The Democratic presidential field is set to have its smallest and potentially most influential debate yet. It could also become among the most contentious if candidates bring their campaigns’ offstage issues onstage.

On Tuesday at 6 p.m., six candidates are slated to gather at Drake University in Des Moines to slug it out less than three weeks before the first-in-the-nation caucuses in Iowa.

Gone are the two-night, 10-candidates-at-a-time spectacles that marked the earliest debate rounds of the Democratic contest last year. This two-hour debate will feature former Vice President Joe Biden; former Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Ind.; Sens. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts; and billionaire activist Tom Steyer.

With fewer candidates onstage, there will be more time for each to spar, and this week Sanders and Warren were already clashing well before the debate. Warren blasted Sanders for sending volunteers out to “trash” her after his campaign reportedly circulated talking points aimed at Warren supporters, alleging she does not bring new voters into the process. And Sanders, accused of telling Warren in a 2018 closed-door meeting that a woman couldn’t win the presidency, responded to the anonymously sourced report by saying Warren’s staffers were lying. Then Warren issued her own statement, fully contradicting Sanders.

This will be the first debate round in which all the participants are white. A dozen Democrats are still campaigning, and notable names missing from the stage include Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii, entrepreneur Andrew Yang and billionaire former New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg. Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey dropped out of the contest on Monday.

Why is this debate so small if there are still a bunch of Democrats in the race?

The Democratic Party set the highest bar yet to qualify for this debate. Candidates must have reached at least 5% support since Nov. 14 in at least four national or early-state polls, or at least 7% support in two state polls from Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina or Nevada. Candidates must have also secured donations from at least 225,000 unique donors, with a minimum of 1,000 unique donors per state in at least 20 U.S. states, territories or the District of Columbia.

Yang and Booker met the donor threshold but fell short in polls. Booker got eight candidates to sign a request to the party to lower the qualification thresholds; that didn’t happen. Yang offered to help fund the cost of more polling, and on Saturday his campaign put out a statement complaining about the Democratic National Committee’s process and saying Yang’s camp had commissioned its own polls showing him at 5% in Nevada and New Hampshire.

Bloomberg, who is self-funding his campaign and spending massively on paid staff and television advertising, met the poll qualification but is not accepting contributions and so did not meet the donor threshold. Gabbard, who threatened to boycott previous debates, alleging that the party and the media were “rigging the election,” met neither requirement.

Why is this debate so important? There have been a lot already.

Many potential Iowa caucusgoers remain undecided in their choice of which candidate to support. A particularly strong or weak performance from a candidate could bring welcome momentum or unwelcome peril in the final weeks before the Feb. 3 Iowa caucuses. And, of course, what makes Iowa so attractive is that a big win in the Hawkeye State could give a successful candidate more credibility with undecided voters in other states.

But not to worry: If you love debates, there are plenty more coming — in Manchester, N.H., on Feb. 7; in Las Vegas on Feb. 19; and in Charleston, S.C., on Feb. 25.

How do I watch the debate?

The debate, co-hosted by the Des Moines Register and CNN, will be shown on the cable channel and can also be viewed on the Register’s and CNN’s websites and apps.

Wolf Blitzer and Abby Phillip of CNN and Brianne Pfannenstiel of the Des Moines Register will moderate.

What’s at stake for each candidate onstage?

Biden probably has the least to lose of the five candidates onstage. His decent polling in predominantly white Iowa is just the cherry on top of his thus-far unshakable strength with voters of color elsewhere, whose support could provide Biden with a path to the Democratic nomination. If a poor debate performance contributes to a poorer performance in the Iowa caucuses, it still poses a risk to Biden’s nomination chances, of course. But unlike some of the other Democratic candidates, Biden could probably withstand a modest finish in the Hawkeye State.

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

Buttigieg, by contrast, probably needs to do very well in Iowa to pave his own path to the nomination, given his inability thus far to attract voters of color. Could strong victories in predominantly white Iowa and New Hampshire help unlock support from more diverse voters in the primary states that follow? It’s harder to see that happening if Buttigieg does poorly in Iowa, so he needs a debate performance that keeps his supporters energized and the door to future voters open.

For Klobuchar, it’s probably now or never. The senator from Minnesota has never broken into the top tier of the race but has polled better in neighboring Iowa than in any other early-voting state, although she’s still getting support only in the single digits. Who knows — a surprise top placement in Iowa could attract undecided moderate voters who might be worried about Biden’s age or Buttigieg’s inexperience. But she’s running out of time to make a breakthrough.

Sanders, like Biden, has one of the most valuable assets in the Democratic primary: a decent amount of support among voters of color. But unlike Biden, Sanders has faced persistent questions, even among sympathetic liberals, about whether he is too left wing to secure the Democratic nomination. One potential cure for that kind of hand-wringing? Winning right out of the gate. It’s not been Sanders’ style to make big splashes at the debates, but a steady performance followed by a top finish in Iowa would make the senator seem more electable to undecided voters.

Steyer almost didn’t meet the polling threshold in time to qualify for the debate, but he did so with a flourish: A new Fox News poll showed him polling at 15% in South Carolina, second only to Biden’s 36%, undoubtedly thanks to Steyer’s blizzard of advertising there. Unlike his fellow billionaire candidate Bloomberg, who has already become the much bigger spender, Steyer had the good sense to get in the race early enough to collect the small donors required to qualify for the debate stage. A good debate will certainly help Steyer, but given his nearly bottomless advertising budget, the debate stakes feel lower for him than for, say, Klobuchar.

At one point over the late summer, Warren was polling as Democrats’ top choice in Iowa. Her shine has since faded a little, with Warren not placing first in an Iowa state poll since early November. The upside: The latest Des Moines Register poll shows that she has the field’s highest favorability rating with Iowa Democrats. Warren might be well positioned to make a closing argument that she’s the best choice to unify the progressive and moderate wings of the party behind a single candidate.

NEWTON, Iowa — 

Elizabeth Warren said Monday that a few weeks before the 2020 campaign started, Bernie Sanders told her that he did not believe a woman could win the presidency.

Warren’s politically charged comment came hours after Sanders adamantly denied an anonymously sourced CNN report that he’d made the remark during a December 2018 chat between the two senators at Warren’s Washington apartment.

“It is ludicrous to believe that at the same meeting where Elizabeth Warren told me she was going to run for president, I would tell her that a woman couldn’t win,” the Vermont senator said in a statement released by his campaign. “It’s sad that, three weeks before the Iowa caucus and a year after that private conversation, staff who weren’t in the room are lying about what happened.”

He added: “Do I believe a woman can win in 2020? Of course! After all Hillary Clinton beat Donald Trump by 3 million votes in 2016.”

But Warren issued a statement Monday evening that contradicted Sanders’ account of the conversation.

“Among the topics that came up was what would happen if Democrats nominated a female candidate. I thought a woman could win; he disagreed,” Warren said. “I have no interest in discussing this private meeting any further because Bernie and I have far more in common than our differences on punditry.”

The clash between the two leading left-wing candidates in the Democratic presidential race marked a definitive end to their longstanding agreement not to attack one another. It signaled the beginning of a more aggressive phase of the race, with multiple candidates struggling to keep their candidacies alive as voters narrow down their choices.

The back-and-forth came on the eve of the party’s final debate before the Feb. 3 Iowa caucuses, the opening contest of the campaign. Recent polls suggest it remains a wide-open race in Iowa, with Sanders, Warren, former Vice President Joe Biden and former South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg vying for the lead.

The clash deepened as Warren and Sanders skittered around the Hawkeye State courting voters with plans to deal with the economy, tax the wealthy and extend Medicare to all Americans.

Sanders’ campaign was also accused of circulating talking points that said Warren does not bring in new voters because her supporters are affluent and already going to vote for a Democrat.

The Vermont senator said he was unaware of the script: “We have hundreds of employees, Elizabeth Warren has hundreds of employees, and people sometimes say things that they shouldn’t.”

Warren, meanwhile, said, “I was disappointed to hear that Bernie is sending his volunteers out to trash me.”

She recalled the hostility of many Sanders voters toward Hillary Clinton after he lost the 2016 race for the Democratic nomination to the former secretary of State. “We all saw the impact of the factionalism in 2016, and we can’t have a repeat of that,” Warren said. “Democrats need to unite our party.”

She’s not alone in worrying about another election in which primary rivals fail to coalesce behind the nominee.

“You both are progressive champs & our movement needs to see you working together to defeat your corporate Dem opponents — not attack each other,” Democracy for America tweeted on Monday, addressing Sanders and Warren. “Progressives will win in 2020, but only if we don’t let the corporate wing or Trump divide us.”

More than half of Sanders’ and Warren’s supporters told Quinnipiac pollsters that their second choice would be the other candidate, according to findings released Monday. And in Iowa over the weekend, the candidates were also trying to turn the heads of the state’s many uncommitted voters.

“I’m here to be frank with you, to ask for your support …,” Sanders told voters at an elementary school in Newton on Saturday. “Our campaign makes no bones about it — we’re here certainly to defeat Trump, but we’re here to do something more. We are here to transform this country and create a government and an economy that works for all of us, not just the 1%.”

Warren delivered a similar populist message to voters in Marshalltown on Sunday.

“This country is in a crisis and media pundits and Washington insiders and even a lot of people in our own party don’t want to admit it. They think that running a vague campaign that nibbles around the edges of these big problems is somehow a safe strategy,” she said. “They are wrong…. We win when we have big ideas that meet the problems in people’s lives.”

Sanders’ supporters argue that he is the most ideologically pure, pointing to Warren’s decision to transition into a fully government run, single-payer system over three years, first by expanding Obamacare and creating a public option before trying to pass Medicare for all through Congress.

Makenna Driscoll of Newton said Sanders has been “steadfast” in his support for Medicare for all and that Warren’s plan is watered down.

“Bernie has the best plan for my family,” said Driscoll, an IT staffer. “I’m a single mom. My parents have had to make choices between food and prescriptions. I want a future where I don’t have to worry about them.”

At a house party hosted by Warren’s campaign in Iowa City on Sunday, Jeff Cox kept a roll of Bernie Sanders stickers stashed in his pocket.

Cox said he believed Sanders and Warren had much in common, but said the Vermont senator “is just more committed on Medicare for all and free tuition.” The University of Iowa history professor supported Sanders in 2016 as well, but noted his side has “lost a lot of people to Warren” this time around.

Sanders has been performing well with younger voters, Cox said, but he worried that the complexity of the caucus process could deter them. Relying on turning out new caucusgoers may be a risky strategy, he said.

“The average self-propelled caucus attendee is a party loyalist, first of all. And they’re suspicious of Bernie,” said Cox, 72 “And they will turn themselves out … they will come to the caucus. The people who are going to support Bernie have to be turned out.”

Warren’s backers counter that she is more electable.

“I don’t think we need any more old white men,” said Cynthia Schmidt, a retired school counselor from Garner. “I don’t want Grandpa Bernie, I don’t want Uncle Joe and I don’t want Cousin Pete. I’m ready for Aunt Elizabeth.”

Schmidt said plenty of Sanders supporters tried to sway her in the last campaign, but “his ideas are too pie-in-the-sky” for her and her husband.

“I believe Elizabeth is a pragmatist,” she said. “Very step-by-step. Yes, she’s goal-oriented but knows that there has to be steps to get there.”

Schmidt pointed to the senator’s signature plans: “As a former teacher and school counselor, I have to see a plan. … that’s how women work,” she said.

Clarity Guerra, 32, of Iowa City, said she is drawn by Warren’s plethora of plans, her approach to shaking up the nation’s capital, and her gender.

“Part of why I want her as my president is because she is a woman and I know that companies that have women in their leadership are stronger companies and our country can be a stronger country with a woman at its helm,” said the university marketer. “But in addition to that … I get the biggest sense from the Bernie supporters that it’s Bernie or nothing. And I find that the Warren campaign is one that will build a big coalition, and I want to stand with the big coalition that will win.”

Michael Fletcher, 67, of Grinnell, voted for Trump in 2016, and although he appreciates the president’s efforts on the economy and immigration, he said the president is too erratic to vote for again. He offered up his ideal Democratic ticket, a pairing that after Monday may have become even more unlikely.

“Who I’d love to vote for is Bernie Sanders with Elizabeth Warren as running mate,” said the retired window factory worker. “I think she’s a little bit further left than he is. But I think she would make a good president if he should have health problems and that’s still a concern of mine.”

Times staff writers Mehta and Mason reported from Iowa and Finnegan from Los Angeles.

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

BOSTON — 

A U.S. cybersecurity company says Russian military agents have successfully hacked the Ukrainian gas company at the center of the scandal that led to President Trump’s impeachment.

Russian agents launched a phishing campaign in early November to steal the login credentials of employees of Burisma Holdings, the gas company, according to Area 1 Security, a Silicon Valley company that specializes in email security.

Hunter Biden, son of former U.S. vice president and Democratic presidential hopeful Joe Biden, previously served on Burisma’s board.

It was not clear what the hackers were looking for or may have obtained, said Area 1’s CEO, Oren Falkowitz, who called the findings “incontrovertible” and posted an eight-page report. But the timing of the operation suggests that the Russian agents could be searching for material that damaging to the Bidens.

The House of Representatives impeached Trump in December, alleging he abused the power of his office by enlisting the Ukrainian government to investigate Biden, a political rival, ahead of the 2020 election. A second charge accused Trump of obstructing a congressional investigation into the matter.

“Our report doesn’t make any claims as to what the intent of the hackers were, what they might have been looking for, what they are going to do with their success. We just point out that this is a campaign that’s going on,” said Falkowitz, a former National Security Agency offensive hacker whose company’s clients include candidates for U.S. federal elected offices.

In an earlier interview, he told the Associated Press that the campaigns of top candidates for the U.S. presidency and House and Senate races in 2020 have in the last few months each been targeted by about 1,000 phishing emails.

Falkowitz did not name the candidates. Nor would he name any clients.

Russian hackers from the same military intelligence unit that Area 1 said was behind the operation targeting Burisma have been indicted for hacking emails from the Democratic National Committee and the chairman of Hillary Clinton’s campaign during the 2016 presidential race.

Stolen emails were released online at the time by Russian agents and WikiLeaks in an effort to favor Trump, special counsel Robert S. Mueller III determined in his investigation.

Area 1 discovered the phishing campaign by the Russian military intelligence unit, known as the GRU, on New Year’s Eve, Falkowitz said via email.

In the report, he said the GRU agents used fake, lookalike domains in the phishing campaign designed to mimic real Burisma subsidiaries.

The cybersecurity researchers said the operation targeting Burisma used tactics, techniques and procedures that GRU agents had used repeatedly in other phishing operations. Area 1 says it has been tracking the Russian agents for several years.

Phished credentials allow attackers both to rifle through a victim’s stored email and masquerade as that person.

Area 1 said its researchers connected the phishing campaign targeting Burisma to another that targeted a media organization founded by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

WASHINGTON — 

Senate Republicans signaled they would reject the idea of simply voting to dismiss the articles of impeachment against President Trump as the House prepares to send the charges to the chamber for the historic trial.

“I think our members generally are not interested in the motion to dismiss. They think both sides need to be heard,” Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), who is part of GOP leadership, said Monday.

It will be only the third presidential impeachment trial in American history, a serious and dramatic endeavor coming amid the backdrop of a politically divided nation and the start of an election year.

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

Speaker Nancy Pelosi has not set the timing for the House vote that will launch the Senate action. Trump was impeached by the Democratic-led House last month on charges of abuse of power over pushing Ukraine to investigate Democratic rival Joe Biden and obstruction of Congress in the probe. Democrats said the vote could be Wednesday.

With the impeachment trial starting in a matter of days, senators are still debating the rules of the proceedings. GOP senators are conferring privately about whether to allow a motion to dismiss the charges against the president or to call additional witnesses for testimony.

Trump suggested over the weekend he might prefer simply dismissing the charges rather than giving legitimacy to charges from the House, which he considers a “hoax.”

It was an extraordinary suggestion, but one being proposed by Trump allies with support from some GOP senators, including Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

But it is clear McConnell does not have the votes needed from his GOP majority to do that.

One key Republican, Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, said she too would oppose a motion to dismiss the charges.

Collins is leading an effort among some Republicans, including Sens. Mitt Romney of Utah and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, to ensure the ground rules include plans to eventually consider voting to call witnesses.

“My position is that there should be a vote on whether or not witnesses should be called,” Collins said.

Romney said he wants to hear from John Bolton, the former national security advisor at the White House, who others have said raised alarms about the alternative foreign policy toward Ukraine being run led by Trump’s personal lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani.

“I’ve said I’d like to hear from John Bolton,” Romney told reporters Monday. “I expect that barring some kind of surprise, I’ll be voting in favor of hearing from witnesses after those opening arguments.”

Democrats have been pushing Republicans, who have the majority in the Senate, to consider new testimony, arguing that fresh information has emerged during Pelosi’s monthlong delay in transmitting the charges.

McConnell is drafting an organizing resolution that will outline the steps ahead. Approving it will be among the first votes senators take after they are sworn in as jurors by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.

Republicans control the chamber 53 to 47 and are all but certain to acquit Trump. McConnell is hesitant to call new witnesses who would prolong the trial. He prefers to model Trump’s trial partly on the process used for President Clinton’s trial in 1999.

It takes just 51 votes during the impeachment trial to approve rules or call witnesses. Just four GOP senators could form a majority with Democrats to insist on new testimony. It also would take only 51 senators to vote to dismiss the charges against Trump.

Most Republicans appear willing to go along with McConnell’s plan to start the trial, then consider witnesses later, rather than upfront, as Democrats want.

Collins is pushing to have at least the promise of witness votes included in the organizing resolution. She and the others appear to be gathering support.

“I’ve been working to make sure that we will have a process that we can take a vote on whether or not we need additional information, and yes, that would include witnesses,” Murkowski told reporters.

McConnell is expected to huddle privately with senators at their weekly lunch Tuesday.

House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer told reporters the House vote might come Wednesday. “Could be,” he said.

Carlos Vela played in a World Cup for Mexico and has spent his club career in England, Spain and the U.S., but the LAFC forward sounded more like German Sgt. Schultz of Hogan’s Heroes fame when asked if he’s spoken to fellow Mexican star Javier “Chicharito” Hernandez about signing with the Galaxy.

“I can say nothing,” Vela said, eliciting hearty laughs after LAFC’s first training-camp practice of 2020 on Monday. “But yes, we have talked.”

Vela, 30, scored a league-record 34 goals to win MLS most valuable player honors last season, leading LAFC to 21-4-9 record before a loss to Seattle in the Western Conference final.

Hernandez, 31, is Mexico’s all-time leading scorer whose Spanish club team, Sevilla, has reportedly agreed to let go on a $10-million transfer. Hernandez’s representatives were reportedly scheduled to meet with the Galaxy this week.

If a contract can be worked out and Hernandez joins the Galaxy, two of Mexico’s most prolific goal-scorers would play in a Los Angeles market teeming with Latino fans, spicing up an already healthy rivalry between the clubs.

“Would I like to see it happen? Of course,” Vela said. “He’s a scoring machine … and he does a really good job defending. I think the Mexican fans would be excited. But I don’t know. We are just talking. I don’t say nothing.”

LAFC, in its third season, began training a week earlier than most MLS teams because it will begin play earlier, traveling to Mexico to face Leon in a CONCACAF Champions League game Feb. 18. The second leg will be Feb. 27 in Banc of California Stadium.

While Vela joined fellow returnees such as defender Jordan Harvey and forwards Latif Blessing and Josh Perez at the team’s Cal State Los Angeles training facility, Monday’s session was also notable for who wasn’t there.

Goalie Tyler Miller, who won a Western Conference-best 34 games the past two seasons, is “out of contract,” in the words of coach Bob Bradley, and he is no longer bound to LAFC. Veteran defender Steven Beitashour, who started 24 games last season, also was not re-signed.

Pablo Sisniega, who allowed nine goals and had 17 saves in six starts last season, is the favorite to replace Miller but will be pushed by Phillip Ejimadu and Paulo Pita, the Marshall University keeper who was LAFC’s first pick in last week’s draft.

“There’s always the possibility that we add [another goalie], but Pablo made great strides last year,” Bradley said. “He showed real promise in some of the games, so we feel good about him continuing to develop.”

Also absent were five starters who will be on national-team duty for another three weeks or so: center back Walker Zimmerman (U.S.); defender Eddie Segura and midfielder Eduard Atuesta (Colombia); and forward Diego Rossi and midfielder Francisco Ginella (Uruguay).

All are expected back in time for the Champions League game, but they won’t have as much time to jell as Leon, which will have played five Liga MX matches before facing LAFC.

“It’s difficult … but the good thing is they’re not out doing nothing,” said Harvey, who is entering his 16^th MLS season. “They’re with their national teams, they’re getting games in, they’re definitely fit. So barring injury they’ll come back flying and will give us a boost.”

There was one notable addition to Monday’s practice and one big one to come. Among nonroster invitees trying out was Bradley Wright-Phillips, a 34-year-old English striker who had three 20-goal seasons for the New York Red Bulls since 2014.

LAFC also announced Monday that it signed 20-year-old Ecuadorian midfielder Jose Cifuentes, the seventh South American player under age 22 to sign with the club.

The 5-foot-9 Cifuentes, whose 25-yard rocket in the 2019 U20 World Cup quarterfinals against the U.S. was named goal of the tournament, will team with newcomer Ginella to give LAFC two dynamic young midfielders. He will join the team pending receipt of his international transfer certificate and P1 Visa.

“He’s a talented young player,” Bradley said, “somebody I think will fit in with some of the other really good young players we have.”

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

ST. LOUIS — 

Alexander Steen scored the first goal and Brayden Schenn added two assists, leading the St. Louis Blues to a 4-1 victory Monday night over the Anaheim Ducks.

The Blues won their ninth straight home game, tying the franchise record for one season set in 1991. The run marks the longest home winning streak in the NHL this season. St. Louis has outscored its opponents 36-15 during the streak.

Tyler Bozak, Jaden Schwartz and Ivan Barbashev also scored for the Blues, who have won four in a row after a three-game skid. The defending Stanley Cup champions are 12-2-1 in their past 15 games.

Through 47 games, the Blues (30-10-7) are tied for first in the NHL (67 points) with the Washington Capitals.

Max Comtois had the lone goal for Anaheim, which has lost four straight. The Ducks are 3-9-1 in their past 13 games.

Backup goaltender Jake Allen improved to 8-3-3 for St. Louis. He stopped 20 shots.

Ducks goalie John Gibson made 30 saves and fell to 13-19-3. He is 1-5-1 in his last seven starts.

The Blues have 17 wins at home this season (17-4-3), most in the NHL. One of their four home losses in regulation came against the Ducks, who won 4-1 in St. Louis on Nov. 16. In fact, the road team won the previous seven meetings between the teams.

Two goals in the second put St. Louis ahead 3-1. The Blues dominated the period, attempting a season-high 22 shots to 10 for Anaheim.

Bozak gave St. Louis a 2-1 lead 2:21 into the second. A shovel pass from Mackenzie MacEachern found Bozak, who beat Gibson for the goal. Robert Thomas stole the puck twice before he passed to MacEachern, setting up the scoring chance.

Schwartz tapped the puck into an open net for a power-play goal at 9:41. From the right circle, Schenn fed Schwartz, who was cutting to the net on the left side for an easy shot.

Steen slammed in a slap shot from the left circle at 7:53 of the first. Robert Bortuzzo wound up and shot from the right circle. The puck hit the stick of Anaheim’s Sam Steel and bounced off the pad of Gibson. The puck went to Steen and his shot hit the top of Gibson’s arm as he was trying to get back into position.

After not scoring in 28 games, Steen has three goals in his last three games.

The Ducks tied it at 15:22 when Comtois fired a wrist shot from the top of the slot. The puck went through the legs of a screened Allen to make it 1-all.

Barbashev got the puck from behind the net and scored an unassisted goal at 10:29 of the third period for a 4-1 lead. Gibson left the puck for Hampus Lindholm, who ran into him. Barbashev scooped up the loose puck and poked it in.

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

During a timeout in the third quarter of Westchester’s game against Palisades on Monday, 6-foot-9 center Marland Harris didn’t agree with something coach Ed Azzam said. He made a face as if he was frustrated. Soon Harris was pulled from the game and sitting in a chair as Azzam kneeled and offered words of advice.

“Listen don’t talk,” was the message Azzam, the winningest coach in the City Section history, was trying to get across.

Harris came back in the fourth quarter and recorded two dunks. He finished with 11 points in Westchester’s 73-47 Western League victory.

The Comets (10-6, 2-1) are unranked and have been largely forgotten amid a wide-open race to win a City Open Division title, but it’s best to consider the Comets a work in progress.

“I wouldn’t be coaching,” Azzam said when asked if he was convinced his team was in the title mix.

Harris and 6-7 Angel Corona, who didn’t play because of an injury, give Westchester something no other team in the City has _ size. If they figure things out, beware.

“We have a powerful inside game,” Azzam said. “We just haven’t learned to use it.”

If the Comets can create a consistent inside game, it will help open opportunities for junior guard TJ Wainwright, who doesn’t miss open shots. He had a slow start but finished with 15 points.

Palisades (7-7, 2-2) hasn’t beaten Westchester since the 1996 season. The Dolphins received 11 points from Graham Alphson.

Fairfax stayed unbeaten in league with an 89-48 win over Hamilton. Keith Dinwiddie scored 18 points. University defeated Venice 47-41. David Cheatom scored 21 points.

In the West Valley League, Taft continued its rise and Birmingham continued its decline. Taft opened a 35-9 lead and defeated the Patriots 72-53. Ramel Lloyd scored 29 points.

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

In the Coliseum League, View Park defeated Fremont 66-53. Marcus Dewberry and Tyvonne Kelly each scored 14 points.

In the East Valley League, Poly defeated Grant 57-51. Joshua Gregorio had 21 points for Poly, which is 3-0 in league. Aviv Hazan had 15 points for Grant.

Westlake received 33 points from Kyle MacLean in a 77-48 win over Oaks Christian.

John David Baker, an offensive quality control analyst who followed offensive coordinator Graham Harrell to USC last January, will soon be promoted to the Trojans’ full-time football staff, presuming Harrell remains in his position at USC.

Baker, 29, will coach inside receivers and tight ends, a person familiar with the decision said. A former quarterback at Abilene Christian, Baker worked primarily with USC’s signal callers during his first season as a quality control analyst, aiding in the Trojans’ transition to the Air Raid offense.

USC did not have an inside receivers coach on its staff last season. Keary Colbert previously handled the Trojans’ receivers, while John Baxter worked with tight ends, along with his duties as special-teams coach. Baxter was fired after the bowl game, following a season in which those tight ends contributed just 15 total catches.

Baker’s promotion comes a month after Harrell signed a multiyear extension that made him one of the Pac-12’s highest-paid assistants. As Harrell decided between staying at USC and taking the same job at Texas, where he was offered a more lucrative, long-term deal to return to his home state, he consulted with Baker, whom he considers one of his closest friends.

The presence of his close confidant as a full-time member of the staff could potentially play a small part in convincing Harrell to spurn any other opportunities that might still arise. Though, it’s widely believed that Baker would follow Harrell wherever he coaches.

With Harrell’s mentor, Mike Leach, leaving Washington State to coach at Mississippi State, it’s not hard to connect the dots between Harrell and the sudden head coaching vacancy in Pullman.

Last month, after signing his extension, Harrell explained that his family was thrilled with their life in Los Angeles. At USC, with the trust of coach Clay Helton, he also had the autonomy to run his Air Raid offense.

It certainly can’t hurt that USC was willing to promote one of his closest coach friends, either.

“This is just too good of a place,” Harrell said last month. “At the end of the day, I want to win a national championship. Of all the opportunities I had to do that, this is the best opportunity.”

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

SAN DIEGO — 

San Diego officials say they hope to get a windfall of up to $40 million sometime this year from a lawsuit that challenges how the county divides up property tax collected by the city’s former redevelopment agency.

The Third District Court of Appeal in Sacramento is expected to rule this year in the 2014 case, which could set a precedent across California for how counties dole out money still being collected by former redevelopment agencies.

The state Legislature in 2012 dissolved redevelopment agencies, which local governments had created since the 1940s to help generate economic activity in blighted areas.

Once a local government created a redevelopment agency, it was allowed to keep any incremental growth in property tax revenue instead of sending that money to the state.

Even though the redevelopment agencies were dissolved, most still continue on as “successor agencies” that collect property tax revenue to pay off debts and other obligations incurred before the 2012 dissolution.

Once those debts and obligations are covered, any money left over is divided up by counties across the state using one of two distinct formulas.

There are two formulas because counties didn’t interpret the legislation that dissolved redevelopment agencies in the same way. One formula is more favorable to cities, and the other is less favorable.

San Diego County chose to use the formula that is less favorable to cities, prompting the city of San Diego and six other local cities — Chula Vista, Vista, Escondido, El Cajon, San Marcos and Poway — to file suit in 2014 challenging that decision.

They contend in the lawsuit that the county misinterpreted and misapplied the state legislation that dissolved redevelopment agencies. Lawyers for the county say the formula the county uses is correct.

While only those seven cities filed the lawsuit, a ruling in their favor would be expected to also affect most other cities and counties in California.

Counties using the formula more favorable to cities would be vindicated and would be allowed to continue with that practice. Counties using the formula less favorable to cities would have to shift to the other approach.

They also would be required to make lump-sum payouts to each affected city. Those payouts would be equal to the difference between the amount each city has been receiving and the amount the city is entitled to under the formula that’s more favorable to cities.

In addition, those cities would get more property tax revenue in all subsequent years because counties would be required to start using the formula that’s more favorable to cities.

A Superior Court judge in Sacramento ruled in favor of the seven local cities in 2015, ordering San Diego County to give them large payouts to make up for years of using the wrong formula and to use the formula favorable to cities moving forward.

Later in 2015, the county appealed the ruling to the Third District Court of Appeal in Sacramento.

The city of San Diego’s Independent Budget Analyst and city finance officials say the appeals court is expected to schedule oral arguments in the case sometime this year and then make a ruling. They said it’s not clear exactly when this year the appeals court will move forward with the case.

If the appeals court upholds the lower court ruling, the independent budget analyst estimates the city’s lump-sum payment would be $35 million to $40 million.

But, the budget analyst notes, even a favorable ruling this year won’t guarantee the payout comes immediately. The case could be appealed to the state Supreme Court.

In addition, the two sides could settle the case and agree to a slower method of compensating the cities than a lump-sum payout.

Cities are allowed to use excess revenue from their former redevelopment agencies as unrestricted general fund money, meaning they have wide discretion in how they spend it.

The other six cities involved in the case would receive smaller payouts than San Diego because their redevelopment agencies generated smaller amounts of property tax increment.

The difference between the two formulas — the one more favorable to cities and the one less favorable — centers on whether the county can “cap” the amount of property tax received by any particular agency.

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

San Diego County chose to use a formula that limits what a city can receive to the maximum amount they would have received if their redevelopment agency had not been dissolved.

In contrast, the formula more favorable to cities calculates the property tax owed to each city by first providing them money they owe for debts and obligations and then dividing whatever is left over among cities, school districts and other local agencies entitled to a share of the money.

In some cases, that allows cities with significant debts and obligations to receive more property tax revenue than they would have received if their redevelopment agency hadn’t been dissolved.

Superior Court Judge Michael Kenny ruled in 2015 that the formula used by San Diego County “unfairly reduces” the shares received by such cities. He said the state Legislature would have clearly stated if it wanted counties to use the formula less favorable to cities.

The seven cities that filed the lawsuit are being represented in the case by Colantuono, Highsmith & Whatley, a Los Angeles firm specializing in redevelopment revenue cases. Holly Whatley, the lead lawyer in the case, didn’t respond to phone calls this week seeking comment.

Whatley sent a letter last month urging the appellate court to take up the case as soon as possible. She said many cities need to know the outcome of the case for long-term budgeting purposes.

Lawyers for the county declined to comment.

Garrick writes for the San Diego Union-Tribune.

In response to likely dramatic increases in state-mandated residential planning, Newport Beach has drawn up a plan that both resists and cooperates with the state.

City leadership has indicated an interest in appealing the methodology used by the Southern California Assn. of Governments to tentatively require Newport to plan for 4,832 new homes over the next decade as part of a broader effort to address regional housing needs.

Click Here: liverpool mens jersey

A formal challenge is still on the table and is on Tuesday’s City Council agenda for discussion. But other possibilities include pausing the ongoing overall update to Newport’s general plan — a comprehensive long-term planning guide that includes a housing component — to focus just on the housing and closely related land-use and circulation elements, forming a housing-focused advisory committee and calling a public vote to accommodate the state mandate.

SCAG voted in November to shift more of the 1.3 million new homes the state says Southern California needs during the next 10 years toward the coast — increasing the number of homes Newport Beach would need to make room for to 4,832 from the previous target of roughly 2,700 set in October. SCAG represents Orange, Los Angeles and four other counties.

Though the state doesn’t directly require cities to build the homes, they must at least accommodate the need on paper through zoning for residential development.

The state Department of Housing and Community Development is reviewing the SCAG figures. Final allocations — including any alterations based on appeals — are expected to be adopted by October. The deadline for certification of compliant city housing plans is October 2021.

Newport Beach and neighboring cities were taken aback by the November calculations and have called them unattainable. Laguna Beach, which would need to set aside enough land for 390 homes by 2029, and Costa Mesa, which may need to plan for 11,734, adopted resolutions in the past week opposing SCAG’s methods.

One path to compliance strikes against Newport’s city charter, which requires a public vote to allow developments with more than 100 new housing units. One way to avoid consequences if voters were to reject major developments would be to amend the charter to accommodate state-driven development, according to a city staff report. Such an amendment also would require a public vote, which could happen as soon as November.

Davis writes for Times Community News.