Florida resident under Hurricane Milton evacuation order explains why he’s not leaving
ABC News
(MARCO ISLAND, Fla.) — Marco Island, a barrier island off southwest Florida, is under a mandatory evacuation ahead of Hurricane Milton’s anticipated landfall late Wednesday.
Though not everyone has evacuated.
Michael Sean Comerford, 65, told ABC News he decided to stay and watch his parents’ condo on the 23rd floor of a building while they evacuated to Naples, where his sister lives.
“I’m prepared,” he said Wednesday. “The island is closed. I have food and water for the next two days.”
Comerford said he’s not the only one who stayed behind in the building, which he said is expected to suffer a power outage in the storm.
“I feel like I’m going to survive it,” he said. “We’re not going to get the worst of it, but it’s going to be uncomfortable, given that there’s going to be power outages and it’ll be hot and dark.”
Comerford said he wanted to document what he sees for a book he’s writing about climate change, in which he talks to people on the Atlantic, Pacific and Gulf coasts.
Milton is expected to make landfall on Florida’s west coast Wednesday night, likely as a Category 3 hurricane.
The storm is forecast to make landfall farther north of Marco Island, though Comerford said there is still the “fear of the unknown.”
“If it takes a turn here this way, I don’t know what could happen,” he said. “I just don’t know. We’re getting all sorts of alarming warnings, but I think they’re directed at the people north of us.”
Comerford said he is preparing himself for “dramatic” storm surge. Marco Island could see 5 to 8 feet, according to forecasts.
“It’s going to be not insubstantial here,” he said. “The whole island could go underwater.”
ABC News’ Mark Guarino contributed to this report.
(PHILADELPHIA) — Members of the “Central Park Five” filed a defamation suit against former President Donald Trump on Monday, accusing him of spreading “false, misleading and defamatory” statements about their 1989 case during the Sept. 10 ABC News presidential debate, according to a new court filing.
Attorneys representing the five men — Yusef Salaam, Raymond Santana, Kevin Richardson, Antron Brown and Korey Wise — filed their civil suit against Trump in federal court in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, seeking monetary damages over his statements, which they say have caused them “severe emotional distress and reputational damage.”
The five men, then teenagers, were accused of the violent rape of a female jogger in Central Park in April 1989. The five, who always maintained their innocence, were convicted and served years in prison. A decade after the attack, a different man confessed to the crime, which was confirmed through DNA analysis.
During the debate, Trump was responding to a statement from Vice President Kamala Harris in which she revisited his full-page ad in The New York Times in the wake of the incident that called for the execution of the Central Park Five when he said the following: “[T]hey come up with things like what she just said going back many, many years when a lot of people including Mayor [Michael] Bloomberg agreed with me on the Central Park Five. They admitted — they said, they pled guilty. And I said, well, if they pled guilty they badly hurt a person, killed a person ultimately. And if they pled guilty — then they pled we’re not guilty.”
The lawsuit points out that Trump’s statements were false in multiple respects — noting none of the members of the Central Park Five ever entered guilty pleas in the case, none of the victims of the Central Park assaults were killed, and the mayor at the time of the assaults was Ed Koch — who did not agree with Trump’s position in the full-page ad.
“Defendant Trump’s conduct at the September 10 debate was extreme and outrageous, and it was intended to cause severe emotional distress to Plaintiffs,” the lawsuit stated.
Trump’s attorneys have not yet entered an appearance on the court docket as of Monday morning.
“This is just another frivolous, Election Interference lawsuit, filed by desperate left-wing activists,” a Trump campaign spokesperson said in response to an inquiry about the lawsuit.
According to the court filing, one of the Central Park Five members, Salaam, was actually present at the debate and sought to confront Trump over his statements in the spin room afterward.
Salaam says he repeatedly shouted questions to Trump, saying, “Will you apologize to the Exonerated Five?” and, “Sir, what do you say to a member of the Central Park Five, sir?”
Trump reportedly responded to him at one point, “Ah, you’re on my side then,” to which Salaam responded, “No, no, no, I’m not on your side.”
“Plaintiff Salaam was attempting to politely dialogue with Defendant Trump about the false and defamatory statements that Defendant Trump had made about Plaintiffs less than an hour earlier, but Defendant Trump refused to engage with him in dialogue,” the lawsuit stated.
The five men’s convictions were vacated in 2002 and Wise, who was still in prison at the time, was released early. The group sued New York City in 2003 and after a decadelong standstill, the lawsuit was settled for $41 million. The city did not admit to any misconduct by its police department or prosecutors.
Salaam was elected to the New York City Council last year, representing northern Manhattan, including Harlem, East Harlem, parts of the Upper West Side and Morningside Heights.
(ASHE COUNTY, N.C.) — There have been threats against Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) employees responding to Hurricane Helene in North Carolina, according to a local sheriff.
“Recently in the mountain region, there have been threats made against them,” Ashe County Sheriff Phil Howell posted on Facebook regarding the alleged threats against FEMA employees. “This has not happened in Ashe County or the surrounding counties,” Howell added. “Out of an abundance of caution, they have paused their process as they are assessing the threats.”
Ashe County is located about three hours northeast of Asheville, NC, which was hard-hit by Helene. Sheriff Howell did not specify in his post who allegedly made the threats.
Threats to FEMA employees have been consistent during the Hurricane response, along with misinformation, federal authorities told ABC News.
Search and rescue efforts in the affected areas continue, a federal source told ABC News. However, while FEMA assesses potential threat information, disaster survivor assistance teams are currently working at fixed locations and secure areas instead of going door to door, out of an abundance of caution, the source said, adding that FEMA will monitor threat information and make adjustments to this posture on a regular basis in coordination with local officials.
A FEMA spokesperson told ABC News that the agency continues to support communities impacted by Helene and to help survivors apply for assistance.
“For the safety of our dedicated staff and the disaster survivors we are helping, FEMA has made some operational adjustments,” the spokesperson said. “Disaster Recovery Centers will continue to be open as scheduled, survivors continue to register for assistance, and we continue to help the people of North Carolina with their recovery.”
Sheriff Howell said that FEMA locations in Ashe County are open this week.
“Stay calm and steady during our recovery, help folks and please don’t stir the pot,” he said.
FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell told ABC News Friday during a press briefing that threats to FEMA employees are a “shame” and a “distraction.”
“We continuously monitor the social media, channels, other outlets where we’re seeing this information, because we want to make sure we’re providing for the safest environment for our employees, and making sure that they know that their safety is first and foremost for us as they go out into these communities,” Criswell said in response to a question from ABC News.
FEMA hires people from local communities when disaster hits, Criswell said, noting that “many” leave their families behind to go and help communities who are impacted by disaster.
(WASHINGTON) — President-elect Donald Trump this week voiced support for tens of thousands of unionized dockworkers in a dispute with major shipping companies.
Negotiations between workers and management are deadlocked over the companies’ plan for further automation of ports, which the union said would eliminate jobs.
“I’ve studied automation, and know just about everything there is to know about it,” Trump said Thursday in a post on Truth Social. “The amount of money saved is nowhere near the distress, hurt, and harm it causes for American Workers, in this case, our Longshoremen.”
The vow of support for dockworkers aligns with Trump’s campaign promise to safeguard blue-collar workers threatened by global capitalism, depicting automation as an unwelcome change foisted on workers by foreign-owned shipping firms, some experts said.
Trump’s rejection of automation highlights a tension found in his economic policy, however, some experts added.
Like tariffs, the policy aims to protect a narrow set of workers at the possible expense of importers and consumers, who could suffer higher costs as a result of a missed opportunity to improve the supply chain, some experts said. While others defended Trump’s attempt to protect dockworkers from technological change.
The Trump transition team did not respond to ABC News’ request for comment.
Here’s what to know about the labor dispute over automation at East and Gulf Coast docks, and what it says about how Trump may approach the economy in his second term.
Dockworkers and freight companies feud over automation
A strike in October at docks across the East and Gulf coasts threatened to upend the economy and drive up prices, but workers and management ended the stoppage with a tentative agreement after three days.
The deal includes a 62% wage increase over the life of the six-year contract, but the two sides have yet to finalize it due to a disagreement over plans for further automation.
The standoff centers on the potential installation of cranes that would facilitate the retrieval and storage of freight containers, said John McCown, a non-resident senior fellow at the Center for Maritime Strategy who closely tracks the shipping industry.
Cranes already help remove containers from a ship and place it in a nearby port terminal, but shipping companies have sought the use of additional automated cranes once goods have reached land, McCown said.
The cranes work like an old-fashioned juke box, he added. “You hit a number and it goes to pick a record and play a record,” McCown said, noting the cranes would similarly mechanize sorting and transport of containers.
The U.S. Maritime Alliance, or USMX, the organization representing shipping firms in negotiations, said on Thursday that such automation would improve efficiency and increase capacity. Those enhancements would benefit U.S. companies and consumers that depend on goods from abroad, the group added.
“We need modern technology that is proven to improve worker safety, boost port efficiency, increase port capacity, and strengthen our supply chains,” USMX said in a statement.
The USMX did not immediately respond to ABC News’ request for comment.
The plans have drawn rebuke from the International Longshoremen’s Association, or ILA, the union representing dockworkers. The union has pointed to massive profits enjoyed by the shipping firms during the pandemic, saying further automation would invest those gains in job-cutting machinery rather than increased compensation. Workers have also disputed the supposed productivity benefits of the technology.
“This isn’t about safety or productivity — it’s about job elimination,” ILA President Dennis Daggett, said in a statement earlier this month. The union has proven that the automated cranes at issue “are not more productive than traditional equipment operated by human workers,” Daggett added.
In response to ABC News’ request for comment, the ILA shared a statement from Daggett praising Trump.
“Throughout my career, I’ve never seen a politician — let alone the President of the United States — truly understand the importance of the work our members do every single day,” Daggett said.
What could Trump’s approach to the standoff mean for his 2nd term?
In his social media post backing the workers and opposing port automation, Trump criticized foreign-owned shipping firms for what he described as penny pinching.
“For the great privilege of accessing our markets, these foreign companies should hire our incredible American Workers, instead of laying them off, and sending those profits back to foreign countries,” Trump said. “It is time to put AMERICA FIRST!”
The framework presents U.S. workers as victims of foreign companies, which he says aim to make use of America’s economic resources at the expense of its citizens. As such, Trump’s intervention in this case favors the ILA in its longstanding fight against automation, Peter Cole, a professor at Western Illinois University who studies the history of dockworkers, told ABC News.
“The ILA will really benefit if in fact Trump pushes employers to back off automation,” Cole said, noting that the explanation offered up by Trump reflects a larger political shift in the U.S. against unrestricted global trade.
“Presidents in both main parties have supported more manufacturing domestically,” Cole said.
However, Trump’s opposition to automation risks imposing higher costs on consumers and even some domestic manufacturers, since advances in productivity would help lower supply costs otherwise passed along to buyers at the end of the chain, some experts said.
Trump mistakenly claims that foreign shipping companies would bear the cost of forgone automation, just as he inaccurately says that foreign countries would pay the cost of tariffs, David Autor, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who specializes in technological change and the labor force, told ABC News.
“The assertion that raising tariffs at our ports will force foreigners to cover these costs is beyond naive,” Autor said. “It’s simply false.
Autor said the hardship that dockworkers would face if automation were to advance and put many of them out of work. “It will not be good for the livelihoods of longshoremen and we should not pretend otherwise,” Autor said, adding that the workers should receive compensation or other protections under such circumstances.
