DELEITURAS

U.S. residents living near the southern border claim they are afraid to report immigration-related crimes to the police, detailing horrific stories of retaliation by Mexican cartels.

“I turned in 700 pounds [of marijuana] up here … I called it in [to Border Patrol]. They went and got it. That night, [the smugglers] came back. They … broke off all the floats off my troughs — chopped ’em up, drained all of it,” Billy Darnell, a cattle rancher in New Mexico, explained to the Washington Examiner.

Unlike other residents in the area, Darnell alerts the Border Patrol and local authorities whenever he sees an incident. However, the Hidalgo County cattle ranger has paid the price for talking.

Drug smugglers working for the cartels are constantly crossing the U.S-Mexico border, carrying marijuana and other illicit narcotics with them. Many times, smugglers will camp out and make use of property on the U.S. side of the border, clashing with American ranchers and residents.

After reaching out to residents living near the area, several told the Washington Examiner that reporting immigration-related crimes — such as burglary or finding drugs near their property — to the police can lead to retaliation. Fearing retribution, many of them forgo calling authorities altogether.

“I mix and mingle with these folks a lot,” said Joel Edwards, a Hidalgo County commissioner who said ranchers’ fears of retaliation by the cartels are legitimate. “That’s pretty much a real common feeling out there … I’ve heard it quite a bit in the last few weeks. They’re just scared.”

Another resident, Tricia Elbrock, believes cartel spotters camp out in the hills that overlook her home in Animas, New Mexico and would know if she attempted to report suspicious activity. Elbrock has reported finding semiautomatic rifles, cellphones and satellite phones. However, she never approaches anything that is left on her property because people watching “could pick us off with a rifle.”

News of resident anxiety comes as lawmakers in Congress continue to debate border security and possible construction of a massive border wall.

After undergoing the longest shutdown in U.S. history, President Donald Trump relented and allowed the federal government to reopen in late January. However, Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill have until Feb. 15 to reach an agreement or else face another shutdown.  It’s not clear if Democrats will allow a comprehensive deal on border security to include funding for a border wall — something that Trump has made clear is a deal-breaker.

In the meantime, the president is wielding his executive authority to beef up security on the U.S.-Mexico border. The Pentagon last Tuesday announced they were sending an additional 2,000 troops to the southwestern part of the border for a mission that will extend until Sept. 30. The Pentagon on Sunday announced another 3,750 U.S. troops to be deployed at the border.

Soldiers will help border agents install barbed wire and assist with other immigration enforcement efforts.

Retail prices for 768 prescription drugs commonly used by older adults increased by an average of 6.4% in 2015, outpacing the general inflation rate of 0.1%. This is at least the 12^th straight year of substantial retail price increases for prescription drugs, according to the latest in a series of AARP Public Policy Institute reports that began tracking drug prices in 2004.

The new “Rx Price Watch Report: Trends in Retail Prices of Prescription Drugs Widely Used by Older Americans, 2006-2015,” studied retail prices of a combined set of 268 brand name, 399 generic, and 101 specialty drugs widely used by older Americans, including Medicare beneficiaries, over ten years.

In 2015, the average annual cost of therapy for just one prescription drug was almost $13,000 for older adults. This cost was:

• Equal to 80% of the average Social Security retirement benefit of $16,101.
• More than 50% of Medicare beneficiaries’ median income of $25,150.
• Almost 25% of the median household income of $55,775.

“Year after year, drug price increases far outpace price increases for the other kinds of goods and services that consumers use every day,” said AARP Chief Public Policy Officer Debra Whitman. “These increases are simply unsustainable for everyone, including patients, employers, insurers, and taxpayer-funded programs like Medicare and Medicaid.”

Rx Price Watch Report Highlights
Based on the retail prices of 768 brand name, generic, and specialty drugs:

• The average annual cost for one widely-used prescription drug in 2015 ($12,951) was more than 3X the average annual cost for a widely-used prescription drug in 2006 ($4,202), the year Medicare implemented Part D.
• In 2015, the average annual cost of therapy for widely-used specialty drugs was $52,486compared with an average annual cost of $5,807 for widely-used brand name drugs and $523for widely-used generic drugs.

“Given these trends in prescription drug price increases, we’re going to continue seeing more and more older Americans, especially those on fixed incomes, who’ll be unable to afford their prescription drugs,” said Leigh Purvis, Director of Health Services Research, AARP Public Policy Institute, and co-author of the report.

United Kingdom Prime Minister Theresa May’s Brexit deal was voted down by both pro-Brexit and anti-Brexit members of the House of Commons in a record-setting defeat Tuesday.

The next step is unclear after the U.K.’s lower house of parliament voted against May’s deal for an exit from the European Union 432 to 202, reported CNBC.

May also faces a a vote of no confidence in her government, which could result in a new general election, reported BBC. It was brought by Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, who cited “the sheer incompetence of this government.”

The parliament’s third largest party, the Scottish National Party, is expected to align with Labour on the vote of no confidence, reported CNBC. Debate on Corbyn’s motion will be Wednesday, May said according to BBC.

May also said it is still her “duty to deliver” Brexit after her withdrawal agreement was voted down.

May will present her “plan B” for withdrawing the United Kingdom from the European Union on Jan. 21, according to CNBC. Some of her options include trying to ram the current Withdrawal Agreement through parliament again or a second Brexit referendum.

May has already survived a confidence vote after conservative lawmakers called for it in November. May will held on to her job after 200 members of her party voted they have confidence in her to lead the government Dec. 12.

Stella Artois is hosting “The Art of the Chalice” on August 10, 2017 from 7-10pm.  The event celebrates the best of Stella Artois and the best of the city’s local art, culture, and cuisine through the lens of the Stella Artois Chalice.

Stella Artois commissioned local art duo No Kings Collective to create a mural inspired by the city of Washington, D.C. and the Stella Artois Chalice.

To unveil the “The Art of the Chalice” mural, Stella Artois is hosting an event at the Ronald Reagan Atrium. No Kings Collective’s mural reflects the city’s political history as well as the cultural liveliness, incorporating red and white colors that are iconic to both Stella Artois and Washington, D.C. Following the event, the mural will be on display for six months between Meridian Hill and Logan Circle on 1738 14th St NW.

Stella Artois also enlisted local artisans to help celebrate the city including Top Chef Bart Vandaele, glass artists from the McFadden Art Glass Studio and folk-rock music group Wylder.

Beer expert and Master Cicerone® Max Bakker will be at the event to teach guests more about the Stella Artois Chalice and the brand’s signature Nine Step Pouring Ritual. Max is one of only 13 individuals worldwide to earn the title of Master Cicerone®, which is the fourth and highest level of the Cicerone Certification Program. It recognizes an exceptional understanding of brewing, beer, and pairing – combining outstanding tasting abilities with an encyclopedic knowledge of beers.

This event is part of the “The Art of the Chalice” program which pays tribute to the iconic Stella Artois Chalice through local art installations across the country.

You can find more information on the “Art of the Chalice” Facebook page.

A federal judge in Florida on Wednesday ordered the public release of dozens of documents kept under seal during BuzzFeed’s lawsuit over the Steele dossier.

District Court Judge Ursula Ungaro ordered that the documents be made public by Feb. 8. More than 40 records used in the case are listed in the order.

Ungaro’s decision will shed light into the discovery process during the defamation case, which included depositions with dossier author Christopher Steele and the founders of Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm that hired Steele.

Ungaro ruled in BuzzFeed’s favor on Dec. 19. The website was sued in February 2017 by Aleksej Gubarev, a Russian tech executive accused in the dossier of using his web hosting companies to hack into the DNC’s computer systems.

Gubarev vehemently denied the allegation, which Steele made in a memo dated Dec. 13, 2016. The memo was the last of 17 memos that compile what is now known as the dossier. BuzzFeed published the dossier on Jan. 10, 2017.

BuzzFeed apologized to Gubarev after the lawsuit was filed and redacted his name from the copy of the dossier posted to its website. But the website hired a private investigator — a former FBI and National Security Council official named Anthony Ferrante — to uncover evidence to support its legal defense.

BuzzFeed was also sued last year by former Trump attorney Michael Cohen. The dossier accuses Cohen of visiting Prague during the 2016 campaign to meet with Kremlin officials and to pay off Russian hackers. Cohen has vehemently denied the allegations, but dropped the lawsuit amid other legal problems.

He was sentenced to three years in prison on Dec. 13 on a variety of charges.

In her final order in the case, Ungaro revealed that BuzzFeed obtained the dossier through David Kramer, a former State Department official and close associate of Arizona Sen. John McCain. Kramer gave BuzzFeed’s Ken Bensinger a copy of the dossier on Dec. 28, 2016.

The discovery process of the case revealed Steele and opposition research firm Fusion GPS’s efforts to provide the dossier to journalists. Steele and Fusion founder Glenn Simpson met with reporters from The New York Times, The Washington Post, The New Yorker, CNN and Yahoo! News in September and October 2016.

Steele and Fusion GPS executives were deposed during the discovery process in the case.

The FBI relied heavily on some of Steele’s unverified memos to obtain surveillance warrants against former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. Steele, a former MI6 officer, alleged in his report that Page met secretly with Kremlin insiders during a visit to Moscow in July 2016.

The FBI cited Steele’s unverified claims as part of a probable cause affidavit to obtain spy warrants against Page. Republicans have accused the FBI of misleading the surveillance court by relying on Steele’s unverified dossier and for failing to disclose that it was ultimately funded by the Clinton campaign and DNC.

Fusion GPS Connections

Yesterday, the DOD announced it would continue to slavishly adhere to the treasonous New START unilateral disarmament treaty signed by Barack Obama four years ago, even despite Russia’s ongoing, rapid nuclear buildup and its illegal invasion and occupation of the Crimea.

In order to implement the treaty – which requires only the US, not Russia, to cut its nuclear arsenal – the DOD will eliminate 50 ICBMs, disable four launch tubes on each ballistic missile submarine and disable the nuclear weapon carrying ability on 30 of the USAF’s 66 B-52 bombers, rendering them only nuclear-capable. Thus, the USAF will have only 56 nuclear-capable bombers: the remaining 35 B-52s plus 20 B-2s, while Russia has 251 nuclear-capable Tu-95, Tu-160, and Tu-22M strategic bombers.

Yet, non-governmental disarmament advocates are not satisfied with these unilateral cuts and have called on the Obama administration to cut the US nuclear arsenal much deeper – and unilaterally – even as Russia, China, and North Korea are all rapidly building up and modernizing their nuclear arsenals, and as Iran is racing to reach nuclear weapon capability.

To justify such dramatic unilateral cuts, they falsely claim that a) the US has more nuclear weapons than it needs, and b) disarming oneself makes one safer – both lies that have already been refuted here on CDN many times.

The Arms Control Association’s executive director, Daryl G. Kimball, falsely claims that the Obama administration’s implementation of New START “is modest in the extreme and still leaves the US with far more nuclear weapons than the President and the Pentagon say they need for nuclear deterrence.”

FAS blogger and Danish pro-unilateral-disarmament activist Hans M. Kristensen, who has campaigned for the West’s unilateral disarmament, falsely claims that the Obama administration, in deciding to keep 450 ICBM siloes and not making deeper cuts, “was not driven by national security concerns” – as if disarming oneself unilaterally could make one more secure!

All of their claims are utterly false. Disarmament only makes a country LESS secure, and America does NOT have more nuclear weapons than she needs for deterrence; in fact, the US barely has enough of them. This is because Russia and China wield large nuclear arsenals, while North Korea is growing its and Iran is racing to build one.

Putin’s Huge Nuclear Buildup

According to US State Department diplomats in Moscow, who monitor Russia daily, Moscow is “vastly increasing” its nuclear arsenal and aims to reach “nuclear superiority over, not nuclear parity with, the US”, as Bill Gertz reports in his newest column in the Washington Free Beacon.

This is consistent with previous media and think-tank reports that Russia was building up its nuclear arsenal, was building additional strategic Tu-160 bombers, and had ordered 400 new ICBMs. The State Department and Bill Gertz have now simply confirmed this.

Thus, we have irrefutable evidence that a) Russia is dramatically increasing its nuclear arsenal, and b) its buildup is aimed at achieving nuclear superiority over, not parity with, the US. Which also proves that  New START is a treasonous treaty highly dangerous to US and allied security, because it requires nuclear arsenal cuts only of the US, while allowing Russia to dramatically increase its own arsenal.

Russia currently has:

• About 414-434 ICBMs capable of delivering at least 1,684 (and probably more) nuclear warheads to the CONUS, with its fleet of 68-75 SS-18 Satan ICBMs alone being able to deliver 10 warheads each (750 in total);
• 13 ballistic missile submarines, each armed with 16 ballistic missiles (20 in the case of the sole Typhoon class boat), each missile being itself capable of delivering 4-8 warheads (12 in the future, when Bulava and Liner missiles replace the currently-used Skiff) to the CONUS even if launched from Russian ports (Moscow has had such long-ranged missiles since the late 1980s), meaning over 1,400 warheads in total deliverable by Russia’s strategic submarine fleet;
• 251 strategic bombers (Tu-95, Tu-160, Tu-22M), each capable of delivering between 7 (Tu-95) and 12 (Tu-22M) nuclear warheads to the CONUS. Russian bombers have, in recent years, repeatedly flown close to, and sometimes into, US airspace.
• 2,800 strategic nuclear warheads in total, of which 1,500 are now deployed – and more will be deployed in the future – on the forementioned ICBMs, submarines, and bombers.
• Over 20 attack and cruise missile submarines, each carrying nuclear-armed cruise missiles (one such submarine of the Akula class popped up last year near the US submarine base at King’s Bay, GA).
• The world’s largest tactical nuclear arsenal, with around 4,000 warheads deliverable by a very wide range of systems, from short-range ballistic missiles to artillery pieces to tactical aircraft (Su-24, Su-25, the Flanker family, Su-34), to surface ships using nuclear depth charges.
• Illegal (banned by the INF Treaty) intermediate-range nuclear-armed missiles (Yars-M, R-500, Iskander-M) that can target any place in Europe and China. (Nonetheless, despite these facts, the Obama administration and NATO are too afraid to recognize and name Russia as an INF Treaty violator.)

Russia is now dramatically increasing that arsenal, as the State Department and the Strategic Command’s leader have now confirmed. In addition to deploying more warheads and building more bombers from stockpiled components, it is:

• Deploying new submarine-launched ballistic missiles (the Bulava and the Liner) that can carry 10-12 warheads each. Russia plans to procure around 140-150 missiles of each type; when these are fully deployed on Russia’s 13 ballistic missile subs, that fleet will be able to carry 2,000-2,200 nuclear warheads all by itself.
• Deploying additional Yars-M, R-500, and Iskander-M IRBMs – in violation of the INF Treaty.

Russia is also steadily modernizing its existing nuclear arsenal and fleet of delivery systems. It is:

• Developing and deploying a new class of ballistic missile submarines capable of carrying missiles such as the Bulava and the Liner. Two of them have already been commissioned and at least eight in total will be built.
• Developing a next-generation intercontinental bomber, slated to first fly in 2020 – before the USAF’s planned Long Range Strike Bomber will.
• Developing a new submarine-launched cruise missile, the Kaliber;
• Procuring and deploying a new air-launched cruise missile, the Kh-101/102;
• Developing and deploying three new ICBM types – the light Yars (RS-24, SS-29) to replace the single-warhead Topol and Topol-M missiles, the midweight Avangard/Rubezh (slated to replace SS-19 Stiletto missiles), and the Sarmat (AKA Son of Satan), intended to replace the SS-18 Satan heavy ICBMs.
• Developing a rail-based ICBM type on top of the forementioned ICBM classes.
• Developing a hypersonic missile that could carry nuclear warheads to any point on Earth in an hour and easily penetrate US missile defenses.

Note that the RS-24 (SS-29) Yars ICBMs will be able to carry 10 warheads each, whereas the missiles they’re replacing – the Topol (SS-25 Sickle) and Topol-M (SS-27 Sickle-B) – can carry only one warhead. Therefore, as these missiles enter service, the warhead carriage capacity of the Russian ICBM fleet will greatly increase beyond the (already huge) number of 1,684 warheads immediately deliverable to the CONUS.

By 2018, 80%, and by 2021, 100% of Russia’s ICBMs will be missiles of the new generation – the he Avangard/Rubezh, and the Sarmat heavy ICBM, as well as the forementioned rail-based ICBM.

By contrast, the US, under the Obama administration, has unilaterally retired and scrapped its nuclear-armed Tomahawk submarine-launched cruise missiles and their warheads, plans to kill the procurement of conventional Tomahawks, has no program to replace its ICBMs or air-launched cruise missiles, has delayed the induction of its next-generation bomber until the mid-2020s (and plans to procure only 80-100 of these crucial aircraft), has no plans to develop or deploy mobile ICBMs or medium- or short-range ballistic missiles, and has delayed its ballistic missile submarine replacement program. And even when these boats enter service, there will be only 12 of them, each carrying 16 missiles as opposed to the current Ohio class carrying 24 missiles each.

This is as simple as “Russia and China have nuclear-armed submarine- and ground-launched cruise missiles and IRBMs, the US does not.”

Which means that, even without further cuts, the US will be at a nuclear disadvantage vis-a-vis Russia (and China).

Russia would’ve been a huge nuclear threat necessitating the maintenance of the US nuclear arsenal at no less than its current size even WITHOUT this nuclear buildup. With it, it is becoming an even greater nuclear threat, thus necessitating that the US nuclear arsenal be increased, too.

The Dragon’s Huge Nuclear Teeth

China also has a large nuclear arsenal. How large, exactly? Retired Chief of Staff of Russia’s Strategic Missile Troops, General Viktor Yesin, based on Russian intel data, estimates it at 1,600-1,800 nuclear warheads and enough fissile material for another 1,800 warheads.

China’s delivery systems arsenal currently consists of:

•  24-36 DF-5 ICBMs and an unknown number of DF-41 ICBMs capable of carrying 10 warheads each;
• over 30 DF-31/31A ICBMs capable of carrying 4 warheads per missile;
• 20 DF-4 ICBMs;
• 120 DF-3 and DF-21 medium-range ballistic missiles, now being joined by the DF-25 and the DF-26;
• over 1,600 DF-11, DF-15, and DF-16 short-range ballistic missiles, the vast majority of them stationed opposite Taiwan;
• 440 nuclear-capable bombers and strike aircraft (H-6, Q-5, JH-7), each armed with a nuclear freefall bomb and many H-6K bombers being armed with air-launched CJ-10 and CJ-20 cruise missiles; and
• 6 ballistic missile submarines (1 Xia class, 5 Jin class), capable of carrying 12-16 missiles each (JL-2 missiles in the Jin class’s case, each carrying 4 warheads); a new class of ballistic subs, however, the Type 096 Tang class, is due to begin strategic patrols this year, armed with 24 JL-2 missiles.

Of course, like Russia, China is now rapidly expanding and modernizing its nuclear arsenal. It is building additional ICBMs, shorter-ranged missiles, ballistic missile submarines, and strike aircraft. It is also:

• Developing nuclear-capable hypersonic missiles;
• Modifying more H-6 bombers to carry nuclear-armed cruise missiles;
• Developing new, longer-ranged variants of the JL-2 submarine-launched missile that will be able to carry 12 warheads over a distance of 14,000 kms; and
• Developing a nuclear-capable stealthy intercontinental bomber.

Yet, in the face of this huge nuclear buildup by both Russia and China, arms control advocates like Kimball and Kristensen continue to falsely claim America has more nuclear weapons than needed for nuclear deterrence – and leftist press agencies like Reuters and AP uncritically print their blatant lies!

The American people, and members of Congress, must not buy their blatant lies. No, America does not have more nuclear weapons than necessary for nuclear deterrence; it barely has enough. As Russia and China increase their nuclear arsenals, America will have to do the same if it wishes to be secure.

For it is military strength, not weakness, that guarantees peace and security, contrary to Kristensen’s and the ACA’s blatant lies.

One tumultuous chapter of trade deliberations between the U.S. and China has ended, with both sides now hopeful that a far-reaching deal can be made before an imminent tariff deadline.

Negotiations between U.S. and Chinese trade officials, which began Monday in the Commerce Ministry in Beijing, finally concluded on Wednesday as both sides sought to inch closer to an understanding on a number of disagreements. Originally intended to last only two days, continuing developments prompted negotiators to extend the talks for another day.

“The extension of the talks indicates that both sides are serious about this consultation,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang said of negotiations. “If the results of the talks are positive, it would be beneficial for both China and the US and good news for the global economy.”

President Donald Trump also boasted about the progress, tweeting Tuesday that “Talks with China are going very well!”

The next phase of trade negotiations will involve higher-level talks, likely when Trump attends the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland later in January. Following the economic summit, Vice Premier Liu He is expected to visit Washington, D.C., where he will meet with U.S. trade negotiators led by Robert Lighthizer.

However, both sides still have a long way to go, with Trump carrying an extensive list of demands.

Among their many requests, U.S. negotiators are asking the Chinese to increase purchases of American farm and energy commodities; allow greater access into China’s markets; improve and enforce property theft protections; and an end of China’s policy of forcing foreign companies to hand over technology secrets. U.S. negotiators are also taking steps to ensure the Chinese government actually follows through on its promises.

In return, the U.S. will agree to wind down exorbitant tariffs currently placed on Chinese imports.

The U.S.-China trade war began when Trump imposed a 25 percent tariff on $50 billion worth of Chinese goods last July and August. Trump, who has dubbed himself a “tariff man,” doubled down in September, slapping China with a 10 percent tariff on  an additional $200 billion worth of Chinese imports.

The president was prepared to impose even more tariffs, but agreed to hold back after Chinese President Xi Jinping pledged to meet a number of preliminary demands. The truce took place at the G-20 Summit in Buenos Aires, Argentina, and resulted in Trump postponing his planned tariff hike for 90 days while negotiators work towards a finalized deal.

However, if no deal is reached by March 2, Trump is prepared to hike tariffs from 10 percent to 25 percent on $200 billion worth of Chinese imports.

The Chinese government has strong incentives to reach a deal. The Communist country has been hit with an economic slowdown and its car sales have dropped 19 percent last month from the year before, the steepest decline in China in nearly three decades.

Click:steel plate cutting machine price

Laura Vitale, from the Youtube series “Laura in the Kitchen”, shows how to make a delicious seasonal breakfast treat – gingerbread waffles. Don’t have a Belgian waffle maker? Check below for the Oster model that Laura uses and some alternatives.

Laura is using the Oster 1-1/2″ Thick Belgian Flip Waffle Maker in brushed stainless. It’s a very affordable, high-quality utensil with fool-proof indicators and controls.

• Simple flip operation for evenly cooked waffles
• Adjustable temperature control for light and fluffy or crispy waffles
• 1-1/2-inch nonstick Belgian surface
• Removable drip tray included for easy clean-up
• Space-saving, vertical compact storage design

All waffle makers are different so check your user’s manual to make sure your waffle’s come out right.

Here is how to get the Oster and a few alternatives

California Gov. Gavin Newsom abandoned a high speed rail project Tuesday that sought to connect Los Angeles to San Francisco. He suggested the the high cost of the project made the idea a pipe dream.

Newsom dialed back anticipation for the project during California’s State of the State address. The Democrat suggested building a high-speed rail line between Bakersfield and Merced — a distance of 160 miles — rather than a project designed to connect the state’s two largest cities.

“Let’s level about the high-speed rail,” Newsom said. “Let’s be real, the current project as planned would cost too much and, respectfully, take too long. Right now, there simply isn’t a path to get from Sacramento to San Diego, let alone from San Francisco to L.A. I wish there were.”

Former Gov. Jerry Brown’s plan would have cost nearly $77 billion and taken more than a decade to complete, according to recent estimates. “Critics are going to say that’s a train to nowhere, but I think that’s wrong and that’s offensive,” said Newsom, who was elected after Brown was term-limited in November 2018.

“Abandoning the high-speed rail entirely means we will have wasted billions and billions of dollars with nothing but broken promises… and lawsuits to show for it,” Newsom said, adding that he does not want to send the $3.5 billion in federal money allocated for the project back to the Trump administration.

The rail project has faced a lot of controversy throughout the years. Backers of a campaign to eliminate California’s most recent gas tax, for instance, pushed an initiative in 2018 directing Brown to halt the high-speed rail project and use any unspent funds on road improvements.

The new ballot initiative would have required any funds not needed for repaying rail bonds instead go to other transportation work. Supporters said the measure staves off criticism that eliminating the state’s recent pricey gas tax makes it more difficult to make infrastructure improvements.

Newsom’s decision to ditch the project comes at an awkward time for Democrats. A document posted online fleshing out elements of the so-called Green New Deal suggests Democrats are looking to “[b]uild out highspeed rail at a scale where air travel stops becoming necessary.”

Some conservatives in the state are upset that the project will continue to exist in some form. “Make no mistake about it: Gov. Gavin Newsom’s announcement today is not about killing the wasteful High-Speed Rail Project, it is about keeping it very much alive,” Carl DeMaio, chairman of Reform California, said in a press statement Tuesday. “Newsom wants to spend tens of billions on a rail line between Merced and Bakersfield – a complete waste.”

Argentine Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio has been elected by his peers as the new pope,
becoming the first pontiff from the Americas.

He has chosen to be known as Pope Francis.

Pope Francis I: Let’s begin this long road… let us all behave with love and charity