UPDATE 4-Gov. Christie 'Bridgegate' scandal flares up with new letter - Reuters

Sat Feb 1, 2014 11:25am IST

• Link this


• Share this


• By Edith Honan and Chris Francescani NEW YORK, Jan 31 (Reuters) - A former New Jersey official on Friday claimed Governor Chris Christie knew about politically motivated traffic jams as they happened, re-igniting a political scandal that has taken a...


• Email


• Print

By Edith Honan and Chris Francescani

NEW YORK Jan 31 (Reuters) - A former New Jersey official on Friday claimed Governor Chris Christie knew about politically motivated traffic jams as they happened, re-igniting a political scandal that has taken a toll on the prominent Republican.

The letter from a former official at the agency that oversees the busiest U.S. bridge sparked a quick response from Christie, who again denied wrongdoing, and prompted a top New Jersey newspaper to suggest the governor could face impeachment.

David Wildstein, who resigned his Port Authority post late last year, said in a letter that he had proof of the "inaccuracy" of some of Christie's statements about the so-called "Bridgegate" scandal, which polls show has already started to weigh on Christie's potential 2016 White House bid.

Since the scandal first came to light, Christie has denied knowing the cause of the George Washington Bridge lane closings, which occurred after the mayor of Fort Lee declined to endorse the governor in a re-election bid and caused four days of massive traffic jams in that city.

"It's the first time a high-level official has contradicted the governor," said Julian Zelizer, a Princeton University history professor who specializes in presidential politics.

The letter does not indicate that Christie orchestrated the closures in any way, does not specify exactly when he became aware of the jams, and offers no evidence to back up the claim.

"Mr. Wildstein contests the accuracy of various statements that the governor made about him and he can prove the inaccuracy of some," the letter said.

Wildstein and Christie attended Livingston High School at the same time, but Christie, a former federal prosecutor, has denied knowing Wildstein well.

One key question is exactly when and how Christie learned of the closures, said Fort Lee Mayor Mark Sokolich, a Democrat.

"There aren't enough facts. I'm not rooting for him to know or not to know. I will tell you, I remain very, very concerned about it," Sokolich told CNN. "If it was known at the very tail end, possibly, I'm not sure what this letter means at all."

Assemblyman John Wisniewski, who has led the investigation into the lane closures, told CNN late Friday that "these are serious allegations, because what Mr. Zegas's letter is saying is - you shouldn't believe the governor."

"But we need to see the documents to see whether there's any merit to that claim, to not believe the governor."

'SMOKING GUN'?

The key question, Zelizer said, is whether Wildstein can produce "smoking gun" evidence proving Christie's knowledge of the events. State Democrats probing the scandal are likely to jump on that vulnerability, Zelizer added.

The Newark Star-Ledger, one of New Jersey's largest newspapers, which endorsed Christie in his 2013 re-election bid, posted an editorial after the New York Times first reported about the letter, saying that if the accusations are true, the governor must resign or be impeached.

"Because it will show that everything he said at his famous two-hour press conference was a lie," the editorial said.

The paper had not endorsed Christie's initial run in 2009.

The Democratic National Committee, already targeting Christie, who won re-election in a landslide last November, as its greatest threat in the 2016 presidential election, was quick to pounce.

"He's repeatedly said that he had no knowledge of the lane closures," said Mo Elleithee, a DNC spokesman. "Today's revelations raise serious questions about whether that is true."

Polls taken since the emails emerged early this month showing Christie's now-fired deputy chief of staff, Bridget Anne Kelly, calling for "traffic" in Fort Lee, show Christie's popularity slipping in theoretical 2016 White House and primary matchups.

"If we assume it's true, then we're in the realm of an outright lie on the part of the governor, and that changes the entire story," said David Redlawsk, a New Jersey pollster. "It's the cover-up that gets you."

As for Wildstein, Redlawsk said, "It very much sounds like the message is quite clear to the U.S. Attorney's Office: Tell us what you need, and we'll cooperate."

The scandal has tarnished Christie's reputation as a politician ready to reach across the aisle at a time when partisan gridlock has defined Washington.

Christie bolstered his image as conciliator in 2012 when he walked beside President Barack Obama along the storm-hit New Jersey coastline after Superstorm Sandy, in the final months of the 2012 presidential campaign - a move that some supporters of Republican contender Mitt Romney said hurt their party's chances of retaking the White House.

In the marathon Jan. 9 press conference, Christie repeatedly apologized for actions he blamed on his aides, expressed his shock and said: "I am who I am, but I am not a bully."

• Link this


• Share this


• Digg this


• Email


• Print


• Reprints

Source: Top Stories - Google News - http://ift.tt/MI0UiF

Read more

Differing perspectives fuel debate over Knox case - Houston Chronicle

SEATTLE (AP) — To some Americans, especially those in her hometown of Seattle, Amanda Knox seems a victim, unfairly hounded by a capricious legal system in Italy that convicted her this week in the death of a 21-year-old British woman.

But in Europe, some see her as a privileged American who is getting away with murder, embroiled in a case that continues to make global headlines and reinforces a negative image of U.S. citizens behaving badly — even criminally — abroad without any punishment.

As she remains free in the U.S., the perceptions will likely fuel not only the debate about who killed Meredith Kercher in 2007 and what role, if any, Knox played in her death, but complicate how the U.S. and Italian governments resolve whether she should be sent to Italy to face prison.

"It's been a polarizing case, and that polarization will remain," said Anne Bremner, a Seattle attorney and Knox supporter.

The divergent views on who killed Kercher are rooted not just in the typical dynamics of a legal case in which the two sides hold opposing narratives, but also in the differences between the justice systems in the U.S. and Italy, and examples of Americans avoiding Italian justice.

After being first convicted and then acquitted, Knox and her one-time boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito, were convicted again Thursday, following their third trial. Knox was sentenced to 28 1/2 years, Sollecito to 25 years. The court's reasoning isn't expected to be released for three months.

The tone of some British newspaper coverage reflected skepticism about Knox's protestations of innocence. "Shameless in Seattle" was the front-page headline on Saturday's Daily Mail, which referred to Knox's "brazen TV charm offensive to escape extradition."

Any decision on whether to return Knox to Italy will ultimately be made by the U.S. State Department.

There have been other high-profile cases in which Italians hoped in vain to have Americans face justice there, notably the case of a U.S. Marine jet that sliced a gondola cable in the Italian Alps in 1998, killing 20 people.

Under NATO rules, the U.S. military retained jurisdiction, and the pilot was acquitted of manslaughter.

More recently, in 2009 Italian courts convicted — in absentia — 26 CIA and U.S. government employees in the kidnapping of an Egyptian cleric suspected of recruiting terrorists in Milan.

Some lawyers familiar with the process say Knox has little hope of avoiding extradition under the terms of the U.S.-Italy treaty, but that won't stop her supporters from mounting a campaign to keep her in the U.S.

They're appealing to American principles about trying someone multiple times for the same crime, even though under Italian law her earlier conviction and subsequent acquittal were never finalized, and even her third trial was considered part of the first prosecution against her.

They're also asking how one appellate court could find her actually innocent, while another court convicts her beyond a reasonable doubt.

Kercher, 21, was found dead in the bedroom of the apartment she and Knox shared in the town of Perugia, where they were studying. Kercher had been sexually assaulted and her throat slashed.

Investigators claimed it had been a drug-fueled sex game gone awry — an accusation that made the case a tabloid sensation.

Knox, now 26, and Sollecito, now 29, denied any involvement. After initially giving confused alibis, they insisted they were at Sollecito's apartment that night, smoking marijuana, watching a movie and having sex.

But police and news media focused on what was described as Knox's bizarre behavior afterward — shopping for underwear, embracing Sollecito and turning cartwheels for police as she became a suspect.

Meanwhile, a third defendant was arrested and convicted separately: Ivory Coast-born Rudy Guede, a drug dealer whose DNA was found was found in the room where Kercher was killed, and who acknowledged being there the night of the murder.

For Knox's detractors, there remains that after her arrest, she implicated an innocent man — Diya "Patrick" Lumumba, the Congolese owner of a pub where Knox occasionally worked.

Knox said she made those statements under duress during an overnight interrogation, when she had neither a lawyer nor a professional interpreter, and when she had been asked to imagine what might have happened. Her supporters say such an interrogation would never have been allowed in the U.S.

For Knox's supporters, the initial police theory about the sex game was far-fetched, much more complicated than what they saw was the more plausible explanation that Guede killed Kercher by himself.

And the fact that prosecutors abandoned that theory for the most recent trial, instead arguing that the motive was an argument over cleanliness in the apartment, further illustrates that law enforcement was grasping, they say.

As Knox awaits her fate, the questions over who killed Kercher will continue. Knox's supporters, for example, released an electronic book arguing that Guede acted alone in the killing. Kercher's siblings wonder if they'll ever know what really happened.

Some in Italy, however, seem to be coming to one conclusion: the prosecutors didn't have much evidence.

The Rome daily La Repubblica wrote Friday that the third verdict confirms that the case "from the very beginning has been judged more on the basis of sensation than actual evidence."

It suggested Knox and Sollecito had "always been the perfect culprits," and that "in reality, what is probably more at stake than assigning responsibility for a murder is the prestige of a part of the magistrature and the Umbrian police."

___

Associated Press writers Jill Lawless in London and Colleen Barry in Florence, Italy, contributed to this story.

Source: Top Stories - Google News - http://ift.tt/MI0VDc

Read more

Keystone XL oil pipeline gets boost from State Department review - Los Angeles Times

WASHINGTON — A long-awaited environmental review of the Keystone XL oil pipeline released Friday by the State Department found the project would probably have a negligible impact on climate change, bolstering the case for the controversial project as it heads to the White House for a decision on its construction.

The amount of oil extracted from the huge tar sands deposits under the Canadian Great Plains will be roughly the same whether the 1,200-mile pipeline from Hardisty, Alberta, to Steele City, Neb., is built or not, the department's final environmental impact statement concluded. As a result, the report found, it would not add significantly to the world's greenhouse gas emissions.

If the pipeline is not built, oil companies and the Canadian government will find other ways — primarily rail — to ship the oil to market, the State Department analysis concluded. Already, over the last three years, rail shipments of oil from the tar sands region have increased from near zero to roughly 180,000 barrels a day, the report said.

"Approval or denial of any one crude oil transport project, including the proposed project, is unlikely to significantly impact the rate of extraction in the oil sands," the report concluded.

President Obama has said he would make the final decision on the $5.3-billion project and that his main criterion would be whether it could be built without significantly worsening the problem of carbon pollution. Because the pipeline crosses a U.S. border, it requires a presidential permit from the State Department.

The environmental review, which does not take a position on whether to approve the pipeline, was welcomed by the project's supporters, but was vigorously challenged by environmentalists, who contend that it fails to take into account numerous projections that say Keystone XL would lead to more oil extraction. The pipeline, which could carry 830,000 barrels a day, would connect to pipelines that reach refineries on the Gulf of Mexico.

Federal agencies have 90 days to submit comments on the final assessment, while the public has 30. Among the agencies expected to weigh in is the Environmental Protection Agency, which has been critical of previous State Department reviews of the project.

After the comments are submitted, Secretary of State John F. Kerry will have to decide whether the pipeline is in the "national interest." The decision would then pass to Obama. Neither Kerry nor the president faces a deadline on when to make those rulings.

A decision on the permit was expected in late 2011 but was postponed until after the presidential election, in part because of widely held concern that the State Department's original environmental impact statement did not adequately assess the pipeline's effect on greenhouse gas emissions or on a huge aquifer in Nebraska.

The pipeline plan has since been rerouted to avoid many of the sensitive areas above the aquifer.

After Obama and the Democratic-controlled Congress failed to enact climate change legislation in the president's first term, opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline became a galvanizing issue for many environmentalists who have otherwise supported the president. Polls have shown broad public support for building the pipeline, except among liberal Democrats, who oppose it.

In the wake of the State Department's final report, environmentalists vowed Friday to ratchet up the pressure to reject the pipeline. "The release of the new report will be a green light to escalate our efforts," said May Boeve, executive director of 350.org, an environmental group.

Environmentalists said the study neglected research that shows the pipeline would play a central role in the planned expansion of oil sands extraction, including a report by the Canadian Assn. of Petroleum Producers.

"For them to say it is inevitable that the oil will be extracted because these other infrastructure projects will be built or rail will be built up is just not true," said Doug Hayes, staff attorney with the Sierra Club. "The oil industry itself is saying that Keystone will have an impact on extraction."

But supporters of Keystone XL said the final assessment should clear the way to getting a permit.

"Five years, five federal reviews, dozens of public meetings, over a million comments and one conclusion — the Keystone XL pipeline is safe for the environment," said Jack Gerard, president and chief executive of the American Petroleum Institute, an oil industry trade group in Washington. "This final review puts to rest any credible concerns about the pipeline's potential negative impact on the environment. This long-awaited project should now be swiftly approved."

Russ Girling, chief executive of TransCanada, which would build the pipeline, said, "The environmental analysis of Keystone XL released today once again supports the science that this pipeline would have minimal impact on the environment."

The pipeline itself would not generate a lot of emissions. Rather, the key dispute is whether it would lead to more oil sands extraction, a process that generates more carbon dioxide than conventional oil drilling.

Oil sands deposits are a mixture of clay, sand, rock and a tarry fossil fuel called bitumen, which can be hard as a hockey puck. About one-fifth of Alberta's bitumen deposits can be strip-mined. The rest is deeper and would be tapped by injecting superheated steam. Both methods require burning fossil fuels that emit carbon dioxide.

The State Department analysis backed away from more definitive statements the agency made in a draft environmental review in March that Keystone XL would have little impact on the environment.

Instead, the current analysis conceded that mining Alberta's bitumen would generate an average of 17% more greenhouse gas emissions than conventional oil refined in the U.S. It also said that, under certain scenarios, the pipeline could add as much as 27.4 million metric tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere annually, or the equivalent of putting 5.7 million additional cars on the road.

Canadian oil industry officials, however, have said that they are pushing to cut emissions and have formed an alliance to develop new methods to deal with environmental challenges.

But Environment Canada, the government agency responsible for monitoring greenhouse gas trends, issued a report in October that forecast sharp, sustained growth through 2020 in carbon dioxide emissions from the exploitation of oil sands. By that year, nearly all of Canada's emissions increase will be due to oil sands extraction, the report says.

Environmentalists also point out that the State Department's inspector general is conducting an inquiry into whether the contractor that produced the final impact statement, Environmental Resources Management, failed to disclose recent work it did for TransCanada, resulting in a conflict of interest.

The State Department ran into similar conflict-of-interest issues with a previous contractor on earlier environmental studies. The inspector general's report is due early this year.

Kerri-Ann Jones, an assistant secretary of State, said the State Department had followed "very, very rigorous" conflict-of-interest guidelines with the company and she was confident the inquiry would not find any violations.

neela.banerjee@latimes.com

Source: Top Stories - Google News - http://ift.tt/1kpLPgZ

Read more

Differing perspectives fuel debate over Knox case - Washington Post

SEATTLE — To some Americans, especially those in her hometown of Seattle, Amanda Knox seems a victim, unfairly hounded by a capricious legal system in Italy that convicted her this week in the death of a 21-year-old British woman.

But in Europe, some see her as a privileged American who is getting away with murder, embroiled in a case that continues to make global headlines and reinforces a negative image of U.S. citizens behaving badly — even criminally — abroad without any punishment.

Lunar New Year, partial solar eclipse, Syrian airstrikes, studying snake aerodynamics and more.

• Thursday's Photos of the day

As she remains free in the U.S., the perceptions will likely fuel not only the debate about who killed Meredith Kercher in 2007 and what role, if any, Knox played in her death, but complicate how the U.S. and Italian governments resolve whether she should be sent to Italy to face prison.

“It’s been a polarizing case, and that polarization will remain,” said Anne Bremner, a Seattle attorney and Knox supporter.

The divergent views on who killed Kercher are rooted not just in the typical dynamics of a legal case in which the two sides hold opposing narratives, but also in the differences between the justice systems in the U.S. and Italy, and examples of Americans avoiding Italian justice.

After being first convicted and then acquitted, Knox and her one-time boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito, were convicted again Thursday, following their third trial. Knox was sentenced to 28 1/2 years, Sollecito to 25 years. The court’s reasoning isn’t expected to be released for three months.

The tone of some British newspaper coverage reflected skepticism about Knox’s protestations of innocence. “Shameless in Seattle” was the front-page headline on Saturday’s Daily Mail, which referred to Knox’s “brazen TV charm offensive to escape extradition.”

Any decision on whether to return Knox to Italy will ultimately be made by the U.S. State Department.

There have been other high-profile cases in which Italians hoped in vain to have Americans face justice there, notably the case of a U.S. Marine jet that sliced a gondola cable in the Italian Alps in 1998, killing 20 people.

Under NATO rules, the U.S. military retained jurisdiction, and the pilot was acquitted of manslaughter.

More recently, in 2009 Italian courts convicted — in absentia — 26 CIA and U.S. government employees in the kidnapping of an Egyptian cleric suspected of recruiting terrorists in Milan.

Some lawyers familiar with the process say Knox has little hope of avoiding extradition under the terms of the U.S.-Italy treaty, but that won’t stop her supporters from mounting a campaign to keep her in the U.S.

They’re appealing to American principles about trying someone multiple times for the same crime, even though under Italian law her earlier conviction and subsequent acquittal were never finalized, and even her third trial was considered part of the first prosecution against her.

They’re also asking how one appellate court could find her actually innocent, while another court convicts her beyond a reasonable doubt.

Kercher, 21, was found dead in the bedroom of the apartment she and Knox shared in the town of Perugia, where they were studying. Kercher had been sexually assaulted and her throat slashed.

Investigators claimed it had been a drug-fueled sex game gone awry — an accusation that made the case a tabloid sensation.

Knox, now 26, and Sollecito, now 29, denied any involvement. After initially giving confused alibis, they insisted they were at Sollecito’s apartment that night, smoking marijuana, watching a movie and having sex.

But police and news media focused on what was described as Knox’s bizarre behavior afterward — shopping for underwear, embracing Sollecito and turning cartwheels for police as she became a suspect.

Meanwhile, a third defendant was arrested and convicted separately: Ivory Coast-born Rudy Guede, a drug dealer whose DNA was found was found in the room where Kercher was killed, and who acknowledged being there the night of the murder.

For Knox’s detractors, there remains that after her arrest, she implicated an innocent man — Diya “Patrick” Lumumba, the Congolese owner of a pub where Knox occasionally worked.

Knox said she made those statements under duress during an overnight interrogation, when she had neither a lawyer nor a professional interpreter, and when she had been asked to imagine what might have happened. Her supporters say such an interrogation would never have been allowed in the U.S.

For Knox’s supporters, the initial police theory about the sex game was far-fetched, much more complicated than what they saw was the more plausible explanation that Guede killed Kercher by himself.

And the fact that prosecutors abandoned that theory for the most recent trial, instead arguing that the motive was an argument over cleanliness in the apartment, further illustrates that law enforcement was grasping, they say.

As Knox awaits her fate, the questions over who killed Kercher will continue. Knox’s supporters, for example, released an electronic book arguing that Guede acted alone in the killing. Kercher’s siblings wonder if they’ll ever know what really happened.

Some in Italy, however, seem to be coming to one conclusion: the prosecutors didn’t have much evidence.

The Rome daily La Repubblica wrote Friday that the third verdict confirms that the case “from the very beginning has been judged more on the basis of sensation than actual evidence.”

It suggested Knox and Sollecito had “always been the perfect culprits,” and that “in reality, what is probably more at stake than assigning responsibility for a murder is the prestige of a part of the magistrature and the Umbrian police.”

___

Associated Press writers Jill Lawless in London and Colleen Barry in Florence, Italy, contributed to this story.

Copyright 2014 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Source: Top Stories - Google News - http://ift.tt/1nyNKlK

Read more

Former Christie aide says governor knew of bridge lane closures - Los Angeles Times

A former close aide to New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said through his attorney that the governor knew about the closures of lanes leading to the George Washington Bridge as they were happening, disputing Christie's assertion that he only learned about the traffic mess later.

A lawyer for David Wildstein, who engineered the lane closures while working as a Christie appointee at the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, said in a letter that the closures came "at the Christie administration's order." The letter said that "evidence exists" to show the governor learned of the closures during the rerouting and the ensuing four-day traffic pileup in Fort Lee, the New Jersey town at the foot of the world's busiest bridge.

The Friday letter to the port authority from attorney Alan Zegas, first reported by the New York Times, does not spell out what that evidence is, or say exactly what Christie knew and when. The letter does not say that Christie himself ordered the traffic redirection, or that he knew about it beforehand.

But the letter, the first sign that a member of Christie's inner circle has broken ranks on the controversy, seemed to promise weeks or months of new revelations and a continuing drag on the Republican governor's national political ambitions. Federal prosecutors are investigating, and a state legislative committee has sent out 20 subpoenas to Christie's office and top officials in his administration.

As the controversy over the September traffic jam mounted, Christie repeatedly said he only learned about the closures from press accounts, after they were over.

"I don't know what else to say except to tell them that I had no knowledge of this — of the planning, the execution or anything about it — and that I first found out about it after it was over," Christie said during a marathon news conference this month. "And even then, what I was told was that it was a traffic study."

In a statement issued Friday, Christie's office said Zegas' letter "confirms what the governor has said all along — he had absolutely no prior knowledge of the lane closures before they happened." The Christie statement doesn't spell out when he learned about the bridge closures but says the governor denies the letter's "other assertions."

Wildstein, a schoolmate of Christie's at Livingston High School and one of his appointees at the Port Authority, in August received an email from Christie's then-deputy chief of staff: "Time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee."

"Got it," Wildstein replied. In September, he exchanged emails apparently reveling in the traffic jams and the headaches they were causing for Fort Lee's mayor, who did not endorse Christie for reelection.

During the epic news conference, Christie also downplayed his relationship with Wildstein, saying he barely knew him in high school and rarely spoke to him in Trenton.

"We didn't travel in the same circles in high school," Christie said. "You know, I was the class president and athlete."

Zegas wrote the letter to protest the authority's decision not to pay legal fees for Wildstein, who resigned from the Port Authority in December as controversy over the lane closures grew. It says Wildstein "contests the accuracy of various statements the governor made about him and he can prove the inaccuracy of some."

The Democratic National Committee in Washington quickly issued a chronology dating to 1977, when Christie and Wildstein were in high school, aimed at contradicting the governor's earlier effort to distance himself from his appointee.

"We all know what's coming next — Chris Christie and his allies will go after David Wildstein to question his credibility and long-standing ties to Christie," party spokesman Michael Czin said in a blast email to reporters.

As recently as a few months ago, Christie was viewed as the most politically talented and dynamic 2016 presidential contender on the Republican side — one of the few who came armed with a deep field of donors.

But as the cloud of investigations has darkened, GOP operatives and donors have become increasingly skittish about the prospect of a Christie candidacy. Some have questioned his ability to effectively lead the Republican Governors Assn., which he recently took over.

Ana Navarro, a Republican political consultant who served in the administration of former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, another potential 2016 contender, said that even before the Wildstein letter on Friday many donors were in "a wait-and-see mode until this is fleshed out."

"Just when the intense media attention was beginning to die down, this bubbles up again, and that's most certainly not helpful to Chris Christie," Navarro said. "I think right now we've hit the pause button. Donors — they're not ditching Christie, and they're not hitching up with Christie."

At the same time, some GOP consultants said Friday that they were waiting to see what proof Wildstein could produce.

"Put up or shut up," Republican strategist Steve Schmidt said.

Source: Top Stories - Google News - http://ift.tt/1iWTzcm

Read more

State Department: Keystone XL pipeline's climate effect negligible - The Seattle Times

WASHINGTON — A long-awaited environmental review of the Keystone XL pipeline released Friday by the State Department found the project would have a negligible impact on climate change, bolstering the case for the project as it heads to President Obama for a decision on its construction.

Obama said in June that his main criterion for approving the proposed $7 billion pipeline was that it not significantly worsen the problem of carbon pollution.

Because the northern stretch of Keystone XL, which would carry 830,000 barrels a day from Hardisty, Alberta, to Steele City, Neb., would cross a U.S. border, it needs a so-called presidential permit from the State Department. Obama has said he would make the decision.

A senior State Department official was careful to note that the environmental review took no position on whether to approve the pipeline: “Its analysis is only one factor in the final determination, which will also weigh national-security, foreign-policy and economic issues.”

The report sets up a difficult decision for Secretary of State John Kerry, who will make a recommendation on the project to Obama. Kerry, who hopes to make action on climate change a key part of his legacy, has never publicly offered his personal views on the pipeline.

Federal agencies have 90 days to submit comments about the final assessment, while a 30-day public-comment period runs concurrently.

The president will have to determine whether Keystone XL is in the “national interest” based on those analyses, which will include one from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which has been critical of the State Department’s previous reviews.

The proposed pipeline has become a symbol of the political debate over climate change. Republicans and some oil- and gas-producing states in the U.S. — and Canada’s minister of natural resources — cheered the report, but it further rankled environmentalists already at odds with Obama and his energy policy.

Foes say the pipeline would carry “dirty oil” that contributes to global warming and express concern about possible spills.

Republicans and business and labor groups have urged Obama to approve the pipeline to create thousands of jobs and move further toward North American energy independence.

The pipeline is also strongly supported by Democrats in oil- and gas-producing states, including Sens. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Mark Begich of Alaska and Mark Pryor of Arkansas. All face re-election this year and could be politically damaged by rejection of the pipeline. Republican Mitt Romney carried all three states in the 2012 presidential election.

The 1,179-mile pipeline would travel through the heart of the United States to refineries on the Texas Gulf Coast. It would cross Montana and South Dakota before reaching Nebraska. An existing spur runs through Kansas and Oklahoma to Texas.

Canadian tar sands are likely to be developed regardless of U.S. action on the pipeline, the report said.

The report says oil derived from tar sands in Alberta generates about 17 percent more greenhouse-gas emissions that contribute to global warming than traditional crude. But the report makes clear that other methods of transporting the oil — including rail, trucks and barges — would release more greenhouse gases than the pipeline.

U.S. and Canadian accident investigators warned last week about the dangers of oil trains that transport crude oil from North Dakota and other states to refineries in the U.S. and Canada. The officials urged new safety rules, cautioning that a major loss of life could result from an accident involving the increasing use of trains to transport large amounts of crude oil.

An alternative that relies on shipping the oil by rail through the Central U.S. to Gulf Coast refineries would generate 28 percent more greenhouse gases than a pipeline, the report said.

The oil industry applauded the review.

“After five years and five environmental reviews, time and time again the Department of State analysis has shown that the pipeline is safe for the environment,” said Cindy Schild, the senior manager of refining and oil-sands programs at the American Petroleum Institute, which lobbies for the oil industry.

However, a top official at the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental group, said the report gives Obama all the information he needs to reject the pipeline.

“Piping the dirtiest oil on the planet through the heart of America would endanger our farms, our communities, our fresh water and our climate,” said Susan Casey-Lefkowitz, the group’s international program director. “That is absolutely not in our national interest.”

In Canada, Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver welcomed the report and said officials there “await a timely decision” on the pipeline. “The choice for the United States is clear: oil supply from a reliable, environmentally responsible friend and neighbor or from unstable sources with similar or higher greenhouse-gas emissions and lesser environmental standards,” he said.

Obama blocked the Keystone XL pipeline in January 2012, saying he did not have enough time for a fair review before a deadline forced on him by congressional Republicans. That delayed the choice for him until after his re-election.

Obama’s initial rejection went over badly in Canada, which relies on the U.S. for 97 percent of its energy exports. The pipeline is critical to Canada, which needs infrastructure in place to export its growing oil-sands production.

In response, Obama suggested development of an Oklahoma-to-Texas line to alleviate an oil bottleneck at a Cushing, Okla., storage hub. Oil began moving on that segment of the pipeline last week.

The 485-mile southern section of the pipeline operated by Calgary, Canada-based TransCanada did not require presidential approval because it does not cross a U.S. border.

Petroleum producers, meanwhile, have already turned to a solution Obama can’t veto: rail.

Canada’s two largest railroads are increasing Alberta crude shipments and developing new terminals to serve refineries throughout North America.

According to the Transportation Safety Board of Canada, Canadian railroads handled 160,000 carloads of oil in 2013, up from 500 in 2009.

There are drawbacks to rail. It costs more to ship crude oil by train than by pipeline, and recent fiery derailments in Quebec, Alabama and North Dakota have raised alarm over the safety of moving the flammable cargo in trains.

Some environmental groups, meanwhile, said oil-industry influence skewed the State Department’s latest report.

The inspector general is investigating complaints that the State Department’s main contractor on the Keystone report, ERM Group, has a conflict of interest because of its business ties to TransCanada, the company that is seeking to build Keystone.

A State Department official Friday denied the conflict of interest.

“There were very rigorous conflict-of-interest screening guidelines, and we feel very confident there are no issues with this contractor,” said Assistant Secretary of State for Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs Kerri-Ann Jones.

Compiled from McClatchy Newspapers, Tribune Washington Bureau, The New York Times and The Associated Press.

Source: Top Stories - Google News - http://ift.tt/1kpp0Kb

Read more

It is a mystery: Who left Knox home in coat? - Buffalo News

The Associated Press

on February 1, 2014 - 12:01 AM

SEATTLE (AP) � It was the photo that ran worldwide after an Italian court once again convicted Amanda Knox in the sensational murder case involving her and her former boyfriend: A person, covered by a coat, leaving her mother's Seattle home and speeding away in a car.

Knox's family spokesman, David Marriott, said Thursday that Knox was at the house when the verdict was read that day, but said he didn't know whether the person who emerged was Knox. The Associated Press and other media outlets identified the person who left the home, surrounded by Knox's family, as someone believed to be Knox.

On Friday, Marriott sent the AP an email that stated he had made inquiries and that the person wasn't Knox, but he didn't elaborate and didn't immediately respond to a phone call seeking additional comment.

It's unclear. The coat-wrapped person achieved one goal, leading some of the photographers camped outside away from the house. Somehow, Knox left her mother's home and appeared on ABC's "Good Morning America" in New York on Friday.

Knox and her family have sometimes gone to great lengths to keep a low profile since she returned to her Seattle home in 2011. Knox has tried to largely stay out of the media glare, while also selectively promoting herself and her story as the legal case has continued to unfold in Italy. An appellate court cleared her in 2011 and ordered her freed after spending four years in prison. Knox is often able to live without much attention in Seattle. Local media largely leave her alone, as interest in the case has waned.

After Italy's highest court overturned her acquittal last year and ordered a new appeals trial that convicted her Thursday, Knox has given interviews to European and American news outlets. She has declined numerous interview requests from the AP.

She did release a book last year about her experience. The book deal was reportedly worth $4 million.

Source: Top Stories - Google News - http://ift.tt/1nyFdPX

Read more

Keystone XL oil pipeline clears significant hurdle - Dallas Morning News

WASHINGTON — The State Department released a report Friday concluding that the Keystone XL pipeline would not substantially worsen carbon pollution, leaving an opening for President Barack Obama to approve the politically divisive project.

The department’s long-awaited environmental impact statement appears to indicate that the project could pass the criteria Obama set forth in a speech last summer when he said he would approve the 1,700-mile pipeline if it would not “significantly exacerbate” the problem of greenhouse gas emissions. Although the pipeline would carry 830,000 barrels of oil a day from Canada to the Gulf Coast, the report appears to indicate that regardless of its construction, carbon-heavy oil would still be extracted at the same rate from pristine Alberta forest and transported to refineries by rail instead of pipeline.

The report sets up a difficult decision for Secretary of State John Kerry, who must make a recommendation on the international project to Obama. Kerry, who hopes to make action on climate change a key part of his legacy, has never publicly offered his personal views on the pipeline. Aides said Kerry was preparing to “dive into” the 11-volume report and would give high priority to the issue of global warming in making the decision. His aides offered no timetable.

“He’ll deliberate and take the time he needs,” said Kerri-Ann Jones, the assistant secretary of state for oceans and international affairs.

Environmentalists said they were dismayed at some of the report’s conclusions and disputed its objectivity, but they also said it offered Obama reasons to reject the pipeline. They said they planned to intensify efforts to try to influence Kerry’s decision. For more than two years, environmentalists have protested the project and have been arrested in demonstrations around the country. But many Republicans and oil industry executives, who support the pipeline because they say it creates jobs, embraced the findings.

Conflict of interest?

The State Department is expected to soon release the results of an inspector general investigation into the preparation of an earlier draft of the environmental impact report. The investigation was ordered after an environmental group obtained documents indicating that some consultants for the firm that wrote the draft report had previously done work for TransCanada, the company seeking to build the pipeline. If investigators determine a conflict of interest in the preparation of that draft, the State Department may have to conduct a new environmental review.

In light of the investigation, environmentalists were particularly critical of Friday’s report.

“In what could be perceived as eagerness to please the oil industry and Canadian government, the State Department is issuing this report amidst an ongoing investigation into conflicts of interest and lying by its contractor,” said Erich Pica, president of Friends of the Earth.

Some environmentalists saw reason for optimism in the review, which models several oil market possibilities. Most involve high oil prices and robust demand, in which the tar sands oil is rapidly developed with or without the Keystone pipeline.

However, the report offers one alternative scenario, in which oil prices and demand are low. In that case, not building the pipeline might slow development and thus slow carbon emissions. That possibility is unlikely, but it could provide the administration something to point to should it deny the project.

“We’re taking the inclusion of that scenario as good news,” said Susan Casey-Lefkowitz, director of international programs at the Natural Resources Defense Center.

Oil industry pleased

The oil industry applauded the review.

“After five years and five environmental reviews, time and time again the Department of State analysis has shown that the pipeline is safe for the environment,” said Cindy Schild, senior manager of refining and oil sands programs at the American Petroleum Institute.

Although the pipeline is a potent political symbol, its true effect on the environment and the economy would be more limited than either its supporters or its opponents suggest.

The new State Department report concludes that the process used for producing the oil — by extracting what are called tar sands or oil sands from the Alberta forest — creates about 17 percent more greenhouse gas emissions than does traditional oil. But the report concludes that this heavily polluting oil will still be brought to market.

The new State Department analysis took into account the growing global demand for oil and the rapidly growing practice of moving oil by rail in areas where pipelines have not been built.

“Given the anticipated outlook of oil prices and the cost of development, no single project will likely affect the rate of extraction,” said a senior State Department official, who asked not to be named under rules imposed by the department.

But moving oil by rail has its own hazards. As the practice has increased in recent years, so have incidents of explosions of rail cars carrying oil.

Supporters of the pipeline say it will create jobs, though the number may be limited. A study by the Cornell Global Labor Institute concluded that the pipeline would create about 3,900 construction jobs over two years.

Privately, people close to Obama say that although he is committed to building a climate legacy, he does not see the pipeline as a central part of that effort. Instead, the president is moving forward with a set of Environmental Protection Agency regulations on coal-fired power plants.

Coral Davenport,

The New York Times

Source: Top Stories - Google News - http://ift.tt/1fjeJf3

Read more

Chris Christie at Howard Stern b-day bash - Politico

Christie was a VIP at the elaborate 60th birthday bash of radio host Howard Stern. | AP Photos

The bridge scandal embroiling New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie didn’t stop him from having some Friday night fun: The Republican was a VIP at the elaborate 60th birthday bash of radio host Howard Stern.

Christie, who is battling new allegations in a sprawling traffic scandal, was pictured introducing musician Jon Bon Jovi in a tweet posted by Stern’s Sirius XM radio show.

Continue Reading

“I’m here to bring all praise from New Jersey to Howard Stern,” Christie said, according to NJ.com.

“The representative of New Jersey you want to see right now … is one of New Jersey’s favorite sons, one of my good friends, and a great artist,” Christie added. “Ladies and gentlemen, Jon Bon Jovi.”

The governor’s attendance at the party was on his public schedule for Friday, capping a day of media hits and Superstorm Sandy recovery events leading into the weekend when New Jersey will host the Super Bowl.

A New York Times reporter tweeted that Christie did not take questions as he left Stern’s party.

Source: Top Stories - Google News - http://ift.tt/1jVcNPP

Read more

Ex-Christie Ally Says Governor Aware of Bridge Closings - San Francisco Chronicle

(Updates with former campaign aide’s lawyer in 14th paragraph. For a timeline of the Christie affair, click here.)

Jan. 31 (Bloomberg) -- New Jersey Governor Chris Christie knew about lane closures at the George Washington Bridge as they occurred in September, according to David Wildstein, a former ally at the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey.

Wildstein’s claim came today in a letter by his lawyer, Alan Zegas, to the Port Authority, contradicting Christie’s assertions Jan. 9 that he had no knowledge of closures that snarled traffic for four days near the bridge in Fort Lee, New Jersey. At the same time, a former Christie campaign aide said he’ll refuse to answer questions under the Fifth Amendment.

While saying “evidence exists” of Christie’s knowledge, Zegas didn’t cite any in the letter, which demands that the Port Authority pay Wildstein’s legal fees amid investigations by the state legislature and federal prosecutors of the closures. Fort Lee Mayor Mark Sokolich, a Democrat, has suggested the closures were intended to punish him for not supporting the re-election last November of Christie, a Republican.

“A person within the Christie administration communicated the Christie administration’s order that certain lanes on the George Washington Bridge were to be closed,” Zegas wrote. “Evidence exists as well tying Mr. Christie to having knowledge of the lane closures, during the period when the lanes were closed.”

Traffic Nightmare

The Christie administration, in an e-mail, repeated the governor’s assertion that he first learned of the closures when they were reported by the media.

“Mr. Wildstein’s lawyer confirms what the governor has said all along: He had absolutely no prior knowledge of the lane closures before they happened, and whatever Mr. Wildstein’s motivations were for closing them to begin with.”

It added: “The governor denies Mr. Wildstein’s lawyer’s other claims.”

The closings, from Sept. 9 to Sept. 12, stretched typical delays of 30 minutes to four hours or more and trapped emergency-response vehicles and schoolbuses. On what was to be the fifth day of tie-ups, Port Authority Executive Director Patrick Foye, who was appointed by New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, ordered all lanes reopened.

Today’s claim by Wildstein “establishes a reasonable suspicion that the governor may have committed an impeachable offense,” said Senator Raymond Lesniak, a Democrat from Elizabeth who sits on the Judiciary Committee.

Traffic Study

In testimony in November before the New Jersey Assembly Transportation Committee, Bill Baroni, Christie’s appointee as the authority’s deputy executive director, said the closures were for a traffic study. Baroni and Wildstein resigned in December. A comprehensive traffic study has yet to be produced.

The bridge plot apparently began in August when Christie’s then-deputy chief of staff, Bridget Anne Kelly, e-mailed to Wildstein: “Time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee.” Wildstein, who ordered the lane closures, replied: “Got it.”

Mark Sheridan, an attorney representing Christie’s campaign and the New Jersey Republican State Committee, declined to comment when reached by phone. Each organization was issued a grand jury subpoena Jan. 17 by U.S. Attorney Paul Fishman, seeking documents related to the bridge closures.

Feb. 3 is the due date for documents subpoenaed by New Jersey lawmakers who also are investigating the matter. Twenty people or organizations with links to Christie were ordered to turn over e-mails, mobile-phone text messages, letters and any other correspondence related to the bridge closures.

Fifth Amendment

Kevin Marino, a lawyer for Christie’s former campaign manager, Bill Stepien, notified the legislative committee today that his client won’t comply with the subpoena and will invoke his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.

“His act of producing documents and things responsive to the subpoena might compel him to furnish a link in the chain of evidence that could be used to ensnare him in the ambiguous circumstances of a criminal prosecution -- and thus force him to become a witness against himself,” Marino said.

Christie, a possible 2016 presidential contender, is chairman of the Republican Governors Association and is a major fundraiser for colleagues’ races in November.

His approval since the bridge allegations slid to its lowest since May 2011, according to a poll released Jan. 28 by Fairleigh Dickinson University in Madison, New Jersey. Forty- eight percent of state voters said they approved of his job performance, wiping out the bounce he received in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy. The rating stood at 62 percent in October poll by the institute.

Christie hasn’t faced reporters since the Jan. 9 news conference in which he denied knowledge of the closures and has made two appearances this week on sports radio programs to discuss the Super Bowl at MetLife Stadium in East Rutherford.

“Chris Christie doesn’t want to talk about anything but the game, but it looks like he’s going to need to change his plans,” Mo Elleithee, spokesman for the Democratic National Committee, said in a statement.

--With assistance from David Voreacos in federal court in Newark, New Jersey. Editors: Stephen Merelman, Alan Goldstein

To contact the reporters on this story: Elise Young in Trenton at eyoung30@bloomberg.net; Terrence Dopp in Trenton at tdopp@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Stephen Merelman at smerelman@bloomberg.net

Source: Top Stories - Google News - http://ift.tt/1nyqrbZ

Read more

Reactions to Keystone pipeline impact report - Reuters

WASHINGTON Fri Jan 31, 2014 10:54pm EST

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. State Department on Thursday issued its long awaited final environmental impact statement on the proposed Keystone pipeline, which would carry crude oil from Canada's tar sands region to refiners in the Gulf of Mexico.

The following are quotes from lawmakers, environmental groups and others on the report and the road ahead for TransCanada Corp's, which was first proposed more than five years ago.

-----------------------------

U.S. HOUSE SPEAKER JOHN BOEHNER:

"President Obama is out of excuses. The fact that he has let a final decision on the Keystone pipeline project - and the more than 100,000 jobs that come with it - languish for more than five years is economic malpractice."

NEERA TANDEN, CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS:

"This environmental impact study - which ignores the evidence gathered in the past year that indicates the pipeline will increase our level of emissions - is by no means the final word on the Keystone XL pipeline.

"Since we know this pipeline will significantly exacerbate the problem of carbon pollution, I hope that President Obama will hold firm on the commitment he made in his climate speech and reject the pipeline."

U.S. SENATOR JOE MANCHIN, DEMOCRAT OF WEST VIRGINIA:

"I encourage the Secretary of State and the President to take the final step necessary to approve the pipeline's construction because there is no doubt that this is in our nation's best interest."

LARRY SCHWEIGER, CEO, NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION:

"In this report, for the very first time, the State Department acknowledges a scenario in which the Keystone XL tar sands export pipeline dramatically increases carbon pollution. That's a welcome and long overdue change, and it gives President Obama all the evidence he needs to reject Keystone XL."

U.S. SENATOR JERRY MORAN, REPUBLICAN OF KANSAS:

"The release of the final analysis should bring us one step closer to moving this job-creating, domestic energy-producing project forward. Despite the Administration's continued reluctance to approve this necessary project, the overwhelming majority Americans agree that we should proceed immediately."

SENATOR JOHN HOEVEN, REPUBLICAN OF NORTH DAKOTA

"The U.S. State Department's final EIS released today is a step forward in that it poses no reason for President Obama to deny approval of the Keystone XL pipeline project. Although not explicit, this finding is consistent with four previous findings that affirm the need to begin construction without delay. On the other hand, the report is vague and provides no timeline for a final decision, giving the president broad room to postpone a decision further."

REP. HENRY WAXMAN, DEMOCRAT OF CALIFORNIA

"While still flawed, this environmental review recognizes that the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline could have a significant effect on carbon pollution, depending on variables such as oil prices and transportation costs."

SENATOR MARY LANDRIEU, DEMOCRAT OF LOUISIANA:

"This single project will inject billions of dollars into Louisiana and national economies and reduce our dependence on oil from hostile countries. Once again, another study has concluded that the Keystone XL pipeline will have no significant impact on our environment. If we wait any longer to approve this project, we risk losing it for good."

JACK GERARD, PRESIDENT, AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE:

"Five years, five federal reviews, dozens of public meetings, over a million comments and one conclusion ─ the Keystone XL pipeline is safe for the environment. This final review puts to rest any credible concerns about the pipeline's potential negative impact on the environment."

ERICH PICA, PRESIDENT, FRIENDS OF THE EARTH:

"The State Department's environmental review of the Keystone XL pipeline is a farce. Since the beginning of the assessment, the oil industry has had a direct pipeline into the agency. Perhaps most frustrating, is the apparent collusion between the State Department, oil industry and the Canadian government."

(Compiled by Ros Krasny)

• Link this


• Share this


• Digg this


• Email


• Print


• Reprints

Source: Top Stories - Google News - http://ift.tt/1bKu7Pa

Read more

Christie denies accusations - Politico

The allegation comes from David Wildstein's lawyer. | AP Photos

The lawyer for a onetime Chris Christie appointee said Friday that there is evidence contradicting what the Republican governor and prospective 2016 presidential candidate has said he knew about the lane closures at the center of a growing New Jersey traffic scandal.

The allegation comes from David Wildstein, an ex-Port Authority official appointed by Christie, in a letter from Wildstein’s lawyer reported by The New York Times and other news outlets.

Continue Reading

Who's who in the bridge scandal

Play Slideshow

“Evidence exists … tying Mr. Christie to having knowledge of the lane closures, during the period when the lanes were closed, contrary to what the Governor stated publicly in a two-hour press conference he gave immediately before Mr. Wildstein was scheduled to appear before the [state] Transportation Committee,” the letter said.

(Also on POLITICO: My time with Chris Christie’s scandal-plagued aide David Wildstein)

“Mr. Wildstein contests the accuracy of various statements that the Governor made about him and he can prove the inaccuracy of some,” the letter said.

Christie’s office denied the accusation.

“Mr. Wildstein’s lawyer confirms what the Governor has said all along – he had absolutely no prior knowledge of the lane closures before they happened and whatever Mr. Wildstein’s motivations were for closing them to begin with,” the statement read. “As the Governor said in a December 13th press conference, he only first learned lanes were closed when it was reported by the press and as he said in his January 9th press conference, had no indication that this was anything other than a traffic study until he read otherwise the morning of January 8th. The Governor denies Mr. Wildstein’s lawyer’s other assertions.”

Christie held the news conference in question earlier this month to announce he had fired an aide who, according to subpoenaed documents, communicated with Wildstein ahead of time about “traffic problems in Fort Lee,” the town where the lane closures would eventually take place last September.

(Also on POLITICO: Christie ally invokes Fifth on subpoena)

The lane closures came as Christie was running for reelection, and some Democrats have alleged the lanes were closed to punish the Democratic mayor of the town, who declined to endorse Christie. Emails written by aides about the closures suggest they were orchestrated as political retaliation.

“I don’t know what else to say except to tell them that I had no knowledge of this — of the planning, the execution or anything about it — and that I first found out about it after it was over,” Christie said at the news conference. “And even then, what I was told was that it was a traffic study. And there was no evidence to the contrary until yesterday that was brought to my attention or anybody else’s attention.”

Wildstein pleaded the Fifth when state lawmakers called him to testify before a panel investigating the closures earlier this month. Wildstein’s lawyer has previously said that if Wildstein “has immunity from the relevant entities, he’ll talk.”

(PHOTOS: Who's who in the Chris Christie bridge scandal)

Both state lawmakers and the U.S. attorney in New Jersey are looking into the scandal.

Christie has apologized for the traffic mess and said he will cooperate with “appropriate” inquiries into how it came about, as well as conduct an internal review.

Source: Top Stories - Google News - http://ift.tt/1koUEHL

Read more

US report on Keystone indicates little climate impact - CNN

• Pipeline supporters approve, environmentalists condemn the report


• The proposed oil pipeline between the U.S. and Canada is politically charged


• Next step is a 90-day comment period, followed by another State Department decision


• President Barack Obama has said the pipeline must be carbon-neutral

Washington (CNN) -- A long-awaited State Department environmental report on the proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline indicates what the oil industry and its backers have been saying -- it won't have a big impact on carbon emissions that cause climate change.

The report released Friday appears to give the Obama administration the cover it needs to approve the politically charged project, but not until May at the earliest, after a 90-day review and comment period.

Environmentalists reacted with predictable fury, accusing the government of bad intent by releasing the report before an inspector general's findings on whether it was flawed because some participants had oil industry ties.

"This document will be seen by the entire environmental community ... as a sham," complained Democratic Rep. Raul Grijalva of Arizona, adding that "it encourages the already widely held impression that the fix was in from the beginning."

White House spokesman Matt Lehrich said Friday night that information in the report "will now need to be closely evaluated by Secretary (of State John) Kerry and other relevant agency heads in the weeks ahead.

"A decision on whether the project is in the national interest will be made only after careful consideration of the (report) and other pertinent information, comments from the public, and views of other agency heads."

GOP: no more stalling

Supporters, including Republican leaders who have been pushing for two years for President Barack Obama to approve the project, said now it was time to get it started.

"Mr. President, no more stalling, no more excuses," said Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, adding a jab at Obama's recent pledge to act on his own this year if he can't get congressional backing. "Please pick up that pen you've been talking so much about and make this happen. Americans need these jobs."

The pipeline that would transport oil from Canada to the Gulf Coast has been a political football, pitting the oil industry and its Republican backers against environmentalists and liberal Democrats who complain it bolsters the especially dirty fossil fuel production from the tar sands of northern Alberta. The project also has sparked protests from the political left and the environmental movement.

However, the politics get messy for Democrats, because organized labor supports the project that will create several thousand jobs.

Release of the report launched a 90-day period for public comment and consultation. Secretary of State John Kerry, who is known for his effort to combat climate change, will then determine if the pipeline project is in the national interest.

The environmental analysis makes no final conclusion on the merits of the project, but says it wouldn't impact how much oil gets produced from Canada's tar sands in northern Alberta.

Dirtier oil

Approval or denial of any single project was unlikely to affect how much oil gets extracted from the tar sands, Assistant Secretary of State Kerri-Ann Jones said in a conference call with reporters.

Jones noted that the oil from the tar sands was more carbon intensive than normal oil, producing 17% more carbon emissions.

Environmentalists say that is why the project should be rejected, arguing that it would continue U.S. reliance on a dirtier foreign oil at a time when Obama has pledged action against climate change.

"I will not be satisfied with any analysis that does not accurately document what is really happening on the ground when it comes to the extraction, transport, refining, and waste disposal of dirty, filthy tar sands oil," said Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer of California.

In a speech last year on climate change, Obama said the pipeline should be approved only if it is basically carbon-neutral, meaning that approving it would have no more impact on climate change that not approving it.

The president and CEO of TransCanada, the company proposing the pipeline, said Friday that the environmental report makes clear the benefits of the project to the U.S. economy, including $3.4 billion in added economic activity from its construction.

Asked about increased carbon emissions, Russ Girling said the report determined that "oil sands are gonna get produced anyway."

"When you read the report carefully, it makes clear that blocking Keystone is an important component of climate sanity and we will find out if John Kerry and particularly Barack Obama are ever willing to stand up to the oil industry or not," said environmental activist Bill McKibben, founder of 350.org.

Messy politics for Democrats

Democrats from energy states, such as Sen. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, face tough re-election battles this fall and therefore want to see the pipeline approved to help a major industry for their constituents.

They have criticized the administration for taking several years to review it. This year, Obama has made holding onto the Senate in November a political priority.

In 2011, the Obama administration postponed a decision on the pipeline until last year, citing concerns raised by Nebraska officials and environmental groups about the original route near the Ogallala Aquifer, which provides drinking water for much of Nebraska and is important for the state's agricultural economy.

Republicans accused Obama of putting off the issue until after the November 2012 election, but their efforts to force an earlier decision failed to work. Meanwhile, TransCanada rerouted it in Nebraska.

The State Department is handling the review because the project crosses an international border with Canada.

CNN's Jamie Crawford, Matthew Hoye, Brianna Keilar, and Jim Acosta contributed to this report.

Source: Top Stories - Google News - http://ift.tt/1beMNtP

Read more

Ex-Port Authority Official Says 'Evidence Exists' Christie Knew About Lane ... - New York Times

HTTP/1.1 302 Found Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 21:23:44 GMT Server: Apache Set-Cookie: NYT-S=0MXD0Qb0kai3/DXrmvxADeHIWFurWNUGaVdeFz9JchiAIUFL2BEX5FWcV.Ynx4rkFI; expires=Sun, 02-Mar-2014 21:23:44 GMT; path=/; domain=.nytimes.com Location: http://ift.tt/1ihJfce Content-Length: 0 nnCoection: close Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 HTTP/1.1 200 OK Server: Apache Cache-Control: no-cache Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Length: 26032 Accept-Ranges: bytes Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 21:23:44 GMT X-Varnish: 938648134 938646713 Age: 13 Via: 1.1 varnish Connection: keep-alive X-Cache: HIT

N.Y. / Region |Christie Knew About Lane Closings, Ex-Port Authority Official Says

http://nyti.ms/1fszh6H

See next articlesSee previous articles

• Home Page


• World


• U.S.


• New York


• Business


• Opinion


• Sports


• Science


• Arts


• Fashion & Style


• Crosswords


• Video

David Wildstein, right, with his lawyer, Alan Zegas, at a hearing in Trenton, New Jersey, in January.Ángel Franco/The New York Times

The former Port Authority official who personally oversaw the lane closings on the George Washington Bridge in the scandal now swirling around Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey said on Friday that the governor knew about the lane closings when they were happening, and that he had the evidence to prove it.

In a letter released by his lawyer, the official, David Wildstein, a high school friend of Mr. Christie’s who was appointed with the governor’s blessing at the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which controls the bridge, described the order to close the lanes as “the Christie administration’s order” and said “evidence exists as well tying Mr. Christie to having knowledge of the lane closures, during the period when the lanes were closed, contrary to what the governor stated publicly in a two-hour press conference” three weeks ago.

OPEN Document

Document: Letter Says Governor Christie Knew About Lane Closings

“Mr. Wildstein contests the accuracy of various statements that the governor made about him and he can prove the inaccuracy of some,” the letter added.

The letter marked the first signal that Mr. Christie may have been aware of the closings, something he repeatedly denied during thenews conference.

In early January, documents revealed that a deputy chief of staff to Mr. Christie, Bridget Anne Kelly, had sent an email to Mr. Wildstein saying, “Time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee,” the town at the New Jersey end of the bridge, where Mr. Christie’s aides had pursued but failed to receive an endorsement from the mayor.

Mr. Christie has steadfastly denied that he knew before this month that anyone in his administration was responsible for the lane closings, and his administration has tried to portray it as the actions of a rogue staff member.

The governor fired Ms. Kelly. Mr. Wildstein, the director of interstate capital projects at the Port Authority, resigned.

More on nytimes.com

• © 2014 The New York Times Company


• Contact Us


• Work With Us


• Advertise


• Your Ad Choices


• Privacy


• Terms of Service


• Terms of Sale

• Site Map


• Help


• Site Feedback


• Subscriptions

Source: Top Stories - Google News - http://ift.tt/1kmSd8C

Read more

It is a mystery: Who left Knox home in coat? - Washington Post

SEATTLE — It was the photo that ran worldwide after an Italian court once again convicted Amanda Knox in the sensational murder case involving her and her former boyfriend: A person, covered by a coat, leaving her mother’s Seattle home and speeding away in a car.

___

Lunar New Year, partial solar eclipse, Syrian airstrikes, studying snake aerodynamics and more.

• Thursday's Photos of the day

WAS IT KNOX? OR NOT?

Knox’s family spokesman, David Marriott, said Thursday that Knox was at the house when the verdict was read that day, but said he didn’t know whether the person who emerged was Knox. The Associated Press and other media outlets identified the person who left the home, surrounded by Knox’s family, as someone believed to be Knox.

On Friday, Marriott sent the AP an email that stated he had made inquiries and that the person wasn’t Knox, but he didn’t elaborate and didn’t immediately respond to a phone call seeking additional comment.

___

SO WHO WAS IN THE COAT?

It’s unclear. The coat-wrapped person achieved one goal, leading some of the photographers camped outside away from the house. Somehow, Knox left her mother’s home and appeared on ABC’s “Good Morning America” in New York on Friday.

___

WHY ALL THE MYSTERY?

Knox and her family have sometimes gone to great lengths to keep a low profile since she returned to her Seattle home in 2011. Knox has tried to largely stay out of the media glare, while also selectively promoting herself and her story as the legal case has continued to unfold in Italy. An appellate court cleared her in 2011 and ordered her freed after spending four years in prison. Knox is often able to live without much attention in Seattle. Local media largely leave her alone, as interest in the case has waned.

After Italy’s highest court overturned her acquittal last year and ordered a new appeals trial that convicted her Thursday, Knox has given interviews to European and American news outlets. She has declined numerous interview requests from the AP.

She did release a book last year about her experience. The book deal was reportedly worth $4 million.

Copyright 2014 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Source: Top Stories - Google News - http://ift.tt/1koyo0S

Read more

New Jersey Gov. Christie Knew of Bridge Lane Closures, Attorney Says - Wall Street Journal

Latest Headlines is home to all the latest, up to the minute news headlines from The Wall Street Journal in a streaming continuous headline experience.

Source: Top Stories - Google News - http://ift.tt/1a99UYi

Read more

Amanda Knox conviction in Italy could spur lengthy extradition fight - Reuters

By Jonathan Kaminsky

Fri Jan 31, 2014 8:13pm EST

1 of 2. Amanda Knox sits alone before being interviewed on the set of ABC's ''Good Morning America'' in New York January 31, 2014.

Credit: Reuters/Andrew Kelly

(Reuters) - Italy's conviction of Amanda Knox for the murder of her British roommate when the two were exchange students together could spur a drawn-out fight over extradition in the United States, where supporters contend she is the victim of a faulty foreign justice system.

If Knox's conviction is ultimately confirmed pending further appeals, her lawyers are expected to argue that the United States cannot send her to Italy in part because of U.S. constitutional guarantees against "double jeopardy," although some experts say that could be a tough case to prove.

Knox and her former Italian boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito were found guilty on Thursday for the second time in the 2007 stabbing death of Meredith Kercher, in a retrial that reversed an earlier appeal judgment that cleared her.

Knox, who spent four years in an Italian jail before returning to the United States in 2011, was sentenced to 28 years and 6 months but will not face jail time pending further appeals in Italy. Knox did not attend the trial and would have to be extradited to serve her sentence.

"She has powerful legal arguments that she can use to fight extradition, or the U.S. can use to deny extradition," said Sean Casey, a New York-based former federal prosecutor. "Under the law, the Constitution trumps a treaty."

Now 26 and a student at the University of Washington, Knox said she would not willingly return to Italy.

"I'm going to fight this until the very end. And it's not right, and it's not fair and I'm going to do everything that I can," she told ABC News' "Good Morning America."

If Italian authorities ultimately seek her return, Knox could find herself in a U.S. federal courtroom to fight it, and experts were split on her chances of prevailing on legal grounds.

Some said a constitutional ban on being retried for the same offense after an acquittal would trump an American-Italian extradition agreement. U.S. courts may also frown on her having been tried in absentia, they added.

Others counter the treaty implies an acceptance of the Italian justice system, and that the legal case for extradition is strong.

"You'd have to show a complete breakdown of their judicial system," said Julian Ku, an international law expert at Hofstra University. "There's no problem of hometown bias for the victim because she was not a local. There's no evidence of corruption."

SUPPORT AT HOME

Initially portrayed as a sex-obsessed party girl, Knox has been commonly seen in her home country as a victim of a judicial process riven with breakdowns in police procedure, mishandling of crime scene evidence and prosecutorial misconduct.

Knox's lawyers argued that only one person is guilty of the murder: Ivory Coast-born Rudy Guede, who is serving a 16-year sentence for sexually assaulting and stabbing Kercher. But his trial found that he did not act alone.

In a measure of the support Knox has received close to home, U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell, a Washington state Democrat, said she was "very concerned and disappointed" by the verdict.

In a move that would be rare but not unprecedented, the U.S. Secretary of State has the final right to veto an extradition request, and legal analysts said Washington might feel political pressure to keep Knox out of an Italian prison.

The U.S. State Department has said officials will continue to monitor the Knox case.

"There's a lot of reasons it wouldn't sit well with folks in our country to see her extradited," said Robert Anello, a New York-based attorney and expert in international criminal law. "That would weigh heavily on the political end."

Washington has proven willing in the past to shield citizens from Italian justice. In 2009, U.S. officials said they would not extradite 23 CIA members convicted in absentia in Italy of kidnapping an Egyptian cleric under the U.S. "extraordinary rendition" program.

A decade earlier, two U.S. Marines whose jet clipped the cable of a ski resort gondola, killing 20 people, were tried in a U.S. military court over the objection of Italian prosecutors. They were found not guilty of involuntary manslaughter.

Denial of extradition would be met with disappointment by Italian officials but would be unlikely to precipitate a diplomatic crisis, several U.S.-based analysts said.

"There are limits to how seriously they feel about actually getting a hold of her," said Paul Rothstein, a law professor at Georgetown University who said an extradition process could take months, if not years, to reach a final conclusion. "They could have acted earlier, more vigorously."

(Additional reporting by Eric Johnson in Seattle; Editing by Cynthia Johnston and Gunna Dickson)

• Link this


• Share this


• Digg this


• Email


• Print


• Reprints

Source: Top Stories - Google News - http://ift.tt/1bJVt8n

Read more