apgov

Senate votes to extend key FISA provision, sending bill to Trump’s desk

CBS News – The U.S. Senate on Thursday voted 65-34 to reauthorize controversial foreign surveillance powers, sending the bill to President Trump’s desk.

Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which was passed under former President George W. Bush in the aftermath of Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, was set to expire Friday night. Some Republicans — such as Rep. Justin Amash, R-Michigan — along with many Democrats opposed reauthorizing section 702, arguing the executive branch’s surveillance powers are too expansive, and should include additional privacy protections.

However, the bill that ultimately passed leaves the program roughly as-is. Section 702 allows the government to intercept the electronic communications of non-U.S. persons, and has long been criticized by civil liberty advocates.

Sen. Richard Burr, the Republican chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, praised the bill’s passage.

“Today, the Senate took this important step in reauthorizing what I believe is our single most important national security tool,” Burr said. “This bill will help us to fulfill our most important duty as senators: keeping Americans safe. Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act has been reviewed time and again by both the courts and Congress, and has been found to be not just constitutional, but vital to our country’s defense. I look forward to the president signing this legislation without delay.”

Mr. Trump is expected to sign the bill, although he sent discussions about section 702 into chaos last week when he suggested on Twitter that the program was used by the Obama administration to spy on his campaign. The tweet seemed to suggestthe president was against the very bill most of his party was trying to pass.

But Mr. Trump — after speaking with chief of staff John Kelly and others — followed that surprise tweet by saying the program is vital to national security.

President Trump is expected to sign the reauthorization before section 702 expires.

Source: US Government Class

Trump’s ‘overall health is excellent’ says doctor, weight loss a goal

ABC News – President Donald Trump‘s “overall health is excellent” and his cognitive health is normal, presidential physician Dr. Ronny Jackson said Tuesday as part of a comprehensive, nearly hourlong review of the president’s recent physical assessment.

Jackson shared the outcomes of Trump’s exam with reporters at the White House press briefing, including his 75-inch height, 239-pound weight, total cholesterol of 223 and resting heart rate of 68 beats per minute.

Given his height and weight, the president’s body mass index falls just short of the defined threshold for obesity. According to a calculator provided by the National Institutes of Health‘s National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, Trump’s BMI is 29.9. The marker for obesity is a BMI of 30, according to the institute.

Despite the number, Jackson said that Trump’s exercise stress echocardiogram was “above average based on age and sex,” but they did discuss “diet, exercise and weight loss.

“I think a reasonable goal over the next year or so would be [for Trump] to lose 10 to 15 pounds,” Jackson said. “We talked about diet and exercise a lot. He is more enthusiastic about the diet part than the exercise part but we’re going to do both.”

The doctor noted that a nutritionist would work with the president in an attempt to change his eating habits, which are said to include a steady stream of fast food and red meat.

Asked how someone with Trump’s diet and no known exercise routine could achieve such relatively strong physical results, Jackson said there was no definite answer.

“It is called genetics. I don’t know,” Jackson said. “Some people have just great genes. I told the president that if he had a healthier diet over the last 20 years, he might live to be 200 years old. I don’t know.”

Despite questions swirling about the president’s cognitive abilities given reports that he sometimes repeats himself during meetings, Jackson said that Trump scored a 30 out of 30 on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment — self described as a “cognitive screening test designed to assist Health Professionals in the detection of mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease.” The doctor added that he doesn’t believe appraisals of the president’s mental state should be made by persons who have not examined him.

“There’s no indication that he has any kid of cognitive issues,” Jackson said. “On a day-to-day basis, it has been my experience the president is very sharp — very articulate when he speaks to me. I’ve never known him to repeat himself around me… I found no reason to think that the president has any issues whatsoever with his thought process.”

During the presidential campaign, Trump’s personal doctor, Dr. Harold Bornstein, proclaimed: “If elected, Mr. Trump, I can state unequivocally, will be the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency.” Jackson would not comment on that prior comparison Tuesday, saying that he could only assess Trump today.

Questioned by the press for nearly an hour, Jackson additionally shared that the president takes aspirin for “cardiac health;” Propecia, a medication intended to prevent hair loss; Soolantra Cream, to combat the skin disease Rosacea; and Crestor, a cholesterol-lowering drug. Trump’s total cholesterol of 223 would be considered high under typical standards.

Jackson did admit that he thinks Trump “doesn’t sleep much.” The doctor said that he did not ask the president about his habits specifically, but guessed that he sleeps “four to five hours per night.”

In total, Trump’s physical last week lasted over four hours, said Jackson, who added that he worked with 12 consultants on the evaluation.

Over the course of the briefing, Jackson maintained optimism about Trump’s continued ability to withstand the pressures of the presidency and the lifestyle required by those who hold the job, saying “he is fit for duty.”

“I think he will remain fit for duty for the remainder of his term and even the remainder of another term, if he is elected,” Jackson said.

Source: US Government Class

New California declares “independence” from rest of state

CBS News SACRAMENTO — With the reading of their own version of a Declaration of Independence, founders of the state of New California took the first steps to what they hope will eventually lead to statehood. CBS Sacramento reports they don’t want to leave the United States, just California.

“Well, it’s been ungovernable for a long time. High taxes, education, you name it, and we’re rated around 48th or 50th from a business climate and standpoint in California,” said founder Robert Paul Preston.

The state of New California would incorporate most of the state’s rural counties, leaving the urban coastal counties to the current state of California.

“There’s something wrong when you have a rural county such as this one, and you go down to Orange County which is mostly urban, and it has the same set of problems, and it happens because of how the state is being governed and taxed,” Preston said.

But unlike other separation movements in the past, the state of New California wants to do things by the book, citing Article 4, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution and working with the state legislature to get it done, similar to the way West Virginia was formed.

“Yes. We have to demonstrate that we can govern ourselves before we are allowed to govern,” said founder Tom Reed.

And despite obstacles, doubters, and obvious long odds, the group stands united in their statehood dream.

The group is organized with committees and a council of county representatives, but say it will take 10 to 18 months before they are ready to fully engage with the state legislature.

This is not the first effort to split up California. In 2014, Silicon Valley venture capitalist Tim Draper submitted signatures to put a measure that would split California in six separate states.

Source: US Government Class

Santa Fe home most robust in decade, but rising prices hurt residents seeking ownership

The Santa Fe-area housing market in 2017 saw the largest number of sales in more than a decade, and average home prices were some of the highest since the national housing bubble burst in 2008, according to new data released by the Santa Fe Association of Realtors.

The new report shows the number of sales increased by 15 percent for the last four months of 2017 over the same period in 2016. Overall, sales in 2017 jumped by 11 percent over 2016 sales, to 2,919 from 2,629, and the pace of sales picked up more by than 26 percent — with homes on the market a little over three months before selling last year, compared to more than four and a half months the previous year.

The median sales price rose 4.2 percent in 2017, to $325,750, and the average price rose by 8.2 percent, to $434,337.

“Santa Fe had a strong end to the year in both home sales and total volumes,” association President Kurt Hill said in a news release on the group’s final quarterly report for 2017.

The strong year for real estate agents and home sellers — Keller Williams broker and blogger Alan Ball had predicted it would reach $1 billion in sales for the first time in a dozen years — had downsides, however, for many city and county residents hoping to become homeowners.

The housing affordability index — which compares the median household income of an area with the income needed to purchase a median-priced home — is on the decline, and the inventory of local homes on the market has dropped to its lowest level since at least 2005, according to the association’s report.

An affordability index of 100 means a family earning the area’s median income is bringing in just enough money to purchase a median-priced home; Santa Fe’s index is now at 90, down from 99 in 2016. That means earnings are 10 percent too low to cover rising home prices.

That compares to a national index of over 150 in the first three quarters of 2017, a decrease from about 165 in the three previous years. Fourth-quarter national figures for 2017 were not yet available.

In an interview Thursday, Hill said finding any kind of affordable housing is increasingly difficult in Santa Fe, where the rental market also has tightened and prices have risen. With little new construction occurring to ease the demand, he said, “the supply of housing is just absolutely horrible.”

Addressing the lack of lower-cost single-family homes for purchase, as well as rental units, is one of his top concerns, Hill said. He added several proposed projects in 2017 met with opposition from neighbors.

“We have a real problem with NIMBY-ism,” he said.

Hill hopes to encourage a rise in what he calls YIMBY-ism — “yes in my backyard.” Support for housing developments must come not just from people living in a neighborhood where a project is proposed, he said, but from people throughout the community who understand the pressing need.

“We need to get a lot more permits in the pipeline,” Hill said.

Alexandra Ladd, special projects manager for the city of Santa Fe’s Office of Affordable Housing, said there are some projects in the works. She expects about 2,000 new homes and multifamily-housing units to be constructed in the next couple of years, including 87 lower-cost — or “affordable” — homes, which could help put a dent in the estimated 2,500-unit gap.

Hill said his organization estimates the housing shortage to be closer to 6,500 units, a situation that has allowed prices to soar by some 20 percent.

“That’s scary for a local person,” he said.

Still, Hill said, the uptick in the housing market is a sign the local economy is strengthening. “So that’s a positive.”

Source: US Government Class

The Net Neutrality Debate in 2 Minutes or Less

Scientific American – Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to “Intractable Tech Battles!” Today—net neutrality! Yes, net neutrality: it’s in the news, it’s just been in the courts and, sooner or later, it will affect you! It’s my pleasure to introduce Pro, who’s in favor of net neutrality, and Con, who’s against it.

Pogue: Now, Pro, whose side do you represent?

Pro: Why, nearly every proconsumer organization on earth, including the Consumers Union and Common Cause. Also, the creators of the Internet (including Vinton Cerf) and the Web (including Tim Berners-Lee). And every true believer in free speech, innovation and the American way.

Pogue: And you, Con?

Con: I represent the companies that bring America its Internet, including Verizon, Comcast, AT&T and Time Warner.

Pogue: Okay, Pro, let’s start simple: What is this “network neutrality”?

Pro: It’s the idea that all Internet data should be equal. That the Comcasts and Verizons of the world can provide the pipes but should have no say in what passes through them. The Internet providers shouldn’t be allowed to charge different companies more or less for their data or to slow down, or block, access to Web sites and services they don’t like.

Pogue: Isn’t that the way the Internet has always been?

Pro: Yes. Neutrality has been a core democratizing principle of the Internet since the day it was born. Internet service should be like phone service: the phone company can’t make the connection worse if they don’t approve of the person you’re calling.

Con: But times have changed. Today Netflix and YouTube videos clog our pipes with enormous amounts of data. Or consider the BitTorrent crowd, which uses our lines to download insane exabytes of software, movies and music—illegally. Or how about Google and Skype? They’ve created services that let people make phone calls—for free—on networks that we spent billions to build. Why shouldn’t all those services pay their share?

Pro: Because net neutrality protects innovation. If big companies such as Netflix and Google could pay to get special treatment—faster speeds, more bandwidth—little start-ups would be at a disadvantage.

Con: Net neutrality is stifling innovation! If we could charge higher fees to the biggest bandwidth hogs, we could afford to build advanced fiber networks that permit all kinds of new Internet services.

Pro: But what about freedom of speech? Without net neutrality, Comcast could give priority to video from TV networks it owns—such as NBC—and slow down the signals from its rivals.

Con: We wouldn’t do that. Pinky swear. Verizon said that giving “unblocked access to lawful Web sites … will not change.”

Pro: Oh no? Then why was Verizon the company that led the charge to strike down net neutrality in court?

Con: Ah, you mean the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals decision in January. Yes, the court already struck down the Federal Communications Commission’s 2010 net neutrality rules—proving that I’ve been right all along.

Pro: You were never right. The FCC lost that one on a technicality. And the American public will ultimately be the losers.

Con: You call that a technicality? It was the FCC itself that originally classified us Internet providers as an “information service,” which isn’t susceptible to much regulation, instead of a “telecommunications service,” which is. It’s the FCC’s fault.

Pro: On that point, you are correct. The FCC chair who voted for that initial misclassification is now the chief lobbyist for the telecom companies. It was a fox-in-the-henhouse situation—one that the current chair, if he has any backbone, will quickly reverse, despite his own background lobbying for big telecoms.

Pogue: And I’m afraid that’s all the time we have. Join us next time! If your Internet provider allows it.

This article was originally published with the title “The Great Net Debate”

Source: US Government Class

Trump’s Moon directive earns praise from NASA, others

FoxNews – President Donald Trumped signed a new space policy directive Monday (Dec. 11) ordering NASA to work toward sending humans to the moon and, eventually, Mars.

As he signed the new directive at the White House, surrounded by several astronauts and other dignitaries, the president said that the order would “restore American leadership in space.”

Experts across the space industry showed overwhelming support for the new directive, formally known as Space Policy Directive 1 (SPD-1). Here’s how they reacted. [From Ike to Trump: Presidential Visions for Space Exploration]

“NASA looks forward to supporting the president’s directive strategically aligning our work to return humans to the moon, travel to Mars and opening the deeper solar system beyond,” acting NASA Administrator Robert Lightfoot said in a statement. “This work represents a national effort on many fronts, with America leading the way. We will engage the best and brightest across government and private industry and our partners across the world to reach new milestones in human achievement. Our workforce is committed to this effort, and even now, we are developing a flexible deep-space infrastructure to support a steady cadence of increasingly complex missions that strengthens American leadership in the boundless frontier of space. The next generation will dream even bigger and reach higher as we launch challenging new missions, and make new discoveries and technological breakthroughs on this dynamic path.”

Lockheed Martin

“We support the president and vice president’s vision and commitment to return America to the moon,” Lockheed Martin officials said in a statement. The aerospace engineering company is a contractor for NASA and is currently working on the Orion Multipurpose Crew Vehicle that will carry astronauts beyond Earth orbit. “A lunar mission with today’s technology would further our understanding of the moon’s history and resources. And it will build a strong foundation that will not only accelerate the U.S. to Mars and beyond. It will foster a thriving new space economy that will create jobs and drive innovation here on Earth. With the Orion deep-space vehicle and our prototype orbital lunar habitat making outstanding progress, we are ready to help the nation achieve this bold new vision.” [In Photos: President Donald Trump and NASA]

Eric Stallmer, President, Commercial Spaceflight Federation

The Commercial Spaceflight Federation (CSF) “applauds President Trump for signing Space Policy Directive 1, which directs NASA to partner with the U.S. commercial space industry to return Americans to the moon,” Eric Stallmer, president of CSF, said in a statement. “The U.S. commercial space industry has invested hundreds of millions of dollars in private capital to develop innovative capabilities for lunar transport, operations and resource utilization. CSF recommends that the administration challenge NASA to leverage these commercial capabilities to generate greater efficiency, and to partner with industry through flexible, innovative contracting approaches to achieve the goals set out in Space Policy Directive 1 as quickly as possible.”

Coalition for Deep Space Exploration

“The Coalition for Deep Space Exploration (Coalition) welcomes Space Policy Directive-1 (SPD-1) signed today by President Trump, formalizing the commitment made by the administration during the first meeting of the National Space Council to reinvigorate America’s deep-space exploration program,” officials with the coalition said in a statement.

“After 45 years, it is time to return humans to the region of the moon even as we look toward Mars,” CEO Mary Lynne Dittmar said in the statement. “The Coalition is proud to support NASA and to help bring about this exciting future. We congratulate the Trump administration on its bold vision and commitment to American leadership in space. … NASA’s flagship programs for human space exploration — the Orion crew vehicle and the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket — supported by ongoing research on human health and performance conducted on the International Space Station — will take a major step to fulfilling this vision beginning with Exploration Mission 1 targeted for late 2019.”

Congressman Lamar Smith (R-Texas)
House Science, Space and Technology Committee Chairman

“By signing this directive, President Trump has again shown that, under his administration, America will be a leader in space exploration,” U.S. House Science, Space and Technology Committee Chairman Lamar Smith said in a statement. “Going back to the moon as the precursor to further exploration will enable NASA to test new systems and equipment critical for future missions, like the human exploration of Mars. Going back to the moon achieves more than just the practical benefits; it will teach our children and grandchildren to dream big and strive to achieve what others think impossible. The innovations, inventions and ideas that they come up with, inspired by exploring the moon and Mars, will fuel future aspirations to explore worlds beyond Mars. This administration’s dedication to space is a refreshing change from the past eight years.”

Brian Babin, (R-Texas)
House Space Subcommittee Chairman

“By signing this space policy directive and refocusing America’s space program on human spaceflight exploration, the president has ensured America’s leadership in space and prioritized our return to the moon and future manned missions to Mars,” House Space Subcommittee Chairman Brian Babin said in a statement. “Under the president’s leadership, we are now on the verge of a new generation of American greatness and leadership in space — leading us to once again launch American astronauts on American rockets from American soil.”

Source: US Government Class

College presidents to state lawmakers: Change way lottery scholarships awarded to curb rising tuition

Santa Fe New Mexican – The leaders of New Mexico’s colleges and universities want the state Legislature to decouple lottery scholarships from tuition costs — a move, they say, that would discourage colleges from raising tuition and perhaps give schools leeway in parceling out the scholarship money.

Garrey Carruthers, chancellor of New Mexico State University, made the request on behalf of the Council of University Presidents during a Legislative Finance Committee hearing Tuesday.

“This will break the tradition of tuition going up in comparison to the lottery scholarship,” Carruthers told legislators.

Since the New Mexico Lottery was established more than two decades ago, its profits have funded scholarships for qualifying in-state students to attend New Mexico’s public universities and colleges. The amount of lottery scholarship money a student receives is tied to that student’s tuition costs.

The details of the proposal by the school leaders have not been worked out, but Carruthers said one idea would be to give every lottery scholarship recipient somewhere between $1,400 and $1,500 per semester, regardless of where the student goes to college.

Or, he said, each college could receive a block grant of lottery scholarship money and decide whether to dole it out based on student merit or need.

His hope, he said, is that the move would help save the lottery scholarship program. Lottery profits, which fund the program, haven’t kept pace with tuition increases and increased student demand for scholarships.

A lottery scholarship once paid for 100 percent of an eligible student’s tuition costs at New Mexico colleges, but it now covers just 60 percent of tuition for some 26,000 students who rely on the fund. When the lottery scholarship program covered 100 percent of tuition, schools were free to raise tuition knowing that the lottery would continue to cover the full tuition costs of scholarship recipients.

The Legislative Finance Committee recently cautioned that tuition increases initiated by schools to address shrinking revenues from declining enrollment and dwindling financial support from state government could make college unaffordable for impoverished students.

Rep. Patricia Lundstrom, D-Gallup, and chairwoman of Legislative Finance Committee, applauded the idea by the college and university leaders, saying, “This makes sense to me. …. The block grants would go to the student directly.”

Sen. George Muñoz, D-Gallup, said he would sign on to any bills proposed to make the change in the 30-day legislative session beginning in mid-January.

“There’s not enough money in the lottery scholarship for everyone. We need to fix it,” he said. “If colleges made it merit- or needs-based, it could really help students.”

Higher Education Department Secretary Barbara Damron said she also supports the plan.

“The question is: How much should that [per-student grant] be?,” she said. “Some say a flat $1,000 per student. Some say $1,500, some say $2,000, depending on where those students go to college.”

Other legislators seemed unsure of the idea.

Rep. Jimmie Hall, D-Albuquerque, said, “This is a new concept and I would like to know more about it. I don’t know if it will get us any further along in what we need.”

Since 2008, the Legislature has required the lottery to allocate 30 percent of its gross ticket sales for the scholarship program. In the fiscal year that ended June 30, lottery proceeds for the program were $37.8 million, down from $46.3 million in the previous budget year.

Lottery scholarships are available to New Mexican residents who go to college in the first semester following high school graduation, maintain a minimum of a 2.5 grade point average and meet other requirements.

During the meeting, Damron proposed a roughly $34 million budget for the Higher Education Department, a “flat” request that would not require any increased investment.

Source: US Government Class

Trump shrinks Utah monuments in historic move

(CNN)If only the rocks could talk. If only the sandstones could sing, imagine the stories they’d tell, of dinosaurs, mammoth hunters and the “ancient ones” known as the Anasazi.

All roamed southern Utah over the eons, long before Native Americans struggled to hold their land against Mormon settlers, modern life and now, Donald Trump.

As the President arrives in Utah Monday afternoon, this rocky corner of the Wild West is a battlefield once again, but this time the warriors will carry briefcases and lawsuits.

Trump, by signing two presidential proclamations on Monday, shrunk the size of Bears Ears National Monument by more than 80% and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument by roughly 45%, fundamentally reshaping the two large national monuments.

The proclamations split the two national monuments into several smaller sections. Bears Ears will be shrunk from 1.35 million acres to 228,337 acres, according to the spokesperson for Interior, and split into two separate monument sections. Grand Staircase-Escalante, a monument designated by President Bill Clinton, will be split into three sections and shrunk from 1.9 million acres to just about 1 million acres.

Trump slammed past administrations — namely Clinton’s and President Barack Obama’s — for what he called “federal overreach.” The two former Democratic president designated Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante for protection, hoping to preserve their culture, history and natural beauty.

Past administrations, Trump said, thought “the natural resources of Utah should be controlled by a small handful of very distant bureaucrats located in Washington. And guess what? They are wrong.”

“The families and communities of Utah know and love this land the best and you know the best how to take care of your land,” Trump said. “You know how to protect it. And you know best how to conserve this land for many, many generations to come.”

Locals in the area saw the designations as nothing more than a 3-million-acre federal land grab. The drillers, miners and frackers who were shut out by Clinton’s and Obama’s use of the Antiquities Act would have new leases on life. Sen. Orrin Hatch and his fellow Utah Republicans would have a major victory to celebrate.
But those who believe the rocks can talk, through countless fossils, sacred ruins and desert solitude, are bracing for a fight.
“I’m going to sue him,” says Yvon Chouinard, founder and CEO of outdoor gear maker Patagonia. “It seems the only thing this administration understands is lawsuits. I think it’s a shame that only 4% of American lands are national parks. Costa Rica’s got 10%. Chile will now have way more parks than we have. We need more, not less. This government is evil and I’m not going to sit back and let evil win.”

Chouinard led the effort to move a major outdoor show from Salt Lake City to Denver in protest of Utah’s land use politics and he’s been a big supporter of the historic coalition of the five local tribes, which put aside ancient rivalries and lobbied for monument protection.

Outdoor retailer Patagonia also lent its voice in opposition to the move Monday, setting the home page of Patagonia.com to a blacked-out page that says, “The President Stole Your Land,” with the option to learn more about “the largest elimination of protected land in American history.”

The site also gave visitors the option to support groups that are pushing back.
Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke said he was unmoved by people like Chouinard who are threatening lawsuits.

“I don’t yield to pressure, only higher principle,” he said. “And I don’t think public policy should be based on the threat of lawsuit … I feel very confident.”

But Chouinard’s arguments carry no sway at a pro-Trump, anti-monument rally in Monticello. Here, Chouinard represents all the liberal interests from outside, conspiring to pit neighbor against neighbor. “What’s his net worth? One billion dollars? Two billion?” says San Juan County Commissioner Phil Lyman. “You got Patagonia in here waving the flag of environmentalism while he’s completely exploiting the outdoors for industrialized tourism. For a person in that position to try and lecture morality to one of the poorest counties in the entire nation is wrong.”

The size of New Jersey, San Juan is the biggest and poorest county in Utah and with this moment of political victory, Lyman finds kinship with the coal miners of Appalachia.

He points out that Bears Ears is the fifth national park or monument in his county and argues that oil and gas extraction would have less impact on the landscape than the brand of adventure tourism that has transformed nearby Moab. “By designating a monument, you are using a tool that will bring hordes of people to a place that is very sensitive,” he says.

But according to former county commissioner and Navajo elder Mark Maryboy, cultural sensitivity is hard to find in San Juan County. “They didn’t want to work with us,” he says. “In fact, one of the county commissioners told me ‘You guys lost the war so you have no business talking about the land planning process.’”
With efficient strides, he drops into a canyon near the San Juan River, past one of the 100,000 sacred ruins in Bears

Ears, to a wall covered in 1,200-year old rock art. The spindly renderings of man and animal are the work of an artist they’ve dubbed “Wolfman” for the paw print signature that accompanies the pictoglyphs. And then he points out the modern bullet holes.

To his Navajo faith, this canyon holds the spirits of his loved ones and these carvings are just as sacred as any art in the Vatican or any wall in Jerusalem, yet someone has been using it for target practice.

“The local white community members are determined to get rid of all the art rock,” he says. “It stands in the way of progress for them. It stands in the way of a job. New cars. New clothes. Rolex watch.”

He’s heard the argument that his people need jobs and that the extraction industry could provide them while protecting the most important sites.

But, he feels, history hasn’t shown that to be true.

“The experience that Native Americans see in this county is discrimination,” he says. “They are the last ones to be hired for any position. Even if there’s a huge mining operation opening up, they will not be hired for that position. And they will be exposed to the toxic materials that are left on the ground or in the air.”

But, he feels, history hasn’t shown that to be true.

“The experience that Native Americans see in this county is discrimination,” he says. “They are the last ones to be hired for any position. Even if there’s a huge mining operation opening up, they will not be hired for that position. And they will be exposed to the toxic materials that are left on the ground or in the air.”

Source: US Government Class

Ousted FBI agent in Mueller probe softened language in Clinton email case

CBS News – The FBI agent who was removed over allegations of anti-Trump text messages was responsible for softening language about former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in the FBI’s investigation into her private email server, CBS News has confirmed.

CBS News’ Paula Reid reports that Peter Strzok, who led the investigation into Clinton’s use of a private email server while secretary of state, changed the language in former FBI Director James Comey’s description of how Clinton handled classified information, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter. Strzok changed Comey’s earlier draft language describing Clinton’s actions as “grossly negligent” to “extremely careless.” That change in wording has significant legal implications, since “gross negligence” in handling classified information can carry criminal penalties.

In his July 2016 statement about the investigation, Comey said, “Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.”

Strzok was dismissed from Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team after he was suspected of sending politically sensitive text messages that appeared to mock Mr. Trump. Strzok now works in the FBI’s human resources department.

The possible messages came up as the Department of Justice Office of Inspector General’s reviews the actions leading up to the 2016 election, a review that has been publicly known since the beginning of the year. The OIG earlier this year announced it was reviewing the FBI probe of former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s emails and then-FBI Director James Comey’s decision to make public statements about the probe and not recommend charges. Top Republicans have already charged, based on transcripts of interviews with people close to Comey provided by the special counsel’s office, that Comey drafted a statement to announce the conclusion of the investigation into Clinton before the FBI interviewed key witnesses, including Clinton herself.

The revelation of Strzok’s alleged text messages, involvement in the Clinton probe and now, softening of Comey’s draft in the Clinton case with possible legal implications is likely to draw intense criticism, especially from Republicans already skeptical of Mueller’s investigation into Russian election meddling and any ties to the Trump campaign.

Strzok’s actions also give fuel to Mr. Trump’s spirited rants against the FBI. Mr. Trump said the FBI’s reputation is “in tatters — the worst in history” — in a series of tweets over the weekend.

Mueller’s investigation has led to guilty pleas from former campaign aide George Papadopoulos and former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn. Former campaign aide Paul Manafort and his associate Rick Gates are also on trial as a result of Mueller’s probe.

CBS News’ Kathryn Watson contributed to this report. 

Source: US Government Class