Guaidó advisers quit following bungled Venezuela raid
May 11, 2020

1 of 4
FILE - In this March 4, 2020 file photo, opposition leader Juan Guaido listens during a legislative session being held at a religious, private school in Caracas, Venezuela, an alternative location due to the government continuously blocking their access to National Assembly chambers. Guaidó said Monday, May 11, 2020 that two U.S.-based political advisers have resigned following a failed incursion into Venezuela aimed at capturing President Nicolás Maduro. (AP Photo/Ariana Cubillos, File)


CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) — Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaidó said Monday that two U.S.-based political advisers have resigned in the fallout from a failed incursion into the Caribbean nation led by a former-Green Beret aimed at capturing President Nicolás Maduro.

Guaido said he accepted the resignations of Juan José Rendon and Sergio Vergara, who had signed an agreement for a mission to arrest Maduro with U.S. military veteran Jordan Goudreau. While that deal fell apart, Goudreau has taken responsibility for going ahead with a failed attack launched May 3 on a beach outside the capital, Caracas.


Rendon said he gave Goudreau $50,000 to cover some initial expenses, but both say the contract was never fulfilled and he received no more funds.

The would-be invasion quickly became a publicity coup for Maduro, whose security forces intercepted most of the attackers.

Guaidó’s team said in a statement that he “accepted the resignation of the officials and thanked them for their dedication and commitment to Venezuela.”

Maduro says the objective of the raid was to kill him, but instead officials say they killed at least six of the accused “mercenaries” and arrested dozens of others, including two former U.S. soldiers associated with Goudreau’s Florida-based firm Silvercorp USA.

Guaidó, who is backed by the Trump administration among nearly 60 other nations as Venezuela’s rightful leader, has denied having anything to do with the alleged attack, but has come under pressure from at least one opposition party in Venezuela to explain what happened.

Goudreau has presented what he said is a secret recording of Guaidó himself attended, by speakerphone, the meeting at which the deal was signed. Goudreau said he was never fully paid, but went forward with the mission to help liberate Venezuela from Maduro, working with a former Venezuelan Army Gen., Cliver Alcalá, who was recently extradited from Colombia to the U.S. to face drug charges.

Venezuelan Attorney General Tarek William Saab recently said Venezuela will seek the capture of Goudreau and the two former Guaido advisers. Goudreau said about 60 people were involved in the incursion and Venezuelan officials say they have arrested at least 40, including 14 in the last two days.

The “Coup” Attempt in Venezuela Seems Ridiculous. But Don’t Forget — Regime Change Is the U.S. Goal.

Mehdi Hasan THE INTERCEPT May 9 2020

This photo released by the Venezuelan Miraflores presidential press office shows President Nicolás Maduro speaking over military equipment that he says was seized during an incursion into Venezuela, during his televised address from Miraflores in Caracas, Venezuela, on May 4, 2020.

Photo: Miraflores press office via AP

PICTURE THE FOLLOWING SCENE: Two former Venezuelan special forces soldiers are captured while trying to land on a beach in the United States. They confess on camera to being part of a wider plot to capture and kidnap the American president.



That same day, back in Venezuela, another ex-special forces soldier with connections to the longtime bodyguard of Venezuela’s president, Nicolás Maduro, releases a video announcing the two men were working for his private security company, on a mission to detain and extract President Donald Trump and bring down the government in Washington, D.C.

Two days later, the Venezuelan foreign minister, who also happens to be the former head of the country’s feared intelligence agency, gives a press conference at which he chooses to deny only “direct” involvement in the operation. “If we had been involved, it would have gone differently,” he added, with a smirk.

What do you think the reaction would be here in the United States? Among political and media elites? In national security circles? Wouldn’t the U.S. press be running endless pieces denouncing and berating Maduro? Wouldn’t cable news be rolling on it? Does anyone doubt that the U.S. military would be preparing to attack targets across Venezuela in retaliation?

Yet that is exactly what we have witnessed over the past week — but in reverse, and without any sense of shock or outrage in the United States.


In this photo released by Venezuela’s Ministry of Communication, Jorge Rodriguez shows a video of American Airan Berry, a former U.S. special forces soldier associated with the Florida-based private security firm Silvercorp USA, during a televised statement in Caracas, Venezuela, on May 7, 2020.

On Monday, it was Venezuela that captured two former U.S. special forces soldiers, Luke Denman and Airan Berry, after what authorities described as their “botched beach landing in the fishing village of Chuao.” A video was released of Denman telling his interrogators that he had been tasked with capturing the Venezuelan president. Meanwhile, Florida-based ex-Green Beret Jordan Goudreau, head of the private security firm Silvercorp USA, appeared in a video alongside a former Venezuelan military officer in combat fatigues, in which he confirmed that Denman and Berry were working for him. (Press reports have since revealed that Goudreau had meetings with former longtime Trump bodyguard Keith Schiller, had signed a multimillion-dollar contract with the U.S.-backed Venezuelan opposition, and also claims to have been in contact with the office of Vice President Mike Pence.)

On Wednesday, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, a former director of the CIA, spoke at a press conference where he issued his very carefully worded denial: “There was no U.S. government direct involvement in this.” He also couldn’t help but brag to reporters about how it “would have gone differently” if the United States had been behind it. (Memo to Pompeo: Google “Bay of Pigs.”)

Who knows? Perhaps Washington wasn’t involved this time. Perhaps Trump is correct to say that this particular fiasco, which sounds like the plot of a bad Hollywood movie, “has nothing to do with our government.”

Then again, this is an administration of liars, fabulists, and grifters. Dishonesty is the hallmark of the Trump White House. Their denials, therefore, are pretty worthless.

Plus, there is the recent history to consider: the demonization and strangulation of Venezuela has been a bipartisan project in Washington, D.C., since the rise of Hugo Chavez and the socialist “pink tide” in the late 1990s. In 2002, the Bush administration encouraged and supported a (failed) coup against Chavez. (As I later reminded former Bush official Otto Reich — who was accused of meeting with the plotters beforehand — the CIA had warned him and his colleagues that a coup attempt would be made five days before it occurred!).

In 2015, the Obama administration made the absurd decision to formally declare Venezuela an “unusual and extraordinary threat” to U.S. national security. At the time, the United States was 11 times bigger in terms of population, 600 times richer in terms of GDP, and with a military budget 1,800 times the size of Venezuela’s.

In 2019, the Trump administration called Maduro “illegitimate” and recognized opposition leader Juan Guaidó as the interim president of Venezuela. So far this year, Washington has indicted Maduro on charges of narco-terrorism; refused to suspend crippling sanctions on Caracas despite the spread of Covid-19; and deployed U.S. warships near Venezuela in what has been described as “one of the largest U.S. military operations in the region since the 1989 invasion of Panama to remove Gen. Manuel Noriega from power.”

Regime change is the explicit policy of the U.S. government.

To be clear: The regime in Caracas is brutal, autocratic, and corrupt. More than four million Venezuelans have fled the country in recent years; the president’s approval ratings hover around 10 percent.

But anyone who claims that U.S. opposition to Maduro is based on a concern for democracy or human rights in Venezuela is either dishonest or deluded. The United States has a long history of supporting strongmen around the world — and especially in Latin America. Think Gen. Efraín Ríos Montt in Guatemala. Or Gen. Augusto Pinochet in Chile. Or Gen. Jorge Rafael Videla in Argentina. The list goes on and on.

No, the real reason the United States is obsessed with toppling the government in Caracas is, of course, because Venezuela has the world’s largest oil reserves — but leaders opposed to both the United States and capitalism. In fact, Trump and his cronies have a habit of saying the quiet part loud. As former acting FBI director Andrew McCabe revealed in his book, “The Threat,” at a briefing with intelligence officials in 2017, Trump asked why the U.S. wasn’t at war with Venezuela, pointing out how “they have all that oil and they’re right on our back door.”

In January 2019, Trump’s national security adviser at the time, John Bolton, told Fox Business: “It will make a big difference to the United States economically if we could have American oil companies really invest in and produce the oil capabilities in Venezuela.”

We do not know whether Trump and Co. were involved in the Goudreau-inspired attempted attack on Maduro. What we do know, though, is that they continue to try and starve and bully Venezuela into submission. If the Trump administration gave a damn about the people of that country, it would heed calls from everyone from the pope, to the U.N. high commissioner for human rights, to a group of congressional Democrats, to suspend sanctions and help Caracas fight the spread of the novel coronavirus.

But it won’t — because it doesn’t.

Gorsuch, likely key vote, seems to favor Oklahoma tribe
By MARK SHERMAN May 11, 2020

The rising sun shines over the Supreme Court building on Capitol Hill in Washington, Monday morning, May 11, 2020. (AP Photos/Mark Sherman)

WASHINGTON (AP) — Justice Neil Gorsuch appeared Monday to be a pivotal vote for the proposition that a large chunk of eastern Oklahoma remains an American Indian reservation, a question the Supreme Court failed to resolve a year ago.

The justices heard arguments by phone in an appeal by a Native American man who claims state courts have no authority to try him for a crime committed on reservation land that belongs to the Muscogee (Creek) Nation.

The reservation once encompassed 3 million acres (12,100 square kilometers), including most of Tulsa, the state’s second-largest city. In a separate case, a federal appeals court threw out a state murder conviction because the crime occurred on land assigned to the tribe before Oklahoma became a state and Congress never clearly eliminated the Creek Nation reservation it created in 1866.

Gorsuch didn’t participate in the earlier case because he took part in it when he served on the appeals court in Denver before becoming a justice in 2017. The other eight justices were apparently evenly divided, and they took up a different case so the full complement of nine justices could rule.

Monday’s case involved 71-year-old Jimcy McGirt, who is serving a 500-year prison sentence for molesting a child. Oklahoma state courts rejected his argument that his case does not belong in Oklahoma courts and that federal prosecutors should instead handle his case.

Several justices voiced concerns that a ruling for the tribe could have big consequences for criminal cases, but also tax and other regulatory issues.

But Gorsuch suggested that those consequences might be overstated, based on what has occurred since the appeals court ruling in the murder case. “I would have thought that ... we might have seen a tsunami of cases, if there were a real problem here, that we haven’t seen,” the justice said.

Mithun Mansinghani, the Oklahoma solicitor general, said 178 inmates have sought to reopen their cases, calling those “just the initial cracks in the dam.”

But Ian Gershengorn, representing McGirt, said inmates who face equally stiff penalties in federal court and those who already have served a significant portion of their prison terms might do nothing.

If he wins at the Supreme Court, McGirt could potentially be retried in federal court.

Virus unleashes wave of fraud in US amid fear and scarcity

A NATION WHOSE MOTTO IS "A SUCKER IS BORN EVERY MINUTE"

By BEN FOX and ALAN SUDERMAN May 12, 2020



In this image provided by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, this March 24, 2020, photo, shows unapproved COVID-19 tests that were seized on March 22, 2020 from the DHL Express Consignment Facility at JFK Airport in the Queens borough of New York. Federal officials say the COVID-19 outbreak has unleashed a wave of fraud. An arm of the Department of Homeland Security, Homeland Security Investigations, has opened more than 300 cases in recent weeks that include counterfeit products and medicines as well as fake tests for the virus. (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement via AP)


WASHINGTON (AP) — A 39-year-old former investment manager in Georgia was already facing federal charges that he robbed hundreds of retirees of their savings in a Ponzi scheme when the rapid spread of COVID-19 presented an opportunity.

Christopher A. Parris started pitching himself as a broker of surgical masks amid the nationwide scramble for protective equipment in the first desperate weeks of the outbreak, federal authorities said. He was soon taking in millions of dollars.

Except there were no masks.

Law enforcement officials say Parris is part of what they are calling a wave of fraud tied to the outbreak.

Homeland Security Investigations, an arm of the Department of Homeland Security, is leading a nationwide crackdown. It has opened over 370 cases and so far arrested 11 people, as part of “Operation Stolen Promise,” according to Matthew Albence, acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

“It’s incredibly rampant and it’s growing by the day,” Albence said. “We’re just scratching the surface of this criminal activity. ”

Parris was on pretrial release for the alleged Ponzi scheme when he was arrested last month in what authorities say was an attempt to secure an order for more than $750 million from the Department of Veterans Affairs for 125 million face masks and other equipment.



U.S. law enforcement officials say they have just "scratched the surface" of a surge in fraudulent activity tied to the coronavirus pandemic. A new nationwide crackdown has already resulted in more than 370 cases and 11 arrests. (May 12)

“He was trying to sell something he didn’t even have,” said Jere T. Miles, the special agent in charge of the New Orleans office of Homeland Security Investigations, which worked the case with the VA Office of Inspector General. “That’s just outright, blatant fraud.”

Parris has not yet entered a plea to fraud charges and his lawyers did not respond to requests for comment from The Associated Press.

Nationwide, investigators have turned up more than false purveyors of PPE. They have uncovered an array of counterfeit or adulterated products, from COVID-19 tests kits and treatments to masks and cleaning products.

Steve Francis, director of the National Intellectual Property Rights Coordination Center, which is overseen by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, says authorities have tracked counterfeits flowing into the U.S. from 20 countries and for sale through thousands of websites.

“There are people popping up who have never been in the business of securing equipment on a large scale,” Francis said.

In this image provided by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, this March 3, 2020, photo, shows counterfeit 3M masks that were confiscated at the Cincinnati LUK airport in Cincinnati. Federal officials say the COVID-19 outbreak has unleashed a wave of fraud. An arm of the Department of Homeland Security, Homeland Security Investigations, has opened more than 300 cases in recent weeks that include counterfeit products and medicines as well as fake tests for the virus. (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement via AP)

Enter Parris.

From his home outside Atlanta, he claimed to represent a company with 3M respiratory masks and other protective equipment for sale. At the time, there was a mad scramble for supplies that pitted state and local governments against each other.

As outlined in court documents and interviews, his pitch reached a company in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, that was trying to help government agencies acquire PPE. In late March, it contacted the VA, which was dealing with a critical shortage of protective equipment.

The VA was suspicious of the price, about 15 times what it was paying amid the shortage, and alerted its inspector general, which brought in Homeland Security. That resulted in a sting that led to Parris.

“He had no means of producing any PPE,” Albence said. “It was just a scam.”

But it had some takers. Federal authorities say a Parris-controlled bank account received more than $7.4 million, with most appearing to come from unidentified entities trying to buy safety gear in March and April, according to court documents. He wired some of the money to accounts overseas, including more than $1.1 million to a Swiss company’s bank that authorities say may be a shell corporation.

The U.S. government seized more than $3.2 million from his accounts.

The Ponzi scheme was unrelated to the alleged attempt to defraud the VA but “is sufficiently similar to the conduct in this case that it is relevant to his plan, intent, and modus operandi,” according to a search warrant affidavit.

In the earlier case, Parris and his partners are accused of defrauding about 1,000 people out of at least $115 million from January 2012 to June 2018. They persuaded the victims to turn over their savings for what turned out to be nonexistent investments, according to the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Another member of the partnership, Perry Santillo, pleaded guilty to fraud in November.

As part of the alleged scheme, Parris and the others bought the businesses of investment advisers who were retiring and leveraged the trust those advisers had built up over the years to pitch the bogus investments, with relatively modest returns, to their newly acquired clients.

In this image provided by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, this March 24, 2020, photo, shows unapproved COVID-19 tests that were seized on March 22, 2020 from the DHL Express Consignment Facility at JFK Airport in the Queens borough of New York. Federal officials say the COVID-19 outbreak has unleashed a wave of fraud. An arm of the Department of Homeland Security, Homeland Security Investigations, has opened more than 300 cases in recent weeks that include counterfeit products and medicines as well as fake tests for the virus. (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement via AP)

Florida attorney Scott Silver, who represented some investors who sought to get their money back after the SEC shut down the operation, said there was little to recover because Parris and the others spent most of it.

He wasn’t surprised that Parris had been arrested in the COVID fraud case. “He’s already facing 20 years in prison,” he said. “What’s he worried about?”

Parris, who was charged in the case in January, grew up in Rochester, New York, and worked as an insurance agent, owned a dry cleaner and got involved in local politics. He ran unsuccessfully for city council and said he was vice president of a local African American Republican committee.

“So many people that know me, you know, trust me,” Parris said in a 2015 hearing with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, which later suspended his broker license.

One of Parris’ alleged victims in the Ponzi scheme, Jane Naylon, said she took guitar lessons from Parris’ father, a reverend at a local church and lost $150,000 in the fraud.

Naylon was dismayed when Parris was released on his own recognizance in the Ponzi scheme. When she learned he had been charged for PPE fraud, she said she was in shock, but also pleased.

“I’m ecstatic,” she said. “I hope he goes to jail for life.”

Parris is now jailed in Atlanta and is expected to be transferred to Washington to face charges in the VA case.

In this image provided by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, this March 13, 2020, photo, shows a vial of purified water that was seized on March 20, 2020, in Los Angeles. Federal officials say the COVID-19 outbreak has unleashed a wave of fraud. An arm of the Department of Homeland Security, Homeland Security Investigations, has opened more than 300 cases in recent weeks that include counterfeit products and medicines as well as fake tests for the virus. (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement via AP)
___

Suderman reported from Richmond, Virginia. Associated Press Video-Journalist Nathan Ellgren contributed to this report.

Cats with no symptoms spread virus to other cats in lab test
By MARILYNN MARCHIONE MAY 12, 2020

In this Friday, May 8, 2020 file photo, the owner of a cat cafe checks the temperature of one of her cats in Bangkok, Thailand. According to a study published on Wednesday, May 13, 2020, cats can spread the new coronavirus to each other without any of them ever having any symptoms. (AP Photo/Sakchai Lalit)

Cats can spread the new coronavirus to other cats without any of them ever having symptoms, a lab experiment suggests.

Scientists who led the work, reported on Wednesday, say it shows the need for more research into whether the virus can spread from people to cats to people again.

Health experts have downplayed that possibility. The American Veterinary Medical Association said in a new statement that just because an animal can be deliberately infected in a lab “does not mean that it will easily be infected with that same virus under natural conditions.”

Anyone concerned about that risk should use “common sense hygiene,” said virus expert Peter Halfmann. Don’t kiss your pets and keep surfaces clean to cut the chances of picking up any virus an animal might shed, he said
He and colleagues at the University of Wisconsin School of Veterinary Medicine led the lab experiment and published results Wednesday in the New England Journal of Medicine. Federal grants paid for the work.


Researchers took coronavirus from a human patient and infected three cats with it. Each cat then was housed with another cat that was free of infection. Within five days, coronavirus was found in all three of the newly exposed animals.

None of the six cats ever showed any symptoms.

“There was no sneezing, no coughing, they never had a high body temperature or lost any weight,” Halfmann said. “If a pet owner looked at them ... they wouldn’t have noticed anything.”

Last month, two domestic cats in different parts of New York state tested positive for the coronavirus after mild respiratory illnesses. They were thought to have picked it up from people in their homes or neighborhoods.

Some tigers and lions at the Bronx Zoo also have tested positive for the virus, as have a small number of other animals around the world.

Those cases and the new lab experiment show “there is a public health need to recognize and further investigate the potential chain of human-cat-human transmission,” the authors wrote.

Guidelines from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention say that based on the limited information available so far, the risk of pets spreading coronavirus to people “is considered to be low.”

The veterinary medicine group says “there is no evidence to suggest that animals, including pets, that may be incidentally infected by humans are playing a role in the spread of COVID-19.” It stressed that person-to-person transmission was driving the global pandemic.

However, the group noted that many diseases spread between pets and people, so hygiene is always important: Wash your hands before and after touching pets, and keep your pet and its food and water bowls clean.


Halfmann, whose two cats sleep near him, said the worry may be greater for animal shelters, where one infected animal could pass the virus to many others.

___

Marilynn Marchione can be followed on Twitter at http://twitter.com/MMarchioneAP

___

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

Official: US must move ahead with nuclear weapons work

May 6, 2020
ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. (AP) — A top nuclear security official says the U.S. must move ahead with plans to ramp up production of key components for the nation’s nuclear arsenal despite the challenges presented by the coronavirus.

Federal officials have set a deadline of 2030 for increased production of the plutonium cores used in nuclear weapons. The work will be split between Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico and the Savannah River Site in South Carolina. At stake are jobs and billions of federal dollars to upgrade buildings or construct new factories.

National Nuclear Security Administrator Lisa Gordon-Hagerty said in recent letter to U.S. Sen. Tom Udall, a New Mexico Democrat, that her agency has worked with the contractor that manages Los Alamos on precautions to protect employees from the virus while moving ahead with defense work.


“The plutonium pit production mission is one of our highest national security priorities and is being done in accordance with congressional direction,” she wrote. “We must press forward with this project in order to meet Department of Defense deliverables.”

Gordon-Hagerty didn’t specify what steps were taken to safeguard workers. Los Alamos director Thom Mason has said more than 85% of the laboratory’s workforce is working from home and measures “following CDC guidelines” are in place for those doing national security work and protecting the lab.

Watchdog groups have called for a more in-depth look at the plutonium core project at Los Alamos, but the National Nuclear Security Administration rejected those efforts earlier this year. The agency opted to prepare a supplemental analysis of an environmental review done for Los Alamos more than a decade ago. Critics argue that ramping up production at the lab goes beyond those initial plans and should be reexamined.

The agency is doing a separate review for Savannah River. A virtual public meeting on that part of the project was held last week and people can give input on it until May 18.

Gordon-Hagerty denied a request by New Mexico’s congressional delegation to give the public more time to weigh in on the Los Alamos project. People can comment until Saturday. Lawmakers had asked on behalf of dozens of groups for an extension until at least June 19.


“The NNSA is essentially telling the public to get lost during this epidemic,” said Jay Coghlan, director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, a watchdog group.

He said people should use the public comment opportunities to demand the government spend money on masks, ventilators and other needs related to the pandemic rather than on nuclear weapons.

Officials for years have pushed for plutonium core production to resume, saying the U.S. needs to ensure the stability and reliance of its nuclear arsenal.

The National Nuclear Security Administration has said most of the cores in the stockpile were produced in the 1970s and 1980s.

French lawmakers adopt bill on removing hate content online

By The Associated Press 5/12/2020

France’s parliament has approved a bill aimed at fighting hate online that obliges platforms and search engines to remove prohibited content within 24 hours starting July 1.

Lawmakers adopted the proposed legislation on Wednesday. Submitted by French President Emmanuel Macron’s LREM party, the law allows for fines of up to 1.25 million euros ($1.1 million.)

It targets texts, pictures, videos and web pages that incite hatred or violence, or that carry insults of a racist or religious nature.

The bill faced vociferous opposition in France and beyond from critics who said it would curtail the democratic right to freedom of expression.
The Computer & Communications Industry Association, an advocacy group with offices in Washington and Brussels, said it was concerned the French legislation “could lead to excessive takedowns of content as companies, especially startups, would err on the side of caution.”

US meat exports surge as industry struggles to meet demand

MEAT NOT FOR YOU OR ME ITS FOR EXPORT

 In this April 8, 2020, file photo, the Smithfield pork processing plant stands in Sioux Falls, S.D. Meat exports are surging this spring at the same time the processing industry is struggling to meet domestic demand as workers get sick with the coronavirus and companies scramble to make plants safer for employees. The meat industry says that if companies manage to keep workers healthy and plants operating, there should be plenty of supply to satisfy both U.S. and export markets. (AP Photo/Stephen Groves, File)


OMAHA, Neb. (AP) — U.S. meat exports are surging even as the industry is struggling to meet domestic demand because of coronavirus outbreaks at processing plants that have sickened hundreds of workers and caused companies to scramble to improve conditions.

Although the situation could cause concern that American workers are risking their health to meet foreign demand, experts say it shouldn’t because much of the meat sold to other countries is cuts that Americans generally don’t eat. And at least one of the four major processors says it has reduced exports during the pandemic.

If companies manage to keep their workers healthy and plants operating, there should be plenty of supply to satisfy domestic and foreign markets, according to industry officials.

“I really feel like the industry is well positioned to serve all of its customers both here and abroad,” said Joe Schuele, a spokesman for the industry trade group U.S. Meat Export Federation.

Meat exports, particularly pork exports to China, grew significantly throughout the first three months of the year. This was partly due to several new trade agreements that were completed before the coronavirus outbreak led to the temporary closure of dozens of U.S. meatpacking plants in April and May and to increased absenteeism at many plants that reduced their output.

The Meat Export Federation said pork exports jumped 40% and beef exports grew 9% during the first three months of the year. Chicken exports, meanwhile, grew by 8% in the first quarter. Complete figures weren’t yet available for April, but Agriculture Department figures for the last week of April show that pork exports jumped by 40% as shipments to China and Japan surged and exports to Mexico and Canada remained strong. Beef exports declined by 22% in that last week of April.

China’s demand for imported pork has risen over the past year because its own pig herds were decimated by an outbreak of African swine fever, and China pledged to buy $40 billion in U.S. agricultural products per year under a trade pact signed in January. China also became the fourth-largest market for American poultry in the first quarter after it lifted a five-year ban on those products. A trade agreement with Japan and a new North American free trade agreement also helped boost exports.

Part of the reason why exports have continued to be so strong this spring is that much of the meat headed overseas was bought up to six months ahead of time — before the virus outbreak took hold in the U.S.


In this May 7, 2020, file photo, workers leave the Tyson Foods pork processing plant in Logansport, Ind. The plant has closed April 25 after nearly 900 employees tested positive for the coronavirus. Workers won't be able to return to work until they get tested. Meat exports are surging this spring at the same time the processing industry is struggling to meet domestic demand as workers get sick with the coronavirus and companies scramble to make plants safer for employees. The meat industry says that if companies manage to keep workers healthy and plants operating, there should be plenty of supply to satisfy both U.S. and export markets. (AP Photo/Michael Conroy, File)

“A lot of these sales were made before COVID-19 hit. China had already made these purchases and then COVID-19 hit. They had actually pre-purchased a lot of this before the plant problems hit,” said Chad Hart, an agricultural economist at Iowa State University.

It’s also worth noting that meat exports to China and other Asian markets include cuts such as pig feet, snouts and internal organs that have little value in the United States. The most popular cuts in the U.S., including bacon and pork chops, largely stay in the domestic market. More than half of the chicken exports to China were chicken feet. And the Meat Export Federation says demand from the export market helps boost meat production in the U.S. because more animals are slaughtered to help meet all the demand.

Iowa Agriculture Secretary Mike Naig said he doesn’t think it makes sense to restrict exports because so much of the meat sold internationally isn’t popular in the U.S.

“I think it’s important to prioritize,” said Naig, whose state leads the nation in pork production. “I think companies should meet the domestic market first and then be free to sell the things that the American consumer doesn’t purchase and the types of things that we don’t normally consume. That’s economically important.”

MONOPOLY CAPITALISM
Meat production in the United States is dominated by a few huge companies — JBS, Smithfield, Tyson Foods and Cargill. Cameron Bruett, a spokesman for JBS, said that Brazilian-owned company has reduced exports to help ensure it can satisfy U.S. demand for its products. Tyson Foods and Cargill didn’t respond to questions about their exports.

Smithfield Foods, which is owned by a Chinese company, said in a statement that it isn’t controlled by any government and that the free market determines what products it exports. JBS declined to respond to questions about its foreign ownership. Purdue University agricultural economist Jayson Lusk said it’s not clear what role the foreign owners play in deciding how much meat is exported.

The industry has been dealing with a number of production challenges caused by the coronavirus, and several large plants had to close temporarily because of outbreaks of COVID-19, the disease it causes. At least 30 U.S. meatpacking workers have died of COVID-19 and another 10,000 have been infected or exposed to the virus, according to the United Food and Commercial Workers union, which represents roughly 80% of the country’s beef and pork workers and 33% of its poultry workers.


In this May 7, 2020, file photo, ghe Pilgrim's Pride packing plant is seen in an aerial view in Cold Spring, Minn. Meat exports are surging this spring at the same time the processing industry is struggling to meet domestic demand as workers get sick with the coronavirus and companies scramble to make plants safer for employees. The meat industry says that if companies manage to keep workers healthy and plants operating, there should be plenty of supply to satisfy both U.S. and export markets. (Aaron Lavinsky/Star Tribune via AP, File)/Star Tribune via AP)

Kansas State agricultural economist Glynn Tonsor said he thinks the industry will get past the shortage concerns within the next several weeks.

“I think it’s important that we note that the U.S. hog industry is large enough to sufficiently supply our domestic market and export. We’ve done that for some time. We’ve been growing volumes in both places for some time,” Tonsor said.

Tyson and Smithfield have both been able to reopen huge pork processing plants that were temporarily closed in Iowa and South Dakota, which should help the industry keep up with demand even if some plants aren’t running at full capacity, said David Herring, of the National Pork Producers Council.

“I really don’t think we’ll see a big problem with meat shortages,” said Herring, who raises hogs near Lillington, North Carolina. “As long as the plants are able to come back up and operate maybe not at 100% but at 80% or 90%, I think we should be good.”

___

Check out more of the AP’s coronavirus coverage at https://apnews.com/VirusOutbreak and https://apnews.com/UnderstandingtheOutbreak

US report indicates broad risk of COVID-19 at wildfire camps

IN this Aug. 18, 2017, file photo, exhaustion reads on the face of a firefighter from Noorvik, Alaska, while he and his team watch for spot fires that threaten to jump the line on the Lolo Peak fire, in Missoula, Mont. A federal risk assessment says wildland firefighters could see widespread outbreaks of COVID-19 at large U.S. fire camps this summer, and the problem is likely to compound the longer fire season lasts. The draft risk assessment created by the U.S. Forest Service predicts that even in a best-case scenario — with firefighters following social distancing protocols and plenty of tests and equipment available — that nearly two dozen people could be infected by the virus while working at a camp like the one used for the Lolo Peak fire. (Kurt Wilson/The Missoulian via AP, File)


BOISE, Idaho (AP) — Outbreaks of the coronavirus could sweep through large camps where crews typically stay as they fight wildfires across the U.S., according to a federal document obtained by The Associated Press, and the problem is likely to get worse the longer the fire season lasts.

The U.S. Forest Service’s draft risk assessment suggests that even in a best-case scenario — with social distancing followed and plenty of tests and protective equipment available — nearly two dozen firefighters could be infected with COVID-19 at a camp with hundreds of people who come in to combat a fire that burns for months.


The worst-case scenario? More than 1,000 infections.

“The Forest Service is diligently working with partners to assess the risk that COVID-19 presents for the 2020 fire season,” the agency said in a statement Wednesday. “It is important to understand that the figures in this report are not predictions, but rather, model possible scenarios.”

The Forest Service said the document was outdated and being redone, and the newest version wasn’t yet ready to share. The AP obtained the draft from an official who has access to it and didn’t want to be named.

One of the authors of the risk assessment said Tuesday that in the new version, the infection rates remain the same. But while the draft originally said the death rate among infected firefighters could reach as high as 6%, that is being revised sharply downward, to less than 2%, to reflect newer data, said Jude Bayham, an assistant professor in the Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics at Colorado State University.

He said the initial death rate was based on data from early in the pandemic, when testing was far more limited. Based on new data, firefighters — who are largely healthy and young — will likely fare far better if they contract COVID-19 than the general population, he said.

For most people, the coronavirus causes mild or moderate symptoms, such as fever and cough that clear up in two to three weeks. For some, especially people who are older or have health problems, it can cause more severe illness, including pneumonia and death.

Federal guidelines released last week reimagine how to combat wildfires to reduce the risk of firefighters getting the virus. The guidelines urge fire managers to use small crews that can have the close contact that firefighting and travel often require, while staying away from other groups. The guidelines recommend avoiding the traditional large camps and relying on military-issue ready-to-eat or bagged meals instead of catered buffet-style meals at campsites.


Some fire managers also are told to take temperatures with their own touchless thermometers if possible. The guidelines say everyone should wear masks and other protective equipment when around those outside their immediate crew. Good cleaning and sanitation is recommended, as is isolating firefighters and potentially entire crews if COVID-19 is detected.

A review of incident reports from wildfires so far this year show the guidelines are difficult, and sometimes impossible, to follow and could actually increase some risks to firefighters.

“We have developed pinch-points that cause operational lapses in guidance that may very well get confused with policy and doctrine. This situation could result in injury — or even unwanted death — of our multiagency employees,” Greg Juvan, a fire management officer with the Idaho Panhandle National Forests, wrote in a report from a small wildfire last month.

Social distancing was difficult, and firefighters found it unrealistic to meet sanitation standards for truck radios, hand tools and other gear used in the initial attack on the Idaho wildfire, Juvan said. Social distancing guidelines call for more vehicles to transport crews, but that led to congestion on the narrow roads leading to the fire. The guidelines could raise one of the greatest risks to wildland firefighters — traffic wrecks, Juvan said.

Even something as basic as sanitizing vehicles proved problematic, with cleaning supplies difficult to find, the report said.

In New Mexico, several agencies responded to a small wildfire last month, with some not practicing social distancing and other virus policies appearing to vary greatly, George Allalunis, a Carson National Forest engine captain, wrote in a report.

For the Forest Service’s draft risk assessment, researchers created scenarios using three actual fires from 2017 and applied disease modeling. They found testing every firefighter before they started work reduced the coronavirus risk most significantly for short, high-intensity wildfires, said Bayham, the professor. But for longer, drawn-out firefights, initial testing was less important than keeping firefighters spread out in small campsites.

The models showed that even with strict pre-work testing and social distancing, about 21 COVID-19 infections could be expected in a large camp like that used for a 2017 fire in Montana. In the worst-case scenario, more than 1,000 firefighters would be infected. The problem could compound as fire crews are sent to new locations over the monthslong fire season, which has largely begun.

The risk assessment will be updated throughout the season, the Forest Service said.

The American West could see higher-than-normal levels of wildfire this year because of drought

Hikers fight plan for TRUMP border wall at start of scenic trail


In this September, 2019 photo by Shannon Villegas shows the Arizona trail, an 800-mile path that starts at the U.S.-Mexico border near Hereford, Ariz., and ends at the Utah border. Mullaney opposes plans for a two-mile stretch of border wall that would go through the monument and destroy the trail's first stop, which hikers consider symbolic and important. (Shannon Villegas via AP)
PHOENIX (AP) — Tess Mullaney remembers looking at endless rolling desert hills, covered in a thin layer of white snow just as the sun was rising the day she embarked on a 2½-month journey through the Arizona Trail, an 800-mile system that starts at the U.S.-Mexico border in Arizona and ends at the Utah one.

In a picture from that February 2019, Mullaney, 28, is smiling as she poses behind a thin barbed-wire fence that divides Arizona from Mexico. She’s standing next to Border Monument 102, an engraved pillar marking the boundary of the United States. Engraved in the monument is this warning:

“The destruction or displacement of this monument is a misdemeanor punishable by the United States or Mexico”

Now, the government is proposing to do just that. It plans on building a 30-foot (9 meter) border wall there, threatening the view so many hikers marvel at— and the ecological life around it.

Mullaney and others are calling on the government to abandon plans to build two miles (3.2 kilometers) of new fencing they say will destroy the monument that marks the beginning of the Arizona Trail, which is also within the Coronado National Memorial. That southern terminus marks where some believe Spanish explorer Francisco Vázquez de Coronado first crossed into Arizona from Sonora in the mid 1500s in his quest to find gold.

The government also plans to build a ground detection system, a road and new lighting. It’s part of President Donald Trump’s plan to build hundreds of miles of border wall, a campaign promise he has so far maintained.

In this February, 2019 self-portrait, Tess Mullaney of Phoenix, Ariz., poses at the southern terminus of the Arizona Trail, an 800-mile path that starts at the U.S.-Mexico border near Hereford, Ariz., and ends at the Utah border. Mullaney opposes plans for a two-mile stretch of border wall that would go through the monument and destroy the trail's first stop, which hikers consider symbolic and important. (Tess Mullaney via AP)

“To remove not only this symbolism, but also the beauty, seclusion, protection, and wildlife migratory abilities in this area would be saddening to all who enjoy it,” Mullaney said.

Known as “thru-hikers,” an estimated 700 people traverse the entirety of the Arizona Trail in one trip, and thousands more hike different parts of the trail, each year. Thru-hikers have to first be dropped off at a trailhead two miles from the border. They then hike down to the monument that marks where the trail starts, a crucial marker for adventurers, said Matthew J. Nelson, executive director of the Arizona Trail Association.

For years, that part of the border has been protected by a small barbed-wire fence, and Nelson said he doesn’t know of any issues with illegal border crossers there. The area is mountainous and rugged, difficult to access from the south.

Nelson said his opposition to the border wall project at that location isn’t political, but about preserving the crucial point of a massive trail that took volunteers years to complete. He says the trail attracts thousands of visitors who stimulate the local economies of nearby communities, like the city of Sierra Vista.

“It’s a point of pride, and so I hope that people recognize that impact to a quarter-mile of the trail is an impact to the entire 800-mile organism,” Nelson said.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection didn’t immediately answer questions about the project at the trail. During a press briefing in Tucson on Tuesday, Acting Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Chad Wolf said the administration’s top goal is border security and that officials routinely meet with concerned stakeholders. Wolf was addressing a question about concerns that environmental groups have expressed about construction on federally protected land.

In this February, 2019 self-portrait, Tess Mullaney of Phoenix, Ariz., poses at the southern terminus of the Arizona Trail, an 800-mile path that starts at the U.S.-Mexico border near Hereford, Ariz., and ends at the Utah border. Mullaney opposes plans for a two-mile stretch of border wall that would go through the monument and destroy the trail's first stop, which hikers consider symbolic and important. (Tess Mullaney via AP)

\
“But at the end of the day, I think the administration has been very clear on this front, which is border security is national security is homeland security. So we’re gonna secure that border every way we can,” Wolf said.

Wolf said decisions about where to build border barriers and where to rely more on technology for surveillance depend on factors like illegal traffic in that area and how accessible it is.

“Those decisions are not being made by the secretary. They’re being made by the operators on the ground. So I think the best thing this administration has done is we’ve actually listened to the operators,” Wolf said.

The proposed project along the Coronado National Memorial is one of several planned for Arizona, which shares about 370 miles of border with Mexico.

Although the spot is federally protected by the National Trail System Act, the government has the power to override such a designation in the name of national security. It has already done that in places like Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument, where construction workers have removed hundreds of protected cactuses and blasted through a mountain to build a new wall.

Greg Kilroy, a 50-year-old residential real estate agent, remembers first approaching the trail’s southern terminus— Border Monument 102— in August, when most of Arizona is scorching, but when the high altitude and mountainous area is nice and cool.

“It’s really epic,” Kilroy said. “It was also the beginning of our trip, and so it was really exciting, really kind of magical, and, not gonna lie, a little bit of fear and anxiety of what are we taking on here as part of the really long journey.”

It took Kilroy and his friend four years and about 17 different trips to complete the 800-mile trail. He said they found discarded trash they think was probably left behind by border crossers, but never encountered another person there.

“It was a true kind of wilderness experience. And boy the wall would sure fly in the face of that,” Kilroy said.

In this February, 2019 photo by Tess Mullaney shows the southern terminus of the Arizona Trail, an 800-mile path that starts at the U.S.-Mexico border near Hereford, Ariz., and ends at the Utah border. Mullaney opposes plans for a two-mile stretch of border wall that would go through the monument and destroy the trail's first stop, which hikers consider symbolic and important. (Tess Mullaney via AP)

Nine U.S. states sue EPA for easing environmental enforcement amid pandemic

By Valerie Volcovici

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Nine states on Wednesday filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for relaxing a range of companies' compliance and monitoring requirements with federal clean air and water laws in response to the coronavirus pandemic, arguing the policy is too broad and not transparent.

ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTING AGENCY

© Reuters/LUCY NICHOLSON The Environmental Protection Agency headquarters is seen in Washington, D.C.

Under the temporary policy announced on March 26, the EPA said it would not seek penalties for violations of routine compliance monitoring, integrity testing, sampling, laboratory analysis, training, and reporting or certification obligations in situations where the EPA agrees that COVID-19 was the cause.

The states, led by New York Attorney General Letitia James, argued that the EPA issued a broad and open-ended policy that gives polluters too much leeway instead of using enforcement discretion "as authorized by law."

"The policy’s effective waiver of these requirements, which are foundational to our federal environmental laws, exceeds EPA’s authority," the attorneys general said.

The coalition of the nine states - New York, California, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, Vermont and Virginia - argue that the EPA lacks legal authority to waive "critical monitoring and reporting obligations that inform regulators and the general public of pollution hazards" and failed to weigh the impacts the relaxation policy will have on public health amid the coronavirus pandemic.

Their lawsuit comes a month after more than a dozen environmental groups led by the Natural Resources Defense Council, whose president is former Obama EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy filed their own challenge in the same New York federal court.

Former Obama EPA enforcement chief Cynthia Giles, who filed a brief last week supporting the environmental group lawsuit, told Reuters that the agency has never applied this kind of policy so broadly.

"In the past, EPA has only eased compliance obligations in a targeted way to address specific problems, such as Superstorm Sandy," she said.

Current EPA chief Andrew Wheeler told reporters in March that the coronavirus outbreak was an unprecedented national crisis and that he expected "regulated facilities to comply with regulatory requirements, where reasonably practicable."

(Reporting by Valerie Volcovici; Editing by Marguerita Choy)