Hospitalizations. Contra costa county has moved from the orange here to the more restrictive red tier and even though San Francisco has remained in the yellow tier local Health Officials are preparing the state to move them back into a more restrictive tier. Our personal bello has more on what is being affected and when those restrictions go into effect. Mayor london breed said tuesday that 2 weeks ago officials knew they were possibly headed in this direction. And unfortunately after seeing a 250 uptick in covid cases here we are the fact is. The virus is spreading. And we have to make the hard decisions citing a consistent uptick in cases since last month mayor london breed is once again asking the residents of San Francisco to be cooperative as they make significant rollbacks beginning friday evening the city will eliminate Indoor Dining. Gyms and theaters will go back to reduce capacity of 25 . And while schools currently open for in Person Learning can remain open additional reope
Restaurants. All kinds of places they just got people inside and now theyre shutting down this must be a shock wave. A shock wave, vicki and katherine also stunning and devastating for the Restaurant Industry were here in San Francisco and restaurants were hoping that they can just keep going, but this is really going to make them roll back and the effects are going to be stunning they are telling us lets take a look at some video of the restaurants here in San Francisco. They were offering 50 of their indoor space to guess and now theyre told to pull back services mayor london breed that you heard and director of Health Doctor grant colfax announcing tuesday that the city is turning back on reopening. Now theyre pointing to the significant a rapid increase in covid19 cases plus hospitalization rates climb. For the Restaurant Industry that means Indoor Dining will halt affective friday night at midnight kron 4 spoke with the president of the Golden Gate Restaurant Association and owner
Do you make of the white house statement that this impeachment probe is constitutionally valid invalid and violates due process. I may not use those words but i would say its constitutionally very troubling. To elaborate, the framers were ambivalent about impeachment power, debating whether to create it at all and who should exercise it. They understood that tremendous potential for misuse given the british parliamentary practice and the difficulty in cabining it a bit. They moved it to high crimes and misdemeanors, mentioning treason and bribery. What they expected was the house to unfold things with a certain decorum, follow certain procedures many i wouldnt use the word due process. I wouldnt think that applies in a constitutional sense. Paul thats what i want to focus on, david. Seems to me, you look at the language of the constitution, what it says is the house has the power to impeach, high crimes and misdemeanors and so on but it doesnt say how it goes about it. The due process
Statement that this impeachment probe is constitutionally valid invalid and violates due process. I may not use those words but i would say its constitutionally very troubling. To elaborate, the framers were ambivalent about impeachment power, debating whether to create it at all and who should exercise it. They understood that tremendous potential for misuse given the british parliamentary practice and the difficulty in cabining it a bit. They moved it to high crimes and misdemeanors, mentioning treason and bribery. What they expected was the house to unfold things with a certain decorum, follow certain procedures many i wouldnt use the word due process. I wouldnt think that applies in a constitutional sense. Paul thats what i want to focus on, david. Seems to me, you look at the language of the constitution, what it says is the house has the power to impeach, high crimes and misdemeanors and so on but it doesnt say how it goes about it. The due process protections that we think about
Statement that this impeachment probe is constitutionally valid invalid and violates due process. I may not use those words but i would say its constitutionally very troubling. To elaborate, the framers were ambivalent about impeachment power, debating whether to create it at all and who should exercise it. They understood that tremendous potential for misuse given the british parliamentary practice and the difficulty in cabining it a bit. They moved it to high crimes and misdemeanors, mentioning treason and bribery. What they expected was the house to unfold things with a certain decorum, follow certain procedures many i wouldnt use the word due process. I wouldnt think that applies in a constitutional sense. Paul thats what i want to focus on, david. Seems to me, you look at the language of the constitution, what it says is the house has the power to impeach, high crimes and misdemeanors and so on but it doesnt say how it goes about it. The due process protections that we think about