligible as of October 4, 2018.”

Whatever happens this season, the Gauchos’ reign could be nearing an end because the coaching staff put together by Douglas is unlikely to stick around when the season ends. The rest of the coaching staff has stayed together under interim coach Joe Aguirre and successfully kept the players focused on the field.

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

ATLANTA — 

Heroics from franchise icons and inspired performances by youngsters have turned the meeting between the St. Louis Cardinals and Atlanta Braves in the National League Division Series into a classic.

A tie game slipped away from the Braves bullpen in the opener. A few days later, a vintage performance from 38-year-old Adam Wainwright was cratered by Cardinals closer Carlos Martinez in Game 3. Postseason newbie Dansby Swanson had the tying hit for the Braves. Veteran Yadier Molina, who has otherwise struggled in this series, hit a tying single in the eighth inning and a walk-off sacrifice fly in the 10th to stave off the Cardinals’ elimination the following evening.

Now this thrilling best-of-five set shifts to SunTrust Park. Game 5 will either propel the 97-win Braves to the franchise’s first championship series since 2001 or prolong the underdog Cardinals’ October stay.

“All four of these games have just been tremendous,” said Braves starter Mike Foltynewicz, who will return to the mound on regular rest to attempt to replicate the seven scoreless, three-hit innings he threw in Atlanta’s Game 2 win. “I don’t have any nails right now. I mean it’s just edge of the seat.”

The series has been a whirlwind despite the inefficiencies of both offenses. The Braves and Cardinals have hit a combined .182 with runners on base.

St. Louis has kept pace with help from a rejuvenated Marcell Ozuna, who in his first postseason appearance has eight hits and four RBIs. Ozuna has two homers — and so does teammate Paul Goldschmidt, who counts four doubles among his seven hits.

Braves star Ronald Acuna Jr. has eight hits in 16 at-bats and Swanson seven in 14. They each have three doubles, and Acuna has a triple and homer. Off the bench, Adam Duvall has collected three hits and driven in five runs.

But Atlanta’s middle-of-the-order bats have shriveled. Freddie Freeman, probably still not fully recovered from a nagging elbow injury that caused him to miss four games during the final week of the regular season, has only two hits. Outfielder Nick Markakis and third baseman Josh Donaldson have combined for five.

Pitchers have dominated this series. The Cardinals have struck out 36 and posted a 3.00 ERA, the third-lowest mark among postseason teams. The Braves are close behind with 35 strikeouts and a fourth-ranked 3.19 ERA.

A deviation from that trend seems unlikely in the finale, which pits the resurgent Foltynewicz against the Cardinals’ Jack Flaherty, the 23-year-old product of Studio City’s Harvard-Westlake High who held the Braves to one run through six innings in Game 2. He did, however, give up a two-run homer in the seventh to Duvall on his 105th pitch.

Asked before Tuesday’s workouts if he expected another close game, Braves manager Brian Snitker laughed, “You know, after the last few days, yeah.”

“That’s like where we’re going. This has been an unbelievable series. My God. Both teams just banging at each other and the close games and the late-inning heroics. It’s been something. It’s been exhausting, but it’s been a heck of a series for both sides.”

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

Randy Thompson has officially traded Alemany cardinal and gold for Sherman Oaks Notre Dame navy and gold. The former Alemany baseball coach was introduced to players on Tuesday as the new assistant coach at Notre Dame.

“We’re pretty excited,” Notre Dame coach Tom Dill said.

Thompson spent 25 years at Alemany until he was dismissed as baseball coach just before the start of school in August in a cost-cutting move that shocked some longtime Alemany supporters. Thompson graduated from Alemany, his mother graduated from Alemany and his senior son attends Alemany.

But the respect other coaches had in the Mission League for Thompson was sincere, and Dill was one of the first to seek Thompson’s contributions for his program.

“Can’t beat navy and gold,” Dill said.

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

A small plane crashed just after 12:30 p.m. Tuesday in a field outside the Camarillo Airport, killing one person, authorities said.

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

Ventura County Fire Department investigators responded and were working to determine what led to the crash. An official said the pilot of the plane was found dead.

Alec Ticherich, a flight instructor at the airport, said the aircraft was a BD-5 experimental jet. The plane experienced a loss of power after takeoff and crashed while trying to make it back to the airport, he said.

“The plane was entirely engulfed in flames,” he said.

Ticherich said experimental aircrafts are not held to the same safety ratings as other planes.

“Anyone can build them,” he said. “It’s basically a home-built aircraft.”

The Federal Aviation Assn. and the National Transportation Safety Board also are investigating the crash.

OAKLAND — 

Millions of Californians will have new safeguards against large rent increases after Gov. Gavin Newsom signed legislation on Tuesday capping annual rent hikes for the next decade.

Newsom has hailed the law, Assembly Bill 1482, as the nation’s strongest statewide renter protection measure. Here’s how it works:

What does the law do?

The law limits yearly rent increases at 5% plus inflation for the next 10 years. Had the policy been in place this year, rent increases in the Los Angeles area would be limited to 8.3% while those in San Francisco would have been capped at 9%.

There are a number of exceptions to these rules. The rent cap would not apply to apartments built within the last 15 years or single-family home rentals unless they’re owned by corporations or other institutional investors.

Limits on rent increases will not change for those currently living in rent-controlled apartments. However, the new rules extend protections for renters living in newer complexes in cities with rent control. In Los Angeles, for instance, rent control limits increases to about 3% or 4% per year for those living in apartments built before October 1978. Tenants in buildings constructed between that time and 2005 will now be subject to the statewide rent cap.

The law, which will take effect on Jan. 1, also prohibits landlords from evicting tenants without documented lease violations after a renter has lived in an apartment for a year.

How many people would the law affect?

About 2.4 million California households would be affected by the new rent cap in addition to those living in single-family home rentals that meet the law’s requirements, according to an estimate by UC Berkeley’s Terner Center for Housing Innovation.

An analysis of rental listing data by real estate website Zillow found about 6.7% of the properties statewide in the company’s database last year were subject to rent increases that exceeded the cap.

While the new law allows for rent increases that are much higher than average wage growth, renter advocates argue it will prevent sudden surges at levels that could drive people from their homes.

What negative consequences could result from the law?

Landlords and economists have warned that the law might prompt property owners to increase rents up to the cap out of fears that such hikes would be limited in the future. Research on rent controls has shown that such policies can spur property owners to convert apartment complexes into condominiums.

Currently, landlords are allowed to raise rent by more than the cap. However, starting Jan. 1, they would have to reduce rent to its rate on March 15 of this year, plus the allowable increase.

While that rollback provision is in place for rent increases, a similar one doesn’t exist for “just cause” eviction protections. Tenant groups are concerned that landlords will exploit that gap to get rid of residents who pay below-market rent before the law takes effect in January.

Like other landlord-tenant laws in the state, it will be up to tenants to enforce the rent cap and anti-eviction rules in the court system.

How do California’s new rules compare to renter laws and proposals in other states?

The law makes California the third state to have passed a significant expansion of renter protections this year. Oregon approved a statewide annual rent cap of 7% plus inflation, but unlike California, its law won’t expire in 10 years. New York legislators boosted existing rent controls in New York City and allowed other communities in the state to implement the policy.

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

California’s rent cap isn’t slowing plans for a ballot initiative that would pave the way for stricter controls on rents across the state. The Los Angeles-based AIDS Healthcare Foundation is collecting signatures for a measure to appear on the November 2020 statewide ballot that would, among other changes, limit how much a landlord could increase rents when a new tenant moves in — something now prohibited under state law.

Times staff writer Andrew Khouri contributed to this report.