Ted Cruz Bizarrely Invokes Thanos and 'Watchmen' to Attack Environmentalists

Sen. Ted Cruz tried to use comic books to illustrate a point against environmentalists in a clip passed around Monday and Tuesday. It went over poorly, both among fans and creators.

"Have you noticed in how many movies, how often rabid environmentalists are the bad guys? Whether it's Thanos or… go to 'Watchmen.' The view of the left is people are a disease," Cruz said on his streaming show, "Verdict," while trying to explain his view that Democrats and progressives want to tell conservatives which jobs they can and cannot have.

He went on to insist that left-leaning politicians and voters buy into the idea that "there are too many people in the world, that people are bad and that everything would be better if we had fewer people." To make his point, he cited Thanos, the villain in "Avengers: Endgame" who seeks to wipe out half the population.

Responses came swiftly.

"Hi, @SenTedCruz," wrote Lila Byock. "Watchmen writer/producer here. Literally what the f— are you talking about?"

"Guardians of the Galaxy" director James Gunn quipped, "Maybe he can start with pronouncing Thanos correctly & then work his way up to making sense."

Comic book artist Jamal Igle went a deeper, explaining, "Just so that we're clear: Thanos was a genocidal madman. He thought wiping out half the population of the universe would make things better. He admitted he was wrong because people were mad and then decided to just wipeout everything and start over. That's not environnementalism. [sic]"

Others, like filmmaker Adam Best, got more political: "Thanos didn't think half the population mattered, which is exactly how the president Ted Cruz spent the last four years worshipping felt."

U.S. technology company Clearview AI violated Canadian privacy law: report

American technology firm Clearview AI violated Canadian privacy laws by collecting photos of Canadians without their knowledge or consent, an investigation by four of Canada's privacy commissioner has found.

© Ascannio/Shutterstock

 A report by four Canadian privacy commissioners has found Clearview AI's technology created a significant risk to individuals by allowing law enforcement and companies to match photos against its database of more than three billion images, including Canadians and children. Clearview AI's software collects images from the internet and allows users to search for matches.The report found that Clearview's technology created a significant risk to individuals by allowing law enforcement and companies to match photos against its database of more than three billion images, including Canadians and children.

The report rejected arguments from the company that it wasn't subject to Canadian privacy laws and that the images in its database were publicly available.

"What Clearview does is mass surveillance and it is illegal," federal privacy commissioner Daniel Therrien said in a statement. "It is completely unacceptable for millions of people who will never be implicated in any crime to find themselves continually in a police lineup.

"Yet the company continues to claim its purposes were appropriate, citing the requirement under federal privacy law that its business needs to be balanced against privacy rights."

The report by four of Canada's privacy commissioners comes nearly seven months after Clearview agreed to no longer make its controversial facial recognition software available in Canada. A number of Canadian law enforcement agencies, including the RCMP, Toronto and Calgary police, had been using the advanced technology to help identify perpetrators and victims of crimes.

With the technology, police could input the picture of a victim or suspected criminal and compare it with billions of photos it had collected from the internet and social media accounts.

However, privacy experts expressed concerns that the technology could be misused.

While police forces said last summer that they stopped using Clearview AI, questions remained about what would happen to the personal information of Canadians that the company had already collected and whether the company would stop collecting personal information belonging to Canadians.

In July, company CEO Hoan Ton-That said the company had ceased its operations in Canada. He said Canadians would be able to opt out of Clearview's search results.

"We are proud of our record in assisting Canadian law enforcement to solve some of the most heinous crimes, including crimes against children," Ton-That said in a statement at the time. "We will continue to co-operate with the (Office of the Privacy Commissioner) on other related issues."

Lisa Linden, spokeswoman for the company, said Wednesday that the company would respond to the report after it reviewed it.

More later.....

US Agriculture secretary nominee Vilsack endorses biofuels push

BIOFUELS ARE NEITHER CLEAN NOR GREEN 

THEY ARE A SUBSIDY TO IOWA CORN FARMERS & ADM

WASHINGTON — Tom Vilsack, President Joe Biden's nominee for secretary of agriculture, pledged Tuesday to focus on climate change initiatives and work to address racial inequities in agricultural assistance programs.

© Provided by The Canadian Press

Vilsack, who testified before the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee, would bring much on-the-job experience to the position. In addition to serving two terms as the governor of Iowa, he spent eight years as President Barack Obama's Agriculture Secretary.

In his opening remarks, Vilsack, 70, sought to dispel concerns that he would be coming to the job with antiquated ideas.

“I realize that I am back again. But I also realize that this is a fundamentally different time,” he said, referencing a need to rebuild parts of the country's agricultural infrastructure in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.

“The reality is we lacked openness, fairness and competitiveness and resiliency, as the COVID-19 crisis has shown, in many of our agricultural markets,” he said.

In his testimony, Vilsack heavily endorsed boosting climate-friendly agricultural industries such as the creation of biofuels.

“Agriculture is one of our first and best ways to get some wins in this climate area,” he said.

He proposed “building a rural economy based on biomanufacturing” and “turning agricultural waste into a variety of products.” He pledged to work closely with the Environmental Protection Agency to “spur the industry” on biofuels.

Republican Joni Ernst of Iowa questioned whether Vilsack's commitment to biofuels would clash with the Biden administration's public commitment to switch the federal vehicle fleet to electric cars and trucks.

“We're going to need both,” he responded, saying there was room for both climate-friendly industries to thrive and pointing out that the Navy has begun to deploy warships that run partially on biofuel.

With systemic racial inequity now a nationwide talking point, Vilsack said the Agriculture Department needed to seriously examine if it was sufficiently supporting farmers of colour.

He envisioned an “equity taskforce” to identify what he called “intentional or unintentional barriers that make it difficult for people to access the programs.”

Sonny Perdue, agriculture secretary in the Trump administration, sought to purge hundreds of thousands of people from the SNAP or Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program — commonly known as food stamps. That effort was defeated in court, and Vilsack said the SNAP program was particularly vital to the country's recovery from the pandemic.

He said he wanted his department to work directly with governors across the country to make sure SNAP benefits were being accessed smoothly and to address the issue of food deserts in low-income communities.

“It’s all well and good to give someone a SNAP card and say, ‘Go to your local grocery store and buy more food,’" he said. "That’s great, assuming you have a grocery store. But if you don’t have a grocery store, what then?”

Vilsack seems to enjoy bipartisan support and faced no serious criticism from Republicans on the committee. Senators from both parties seemed to treat his confirmation as a foregone conclusion, and at one point New York Democrat Kirsten Gillibrand referred to Vilsack as "Mr. soon-to-be Secretary.”

Ashraf Khalil, The Associated Press

US Treasury Department calls addressing climate change a priority


Newly confirmed Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen is giving climate change a prominent role in her talks with her counterparts around the world, signaling a significant shift by the Biden administration to prioritize addressing climate change not just from the White House but also at the agency. © / Getty Images Janet Yellen

Yellen has spoken to the finance ministers of Italy, Japan, Canada, France, Germany and the United Kingdom since being sworn in less than a week ago, according to statements provided by the Treasury Department regarding those talks. In all of those calls, "forcefully addressing the threat of climate change" has been discussed as one of Yellen's top priorities and tackling climate change has been a topic of conversation, according to those statements.



Play Video
Biden's Treasury nominee Janet Yellen pushes for "big" action at confirmation hearing


Yellen's early focus on climate change with other finance leaders comes after she told senators during her confirmation hearing last month she would appoint someone at a senior level within the Treasury Department to address efforts on climate change and create a "hub" within her department focused on the risks climate change poses to the financial system and tax policy-related incentives.


Her remarks came in response to a question posed by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse. The Rhode Island Democrat cited warnings that climate change will lead to a crash in the value of coastal properties as well as concerns about the so-called "carbon bubble" – or massive investments in the fossil fuel sector.

"I think we need to seriously look at assessing the risks to the financial system from climate change," Yellen said during the hearing, in which she also called climate change an "existential threat."

Yellen acknowledged climate change and the policies implemented to address it could have a major impact on the value of assets and credit risks within the financial system.

"I think everyone understands that the State Department has an important role, the EPA has an important role, but the Treasury actually is really influential in global discussions around finance and climate," said Joe Thwaites, an associate in the Sustainable Finance Center of the nonprofit research organization the World Resources Institute. Thwaites said the administration's "whole-of-government approach" has been well received.

Prior to her nomination last year, Yellen co-chaired a working group on climate change and finance for Group of 30, an international organization comprised of academics, economic officials and bank leaders, which released a report calling for immediate action to put the world economy on a path toward a net-zero carbon economy by 2050. The working group recommended governments to come up with strategies including implementing carbon pricing as well as invest in low-carbon infrastructure.

In a dramatic shift from the Trump administration, President Joe Biden is making tackling climate change a central component of his agenda. Just hours after being sworn in, he signed an order recommitting the United States to the Paris Climate Agreement, which the Trump administration had announced in 2019 the U.S. would exit. Last week, Mr. Biden also signed a series of executive actions aimed at combating climate change.

"That's something that in the campaign, Biden said he wanted to see the end of fossil fuel subsidies globally by the end of his first term, so the Treasury Department will play a key role in that domestically, but also as it engages internationally," said Thwaites. "There's this recognition that it's not just about turning off the faucet of dirty energy flows, but also to ramp up clean energy financing."

Ending the use of fossil fuels and building renewable energy is the mission of the international organization 350. The group is closely monitoring where Yellen and the Treasury Department go with fossil fuel financing.

"Our hope for Janet Yellen and her communication internationally is that she is a leader in generating discourse of the effect of the finance community on the climate," said Brett Fleishman, head of 350.org Finance Campaigns. But he argued she needs to walk the walk at home as well.

"Is her rhetoric signaling positive change? Absolutely," said Fleishman. "Now we just need to see some of those general statements about climate being an urgent priority and guiding policy, if that all turns into the kind of action driving the just transition."

Biden wants millions of clean-energy related jobs. Can it happen?

Last week, President Joe Biden reaffirmed his commitment to addressing climate change by creating green energy jobs, building out a "modern and sustainable infrastructure" toward his continued goal of reaching a carbon-free energy sector in the US by 2035.

© Provided by CNN

In remarks last week before signing several executive orders focused on his climate agenda, Biden tied his energy policy directly to his plans to rebuild the US economy, citing the need for new, green infrastructure that would generate millions of jobs.

"A key plank of our Build Back Better Recovery Plan is building a modern, resilient climate infrastructure," Biden said, "and clean energy future that will create millions of good-paying union jobs -- not 7, 8, 10, 12 dollars an hour, but prevailing wage and benefits."

During his campaign, Biden's climate agenda included the goal of creating 10 million new jobs related to clean energy on top of the 3 million clean energy jobs the campaign said currently exist. "If executed strategically, our response to climate change can create more than 10 million well-paying jobs in the United States," the plan says, without laying out a timeline for that jobs-creating goal.

It's certainly an ambitious goal. Measuring the feasibility of Biden's plan is quite difficult and depends on several variables, including whether Congress will pass climate legislation. Biden has proposed a $2 trillion climate plan, which includes spending on things such as green energy infrastructure overhaul across the US. Green jobs are also hard to define, with different studies varying widely on what type of jobs they choose to include. For context, it's also worth examining the climate and energy efforts of President Barack Obama, many of which were repealed under President Donald Trump, and the effect they had on green jobs.

Under the eight years of Obama's presidency, the US economy added 11.6 million total new jobs, which only adds to the steepness of Biden's challenge, if as he said during his campaign, he wants to create 10 million new clean energy jobs.

Clean energy job numbers

Measuring the feasibility of Biden's plan first requires establishing what these clean energy-related jobs are and getting good data to establish a baseline and historical trends, which isn't easy.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics studied what it called "green jobs" starting in 2010 before budget cuts stopped the study in 2013. The BLS defined these jobs broadly, in part as those "in which workers' duties involve making their establishment's production processes more environmentally friendly or use fewer natural resources."

This definition was not limited to those who directly contribute to building, installing or maintaining green energy technology but was so broad it included jobs in sewage, publishers of environmental trade publications and environment and science museums, to name a few.

In the survey for 2010, the BLS reported the US had "3.1 million green goods and services (GGS) jobs."

A 2020 report from Environmental Entrepreneurs, a non-partisan group of business leaders focused on environment and the economy, found that "[b]efore the COVID-19 crisis, nearly 3.4 million Americans worked in clean energy—solar, wind, energy efficiency, clean vehicles, and more."

Bob Keefe, executive director of Environmental Entrepreneurs, said the study was not focused on the broad category of "green jobs," but rather jobs involved in the process of clean energy.

Video: Joe Biden has a message for coal workers (CNN)

"[P]eople can call whatever they want a green job," Keefe said, "whether it's somebody who works in recycling or something like that. OK, fine they are green jobs. I'm talking about clean energy jobs."

According to the report from Environmental Entrepreneurs, these clean energy jobs increased by about 2% in 2019 and 4% in 2018. But for Biden to reach just a million new clean energy jobs in his first four years, there would need to be a yearly increase of 6.7% based on the figures from the Environmental Entrepreneurs report, and that's after returning to pre-Covid levels of employment.

Obama's efforts

Obama, who campaigned heavily on addressing climate change, ran into significant roadblocks everywhere from the courts, legislation dying in the Senate and ultimately having many of his administration's new environmental regulations repealed under President Donald Trump.

Obama did pass the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in February 2009 to jumpstart the economy in the midst of the recession. The Recovery Act contained grants and loans for the EPA and Department of Energy.

One study led by Syracuse Professor David Popp examined the "green" funds from the Recovery act -- focused on environment-related issues -- and found that for every $1 million spent, 10 new jobs were created a few years later.

"Almost all of those jobs were in manual labor, a lot of them were construction," Popp told CNN. "A lot of that's by design because that's where the money was targeted" through energy efficiency renovations and installing renewable energy infrastructure.

Cap and trade legislation, which would have set limits on carbon dioxide emissions for companies, died in a Senate controlled by 57 Democrats -- seven more than Biden currently has -- after the House passed the bill in 2009.

"[Obama] had this one huge setback, and then he lost control of Congress," Adam Rome, an environmental historian at the University at Buffalo, told CNN.

Despite Democrats only controlling Congress by a razor thin margin, Rome said, Biden could have the opportunity to work toward "legislative, not executive action" to address climate change.

"Biden, I think, recognizes that he has the kind of New Deal moment here," Rome said.

Biden's challenge

Biden can't accomplish his vast, $2 trillion clean energy plan without action from Congress. Right now the President would need every Senate Democrat on board to pass any legislation needed -- and he may even need Republicans signing on too if Democrats like Sens. Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema continue to oppose eliminating the filibuster.

The current pandemic also creates limitations on what Biden can currently accomplish in Congress, with most members focused on a Covid-19 economic stimulus package. And if the President is unable to pass a stimulus package, it's extremely unlikely his climate agenda would.

Even if Biden passes his energy plan, through a Senate with strong disagreements over environmental policies, experts disagree on whether his goal of millions more clean energy jobs is attainable.

"If the question is, do I think that the Biden plans are going to create millions of jobs, the answer is yes," Keefe told CNN. "Is it 10 million? Is it 20 million? I think that's to be determined."

Keefe noted that some of these future jobs are already being planned, with General Motors announcing that by 2035 it would only be producing emission free vehicles.

Benjamin Zycher, a resident scholar focused on energy and environmental policy at the American Enterprise Institute, a right-leaning think tank, told CNN that "more expensive energy means less employment. It's just that simple."

"The best you could hope for," Zycher said, "is merely an employment shift out of other sectors into green sectors, however that's defined."

 

Starship rocket SpaceX hopes to send to Mars explodes

Duration: 00:47 

A prototype rocket that SpaceX hopes will one day send astronauts to Mars crashed and exploded on its return to the ground during a test launch in Texas on Tuesday. It's the second time that the prototype Starship rocket has failed to land successfully.

FAA denied SpaceX a safety waiver. Its Starship SN8 rocket launched anyway

On Dec. 9, 2020, SpaceX sent one of its Starship Mars rocket prototypes, dubbed SN8, on a high-altitude test flight for the first time. The successful launch and flight ended with a dramatic and explosive hard landing, which Elon Musk had warned ahead of time might be the outcome.

© Provided by CNET Boom. SpaceX's Starship SN8 prototype had an eventful landing. SpaceX

On Tuesday, we learned the whole scene came in defiance of the Federal Aviation Administration, the US regulatory agency that oversees much of commercial space activity and licenses SpaceX's Starship prototypes to operate in American airspace.

"Prior to the Starship SN8 test launch in December 2020, SpaceX sought a waiver to exceed the maximum public risk allowed by federal safety regulations," reads a statement from an FAA spokesperson. "After the FAA denied the request, SpaceX proceeded with the flight. As a result of this non-compliance, the FAA required SpaceX to conduct an investigation of the incident. All testing that could affect public safety at the Boca Chica, Texas, launch site was suspended until the investigation was completed and the FAA approved the company's corrective actions to protect public safety."

© SpaceX BOOM. SpaceX's Starship SN8 prototype had an eventful landing.

This revelation came on the same morning the FAA announced it finally gave the green light for SN8's successor, SN9, to make its own high-altitude test flight from the company's Boca Chica, Texas, development facility.

SN9 successfully launched and flew Tuesday afternoon and then suffered an explosive crash landing very similar to the final fate of SN8. Tuesday evening, the FAA said it would open and oversee an investigation into SN9's "landing mishap."

FAA later provided more details on the launch of SN8 in December, explaining that "the company proceeded with the launch without demonstrating that the public risk from far field blast overpressure was within the regulatory criteria."

Basically, the FAA is saying SpaceX didn't demonstrate that the risk to the public from a potential explosive blast wave was within legal limits, but it went ahead and launched SN8 anyway.

"The FAA required SpaceX to conduct an investigation of the incident, including a comprehensive review of the company's safety culture, operational decision-making and process discipline," an FAA spokesperson said in an emailed statement. "The FAA-approved corrective actions implemented by SpaceX enhanced public safety. Those actions were incorporated into today's SN9 launch. We anticipate taking no further enforcement action on SN8 matter."

So it appears SpaceX launched a prototype rocket without all proper regulatory approvals, and the only consequence was to perform an internal review and have the launch of its next prototype delayed by a few days.

SpaceX didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.

The launch of SN9 had been repeatedly pushed back during January. Last week it became clear approval from the FAA was the primary holdup, leading Elon Musk to criticize the agency publicly on Twitter.

Nonetheless, the FAA said Friday it was working with SpaceX to approve a modified license for the launch of SN9.

"The corrective actions arising from the SN8 incident are incorporated into the SN9 launch license," the FAA said

© Provided by CNET SN8's last moments. SpaceX video capture

"I am trying to wrap my mind around this right now, and will likely have more to say about it, but I am just in complete shock that a licensee has violated a launch license and there seems to be no repercussions," former FAA official Jared Zambrano-Stout wrote on Twitter. "If a licensee violates the terms of their launch license, they did so knowing that an uninvolved member of the public could have been hurt or killed. That is not exaggeration. They took a calculated risk with your life and property."

An FAA spokesperson said the agency will likely not be providing further comment on the incident.

Follow CNET's 2021 Space Calendar to stay up to date with all the latest space news this year. You can even add it to your own Google Calendar.

How experts say Trump galvanized extremists who sieged the Capitol

Nearly a month after a pro-Trump mob violently stormed the U.S. Capitol, a clearer picture is emerging of the individuals and groups involved as federal authorities arrest and charge people who allegedly participated in the riot.

© Samuel Corum/Getty Images

Former President Donald Trump’s supporters -- 74 million of whom voted to give him a second term in 2020 -- are diverse in background and ideology and come from all corners of the United States, and those who stormed the Capitol represent just a fraction.

But to some experts, the hundreds who took part in the Capitol siege represent some of the most fervent and radical adherents of the “Make America Great Again” movement and others caught up in the frenzy of the day. They say attempts to unite those extremist elements fell apart after Charlottesville but gained renewed momentum in 2020, with racial unrest, the pandemic and most recently the unfounded controversy over the election.

© Jon Cherry/Getty Images Pro-Trump protesters gather in front of the U.S. Capitol Building, Jan. 6, 2021, in Washington, D.C., before a mob stormed the Capitol, breaking windows and clashing with police officers, as congress gathered to certify the election of Joe Biden.

Cynthia Miller-Idriss, a sociology professor at American University who studies extremism and far-right movements, said that those who stormed the Capitol are a “loose coalition” of groups from across the far-right spectrum.

“These were people who were radicalized and participated in an insurrection, it’s just that some did so in a very planned way, and I think others ended up being caught up spontaneously in mob rioting," Miller-Idriss said.

For the experts, the most prominent force that unified hard-right adherent, militias and other Trump supporters and whipped them up into a frenzy behind the idea that the election was stolen -- Trump himself.

And Trump, unlike past presidents, gave these disparate groups a national platform unlike any they'd had in modern American history with the instantaneous recognition and feedback of social media.

Trump’s false claims about election fraud and his rhetoric post-election urging his supporters to fight back is at the heart of the former president’s Senate impeachment trial, which is set to begin next week. The House of Representatives voted to impeach Trump on Jan. 13 after House Democrats filed an article of impeachment, charging him with "incitement of insurrection."

ABC News reached out to the former president’s legal team but representatives declined to comment.The symbols of hate and far-right extremism on display in pro-Trump Capitol siege
The makeup of the mobThe investigation into the Capitol siege is a massive law enforcement undertaking and continues to evolve every day, with more than 140 arrests and counting.

Larry Rosenthal, chair and lead researcher of the Berkeley Center for Right-Wing Studies, said that the mob was generally made up of two groups: “right-wing populists,” whom he described as part of Trump’s most faithful “rally-goers,” and right-wing militia groups that represent two overlapping “currents” of the far-right movement: white nationalism and anti-government.

© Samuel Corum/Getty Images President Donald Trump is seen on a screen as his supporters cheer during a rally Jan. 6, 2021, in Washington, D.C.

Some of these ideologies and beliefs were on display in far-right insignia scattered among the crowd, which included symbols of the Confederacy, Nazism, white supremacy and anarchy.

And some of those arrested have documented their alleged involvement on social media and some have known ties to far-right groups, or are adherents of disproven conspiracy theories.

The men behind QAnon

In addition to a diverse and loose coalition of groups involved, the members of the mob were also not racially and ethnically homogenous.

Although the majority of rioters at the “Stop the Steal” rally were white, the Trump mob was “not a homogenous group of white nationalists," Cristina Beltrán, a professor at New York University who studies race, ethnicity and American politics, said.

© Manuel Balce Ceneta/AP, FILE Jacob Chansley and other supporters of President Donald Trump are confronted by U.S. Capitol Police officers outside the Senate Chamber inside the Capitol in Washington, Jan. 6, 2021.

In fact, one of the organizers of “Stop the Steal” is far-right activist and conspiracy theorist Ali Alexander, who identifies as Arab and Black. “Blacks for Trump” signs were spotted in the crowd and some Black and Latino participants are now wanted by the FBI for their alleged involvement in the siege.

In order to understand Trump’s support, “we must think in terms of multiracial whiteness,” Beltrán writes in a Washington Post op-ed: “Multiracial whiteness reflects an understanding of whiteness as a political color and not simply a racial identity — a discriminatory worldview in which feelings of freedom and belonging are produced through the persecution and dehumanization of others.”

The motivations of the mob

After weeks of hearing false claims from Trump and his allies that the election was stolen, thousands of the former president's most loyal followers disrupted the certification of the 2020 election results by breaching the U.S. Capitol and

 clashing with law enforcement in a violent siege that resulted in the death of five people.

© Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images Supporters listen as US President Donald Trump speaks on The Ellipse outside of the White House, Jan. 6, 2021, in Washington, D.C.

“This insistence -- and not just Trump’s, but other elected officials’ insistence on that narrative of disinformation and that false conspiracy about the election has played a huge role in mobilizing these people,” Miller-Idriss said.

In fact, chants shouted by rioters and signs spotted in the crowd closely mirrored Trump’s own words.

For instance, the rally was named “Stop the Steal,” a phrase the Trump appeared to revel in and tweeted repeatedly before his account was suspended; shortly after Trump urged supporters to march to the Capitol and “fight like hell,” rioters shouted “fight for Trump” as they violently breached law enforcement to enter the building; signs reading “take back our country” and “Trump won the legal vote” were spotted among rioters, reflecting language Trump has been using for weeks on Twitter as he repeated his false claims that the election was stolen from him.

© Jon Cherry/Getty Images Member of a pro-Trump mob exit the Capitol Building after teargas is dispersed inside, Jan. 6, 2021, in Washington, D.C.

This is what Trump told supporters before many stormed Capitol Hill

And finally, after Trump continued to falsely claim that Vice President Mike Pence could refuse to ratify President Joe Biden's 2020 win -- but had declined to do so, chants of “Hang Mike Pence” were heard among rioters and images casting Pence as a traitor were scattered among the crowd.

“(Trump) was continuing to propagate and circulate and disseminate this information about the election in ways that posed an existential threat to them and made them feel that their democracy has been stolen,” Miller-Idriss said.

"People move from radicalization into mobilization, to really believing that they are not only empowered to act, but compelled to do so.”

© Andrew Harnik/AP People shelter in the House gallery as protesters try to break into the House Chamber at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, in Washington.

The leader of the mob

According to Rosenthal, far-right groups that subscribe to white nationalist ideologies have always existed in the United States and since the second era of the Ku Klux Klan in the 1920s and 30s they have generally existed on the fringes of society, but Trump gave them a place in national politics.

© John Minchillo/AP Trump supporters gather outside the U.S. Capitol, Jan. 6, 2021, in Washington.

“Suddenly, in 2015 at the level of presidential politics, somebody is talking their language,” he added, pointing to Trump's anti-immigrant and racially charged rhetoric.

During his presidency, Trump frequently failed to condemn white supremacists and far-right groups espousing hateful and disproven conspiracy theories. He also often galvanized their causes.

The “Stop the Steal” movement energized some of the same elements of the far-right movement in the U.S. that shaped the August 2017 “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville when hundreds of so-called alt-right groups took to the streets to violently protest the removal of Confederate monuments.Why Trump's response to Capitol siege evokes memories of Charlottesville

“The ‘Unite the Right’ [movement] failed. It did not create such a unified militia and the groups that put it together started falling apart among themselves … the alt-right kind of went into decline, but 2020 resurrected things,” Rosenthal said.

This past year, anti-lockdown and anti-mask demonstrations amid the COVID-19 pandemic “inflamed the anti-government” right-wing militia groups, while the Black Lives Matter protests that erupted over the summer following the police killing of George Floyd “activated the white nationalist side” of the far-right movement, Rosenthal added.

© Samuel Corum/Getty Images Supporters of President Donald Trump gather in the rain for a rally at Freedom Plaza, Jan. 5, 2021, in Washington, D.C., the day before a mob of Trump supporters stormed the Capitol following a rally with Trump.

And Trump, who was outspoken on both issues, elevated these positions to the national stage, experts said.

As president, Trump repeatedly downplayed the pandemic, refused to implement a nationwide mask mandate, mostly refused to wear a mask himself and his administration frequently flouted federal safety guidelines meant to curb the crisis.

Meanwhile, during his 2020 campaign, Trump cast himself as the “law and order” candidate, slammed the Black Lives Matter movement, dismissed concerns surrounding systemic racism and police brutality and in a message to voters, he claimed that if he is not re-elected, crime and riots will overtake the suburbs.

© Jacquelyn Martin/AP President Donald Trump arrives to speak at a rally Wednesday, Jan. 6, 2021, in Washington D.C.

During his final weeks in office, the coalition of far-right groups again found a common cause around the baseless cause that the election had been stolen or rigged.

The white nationalist and anti-government currents compounded in "Stop the Steal," along with an important element of "fascist mobilizations," Rosenthal said: "A devotion to a singular leader who can command their attention.”

ABC News' Alexander Mallin and John Santucci contributed to this report.

It looks like some Capitol rioters are taking plea deals and agreeing to sell each other out

jshamsian@insider.com (Jacob Shamsian) 

© Provided by Business Insider Rioters clash with police using big ladder trying to enter Capitol building through the front doors. Lev Radin/Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images

Legal experts think some of the people charged in the Capitol riot may be cooperating with federal prosecutors.

The Daily Beast identified several charged with an information rather than a grand jury indictment.
An information charge usually means someone plans to plead guilty, and often indicates cooperation.


Federal prosecutors are nearly a month into their investigations into people who stormed the Capitol building on January 6, filing charges against more than 200 people so far.

Court records indicate some of those people may be informing the FBI about other participants, according to The Daily Beast.

The Daily Beast identified three people who had been subjected to a charging instrument called an information, rather than a grand jury indictment.

An information is a type of charging instrument prosecutors typically use when the defendant plans to plead guilty.

According to Randy Zelin, a criminal defense attorney at Wilk Auslander LLP and adjunct professor at Cornell Law School, it also typically means the defendant is cooperating with government prosecutors.

"If the government is drawing up an information, and someone is working this out with the government, more often than not, that means that they're cooperating and entered into a cooperation agreement with the government," Zelin told Insider.

It's not yet certain if the individuals charged with informations are necessarily cooperating, or have just agreed to plead guilty without a cooperation agreement. Prosecutors don't furnish the full list of witnesses until shortly before the trial begins.

"Generally speaking, cooperative agreements are sealed, because the very essence of a cooperation agreement is that you are cooperating against someone else," Zelin said. "And the government doesn't want that other defendant to know who the cooperators are."

© Provided by INSIDER Protesters broke into Capitol Building on January 06, 2021.

 (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)

But prosecutors are sure to seek the cooperation of at least some of the 200-plus people charged. Former Justice Department prosecutor Neama Rahman told The Daily Beast it's unlikely for prosecutors to charge someone with an information unless plea negotiations are underway.

"Cooperation is always likely in federal cases, especially here, where the US Attorney's Office has both significant leverage and wants to identify the ringleaders in this sedition conspiracy, as well as other potential domestic terrorist threats," Rahman said. "It's uncommon to have this large of a gathering of political extremists from all across the country, so the government will have a treasure trove of information and witnesses to work with."

Justice Department representatives didn't immediately respond to Insider's request for comment.

One of the people charged with an information is Matthew Mazzocco, who was arrested at his home in Texas on January 17 after posting videos of his involvement online. According to court records reviewed by Insider, Mazzocco was first charged with a criminal complaint. On Thursday, he was charged with an information on similar counts, a day before he was ordered to appear in court later this week.

Zelin said that once pleas are formalized, we could have a better understanding of who may be cooperating with prosecutors. People who cooperate are likely to receive lesser charges than those who don't, he said.

"That would give you a little bit more insight as to whether or not someone is actually cooperating," he said. "Because the better the deal is, the more likely it is that what they've given up in return for getting that better deal is cooperating." Expanded Coverage Module: capitol-siege-module

Read the original article on Insider

Verity Pharma and India's SII apply to distribute AstraZeneca vaccine in Canada


By Allison Martell and Euan Rocha

© Reuters/FRANCIS MASCARENHAS FILE PHOTO: A nurse displays a vial of COVISHIELD, the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine manufactured by Serum Institute of India, in Mumbai

TORONTO/NEW DELHI (Reuters) - Verity Pharmaceuticals and Serum Institute of India (SII) have applied to distribute SII's licensed version of AstraZeneca's COVID-19 vaccine in Canada, potentially easing shortages as European manufacturing sites struggle to meet global demand.

AstraZeneca Canada had filed a rolling application for its vaccine with Health Canada in October, but online records show Canada's Verity Pharmaceuticals and SII on Jan. 23 filed a separate application to sell the vaccine developed by AstraZeneca and Oxford University researchers.

SII, the world's biggest vaccine maker, has capacity to produce roughly 2.4 million doses per day at its campus in Pune, western India.

"Verity Pharmaceuticals is providing important support to Serum Institute of India related to its regulatory registration, importation and distribution of the vaccine in Canada, pending Health Canada approval," AstraZeneca Canada and Verity said in a joint statement.

A source close to the matter said discussions are ongoing between SII and Verity but it is too early to provide details on delivery timelines or volumes that SII could ship to Canada.

SII did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The Indian company's chief executive, Adar Poonawalla, told Reuters last week that SII was happy to support AstraZeneca to meet any supply needs, but he emphasised that its primary focus was India and other poorer nations in Asia and Africa.

SII has already stepped in to help AstraZeneca to fulfil some orders in South Africa, Brazil, Saudi Arabia and other nations.

Canada, with a population of about 38 million, has ordered more vaccine doses per capita than any other country and was among the first to approve the Pfizer-BioNtech and Moderna vaccines, though deliveries have been sluggish.

Pharmaceutical manufacturing is a major industry in India, and several COVID-19 vaccines are being produced in the country at scale. Canada, by contrast, is entirely dependent on imports from European manufacturing sites, and both Pfizer and Moderna have cut planned deliveries in recent weeks.

Last week the European Union rolled out a new export control regime for vaccines, including a mechanism that could block certain exports. Canadian officials say they have been assured that shipments to Canada should not be affected, but Canada is not officially exempt from the regime.

Poonawalla last week told Reuters that SII had no plans to divert supplies to Europe.

SII, which had a stockpile of about 60 million doses of the vaccine last month, is adding a third production line by March. That would allow it to produce more than 3 million doses a day of COVISHIELD, the brand name under which it markets the AstraZeneca shot.

Beyond supplying India's vaccination drive, however, SII has also committed to supply tens of millions of doses to the GAVI/WHO-backed COVAX initiative to help to accelerate vaccinations in poorer nations.

(Reporting by Allison Martell in Toronto and Euan Rocha in New Delhi; Editing by David Goodman)

CAPITALIST CONSULTATION; DO IT OUR WAY

Baffinland says it won’t budge on proposed railway route

Baffinland says there’s no turning back on the route for the 110-km railroad it wants to build to expand its Mary River iron mine, which it says became finalized when the company struck the Inuit Certainty Agreement with the Qikiqtani Inuit Association.

But the QIA sees things differently. In an email to Nunatsiaq News, the association said that under that agreement, struck in July 2020, Baffinland Iron Mines Corp. “committed to determining whether there is community support” for the route during the hearings of the Nunavut Impact Review Board.

“To QIA’s knowledge the issue of community support remains unresolved,” said QIA’s statement.

The hamlet of Pond Inlet and the Mittimatalik Hunters and Trappers Organization remain opposed to the route, which would run from the Mary River mine, northeast to its port at Milne Inlet. They have expressed concerns that the railroad will scare away caribou.

The Nunavut Impact Review Board’s final hearing on Baffinland’s expansion plans began its second week Monday. Last week, presentations by the company asserted that the railway route was made final by the multi-million-dollar agreement struck with QIA.

Megan Lord-Hoyle, Baffinland’s vice-president of sustainable development, told the hearing Thursday the mine remained committed to the route, despite ongoing concerns raised by community organizations.

Baffinland says the current route, which it calls called Route 3, takes into account earlier concerns raised about the company’s first route proposal that would have closely followed the existing tote road. A second route, proposed by local Inuit, was deemed unsafe by Baffinland. The company maintains that Route 3hree would have the smallest impact on caribou — as well as the lowest fuel consumption for its trains — of the three routes.

Baffinland’s critics, meanwhile, say the company still lacks data on the proposed route.

On, Jan. 28, in a response to a question from Igloolik Mayor Merlyn Recinos, Lord-Hoyle said Baffinland has not completed a geotechnical study of the route, to test the ground’s stability.

Baffinland later clarified in an email to Nunatsiaq News that geotechnical work began in 2020 and will continue in 2021 to “define the exact engineering requirements” but not to change the route.

“It is important to note that regardless of them being completed or not, it does not change our commitment that this is the route that we would construct should phase two be approved,” Lord-Hoyle said during Thursday’s session.

Andrew Dumbrille, World Wildlife Fund Canada’s lead specialist on marine shipping and conservation, said in an interview with Nunatsiaq News that without this study being complete, the route could see unexpected changes made after it’s already accepted.

The study shows whether “a certain geological area can sustain the full weight and construction of a railroad. And they haven’t done that,” he said. “With a project of this magnitude, we shouldn’t be giving Baffinland a blank cheque.”

Baffinland says other studies support its preferred railroad route, with focuses on caribou safety, sustainability and traditional knowledge.

And the current railway route, it said, is a direct result of working with Inuit.

David Venn, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter, Nunatsiaq News