Search results

More Search Options
4 Results for 'Dakota Access Pipeline'
Recent

Why Is Joe Manchin Holding Up Deb Haaland's Nomination?

PlusArticle
Tear gas canisters fired at migrants at the Tijuana border this weekend reportedly were manufactured by Safariland, LLC, the same firm that provided similar munitions used in other recent controversial incidents. Safariland is a defense supplies vendor whose name reportedly was printed on canisters of smoke or tear gas used on migrants in Mexico, including women and children, by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) over the weekend. Safariland munitions reportedly were also linked to the 2014 police crackdown in Ferguson, Missouri, and allegedly used at the Standing Rock showdown over water rights and the Dakota Access Pipeline in 2016. In a lawsuit stemming from the Standing Rock clashes, activist Sophia Wilansky alleged that her left hand was nearly severed and her left arm was disfigured and disabled by a Defense Technology flashbang grenade. Defense Technology is a Safariland brand. The California and Florida-based company is owned by investor Warren Kanders, who also serves as its CEO. Kanders and his wife are affiliated with prestigious institutions including the Aspen Institute and the Whitney Museum of American Art. They have contributed large sums of money to the Republican Party, but more recently became active backers of Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ), according to FEC data reviewed by TYT. See related story on the Kanders donations to Booker and others. In September, TYT reported that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had contracted to use a Safariland product called the “TranZport Hood.” The Trump administration authorized the use of the hood in September of 2017 in an internal document obtained by TYT through a Freedom of Information request. Also in September, Safariland was awarded what appears to be its largest ever subcontract from CBP, worth $526,799, according to a federal government database. The records also show that Safariland was subcontracted by Aardvark Tactical Inc., a company that sells chemical agents for crowd control. Federal records show the primary contract was a delivery order to be completed between Sept. 4, 2018, and Feb. 28, 2019. The purpose of the contract is to “complete delivery order of chemical munitions.” The records also indicate “too many line items for system on the original request.” The only additional specifications say that the contract is for “ammunition (except small arms)” between 30mm and 75mm. Federal data also show that the overwhelming majority of contract funds awarded to Safariland by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) came from its CBP sub-agency. In total, CBP has awarded $2,152,485 in contracts to Safariland. CBP has also awarded $759,838 in subcontracts to Safariland. Another DHS sub-agency that awards a large amount of funds to Safariland is Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). In total, ICE has awarded $1,018,647 in subcontracted funds to Safariland and $463,757 in direct contracts. This year, Safariland shattered its previous record amount of DHS subcontract funding, claiming some $1,065,493. It has already garnered $475,365 in subcontracts for 2019. A map generated by the federal database website depicts the place of performance for the funds awarded by DHS to Safariland and shows significant sums going to southern border states California, New Mexico and Texas. DHS isn’t Safariland’s only benefactor. The Defense Department has so far awarded Safariland $4,763,109 in subcontracted funds for 2018, a sum that dwarfs all preceding years. The largest contract awarded to Safariland by the Defense Department, totaling $16,049,048 and extending through 2030, bears the description, “M1029, 40MM non-lethal crowd dispersal.” The term “non-lethal” has been opposed due to the weaponry’s use in some fatal incidents, and outside law enforcement the weapons are sometimes referred to as “less-lethal.” The name “Safariland” apparently derives from the “African safari excursions” enjoyed by its original founder, who created the company in 1964. Today, Safariland bills itself as a company whose equipment saves lives. Its trademarked mission statement is “Together, We Save Lives.” The firm’s website says, “We continuously seek new innovations to add to the premier group of Safariland brands that have been protecting law enforcement, military and security professionals for over 50 years.” Ken Klippenstein is a senior investigative reporter for TYT. He can be reached on Twitter @kenklippenstein or via email: kenklippenstein@tytnetwork.com. Follow TYT Investigates on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube to stay on top of exclusive news stories from The Young Turks.

Tear Gas Maker Has History of Controversy

PlusArticle
Friday in Washington D.C., two distinct worldviews competed. At 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, President Trump met with executives from seven oil companies, including some of the largest in America, to discuss how a global glut and plummeting demand during this pandemic have driven down petroleum prices. At the Capitol building, in unheralded meetings, House Democrats and environmental lobbyists discussed the party’s Moving Forward Framework. That’s the draft for a $760 billion House bill on infrastructure. It includes $329 billion for highways and $34 billion for “clean energy.” The dueling meetings embodied the battle between fossil fuels and clean renewable energy. The North America director of the environmental activist group 350.org, Tamara Toles O’Laughlin, issued the following statement regarding Trump's oil meeting: The President of the United States should be meeting with the 10 million Americans who have filed for unemployment due to the pandemic. He should be reaching out to the nurses and doctors who are non stop caring for sick patients, without enough protective gear or equipment. It’s disrespectful that instead he’s chosen to roll out the red carpet for Big Oil executives. It’s shameless! Some analysts have said Trump could invoke the Defense Production Act to purchase oil to fill the country’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR). Using this executive power, he could potentially bypass Congress and the environmentalists, like 350.org, that stopped the bailout of oil and gas companies in the $2.2 trillion coronavirus stimulus bill. On Thursday, Trump made the still unsubstantiated claim that he had convinced Saudi Arabia and Russia to reduce oil production, which raised oil prices. The two countries have increased production, leaving the world with an oversupply. Saudi Arabia alone was processing a record 12 million barrels a day. With the worldwide economic slowdown due to the coronavirus pandemic, the oversupply and low demand reduced the price of WTI Crude oil to just over $20 this week compared to $40 a month ago. After Trump’s tweet, the price of WTI Crude spiked before settling to $25. Tyson Slocum, the Energy Program director for the advocacy group Public Citizen, told The Young Turks in an email that, in 2012, President Obama invoked the Defense Production Act to help out the biofuels industry. Regarding the possibility of using the DPA to bail out fossil fuels by filling the SPR, Slocum noted that the Department of Energy (DOE) had filed a solicitation about using the SPR to store oil. Slocum wrote, …this appears to be more of an opportunity for US producers and various marketers to use the SPR as a short-term storage option. That’s because right now, private storage facilities are actually filling up fast, since the demand shock means a lot of oil has nowhere to go. I’ve heard that some pipeline companies are considering using their pipelines to store oil, as the situation is getting bad. Slocum also noted that the 2015 budget bill created an energy security fund to pay for SPR maintenance. He estimated that the fund has some $850 million the DOE could use to buy oil. On Thursday, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said that the Treasury has limited ability to aid oil companies, but will work with the Federal Reserve to lend the companies money. The oil executives reportedly attending the president’s meeting Friday were: Exxon Mobil CEO Darren Woods, Chevron CEO Mike Wirth, Continental Resources founder Harold Hamm, Occidental Petroleum CEO Vicki Hollub, Devon Energy CEO David Hager, Phillips66 CEO Greg Garland, and Energy Transfer CEO Kelcy Warren. There were different types of oil companies present at the meeting: Big oil and smaller companies focused on natural gas and fracking. Their interests are not the same. The oil industry's main lobbying group, American Petroleum Institute, has said that oil companies do not want a bailout -- that the market should decide. And Big Oil executives at Friday’s meeting have not been donating significant amounts to Trump, Federal Election Commission (FEC) records show. But others at the meeting have been. Kelcy Warren, head of Energy Transfer, last year donated $5600 to Donald Trump’s campaign, and $360,600 to the Trump Victory joint fundraising committee, according to FEC records. Warren also gave $355,000 to the Republican National Committee. Energy Transfer is a natural-gas company and owner of Sunoco. It is also part-owner of the controversial Dakota Access Pipeline. Hamm, the founder of Continental Resources, has contributed $50,200 to the Trump Victory joint fundraising committee and the Trump campaign. Hamm has called for tariffs on foreign oil. He is invested in shale oil, which requires fracking to remove the oil and gas from shale rocks. Fracking is not only worse for the environment and climate change, it’s more expensive. Fracking companies have to sell at higher prices to make a profit. The shale oil industry was profitable when the price of oil was $60 a barrel. It is not at $25. Analysts have said big oil companies may be able to weather this economic downturn, but that smaller oil companies may get absorbed or die. As the White House meeting occurred, over at the Capitol -- and via videoconferencing -- sources say, major environmental groups including the Sierra Club, Oil Change International, 350.org, Greenpeace, and the Sunrise Movement met and communicated with Democratic congressional staff from both the House and Senate to work on the Moving Forward Framework infrastructure plan. They hope the plan will lead to a House bill which includes environmentally sustainable industries. House Democrats believe their plan could mean 10 million jobs and a major shift in American energy policies and pollution. However, on Friday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi backtracked, saying the next stimulus relief bill would have to be like the last one, giving direct aid to deal with the pandemic. She said it was still possible Democrats would pursue infrastructure and environmental changes in another stimulus bill. On Wednesday she had noted that the $760 billion plan includes money for community health centers to combat the coronavirus, highway improvement, public transit, railroads, airports, clean water and wastewater treatment, harbor infrastructure, clean energy, broadband for the entire country, and public safety. Natalie Mebane is the associate director of policy and a lobbyist for 350.org. She told TYT that environmental groups coalesced last month to stop the oil industry bailout because of the speed at which the coronavirus stimulus bill went through the Senate. She told TYT, “…with the Senate package moving so quickly and being so large… we just had to coordinate faster than ever, we had to work together and move as a community and think faster than ever…. We all work together, we all coordinate, we all share, because we’re all fighting for the same things.” Mebane noted that the key issues for the next stimulus plan would be supporting clean energy, reducing carbon output, and green jobs. ...If we are doing the right investments with clean energy, and also making sure that we are actually trying to reduce our carbon pollution, because that is the most critical… this is the only time we have... and also providing the job transitions. I think we don't want to sideline and hurt workers who are stuck in the fossil fuel economy by no fault of their own. They're trying to work, they’re trying to live. Whether a Democratic House bill could pass the Senate or get a presidential signature remains to be seen. Trump is unpredictable, though his record has been consistently anti-environment. Because Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) is in a tight reelection race, some activists believe he may be more accommodating on environmental issues.

The Green Fight for Coronavirus Stimulus Money

PlusArticle
Gov. Kevin Stitt (R-OK) has asked the EPA to give his state jurisdiction over environmental regulations on Native American reservations. This would include regulating fossil fuels, a multi-billion dollar industry which donated $239,102 to Stitt this election cycle. This move could destroy opportunities for tribal leaders to reduce pollution and fossil fuel dependency in the eastern half of Oklahoma, effectively thwarting last month's Supreme court ruling giving the tribes sovereignty over the vast area. Stitt revealed his EPA request in a little-noticed webinar hosted by the Oklahoma Farm Bureau, a farming trade group. The farm bureau's president, Rodd Moesel, noted that in 2005, Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) attached a midnight rider to an appropriations bill, creating a federal law that the EPA must regulate environmental issues on the state’s tribal land or, if requested, the state of Oklahoma gains regulatory control. In the Aug. 3 webinar, Stitt explained, “The EPA will regulate environmental issues. That's good and bad. It’s good right now with President Trump's environmental folks at the helm. And could be bad if there’s a switch in the administration.” What Governor Stit considers a good EPA, during the Trump Administration, rescinded some 100 regulations governing vehicle and power plant exhaust, mercury and carbon tetrachloride poisoning, water and air pollution, and drilling on federal lands and waters. In the following exchange, Stitt confirmed that he had already asked Wheeler to use the midnight rider's authority to give regulatory control to the state: Stitt: ... that's what the safety is, something that Inhofe got across the finish line for us. Moesel: And it had a provision, I think, that gave the state — if there was a change in the sovereignty rulings — to request the ability for the state to administer environmental rules within the Indian Territory...And that‘s essentially the request I think you just made to Mr. Wheeler who heads the EPA and to give the state that regulatory authority, if I understand correctly. Stitt: Yes. That’s correct. Shortly after the ruling, Stitt had said publicly and repeatedly that he intended to work with his state’s Native Americans on the jurisdictional issues. “I respect and recognize the sovereignty of every Tribe in Oklahoma and look forward to working with every Tribe to ensure that we meet our shared economic, security and social goals,” he said in a press release two weeks prior to the webinar. And during the webinar, Stitt pointed to his own Cherokee roots. “I'm so appreciative of our heritage, our Native American heritage in Oklahoma. I'm a member of Cherokee Nation, and my grandparents grew up in Skiatook, Oklahoma. So eastern Oklahoma is where I'm from and, and so, so appreciative…” But moments later he said what may have begun as a Freudian slip, “... I don't want. I want tribes to be very successful, but not at the expense of non-tribal businesses." Later Stitt said about the Supreme Court ruling, “The problem is a couple of the chiefs I've talked to think it's fantastic, it's a great, it was a great day for their people. It validated what they've always believed: That they're sovereign over this jurisdiction, so they don't see any need for, for a congressional fix or federal legislation to fix anything. They're happy to have us [conduct] government-to-government negotiations.” So Stitt has asked the EPA to turn over regulation of environmental issues on Reservation land to the state agency, which must be done because of the federal rider Inhofe maneuvered in 2005. Will the EPA agree? Consider this: Andrew Wheeler, the present EPA administrator worked 14 years as an aide to Inhofe, who maneuvered that federal rider stealing tribal rights to environmental regulations on reservations. And denying tribes environmental jurisdiction could be a major boon to the fossil fuel industry, hurting now because of the pandemic slowdown. Although some tribal leaders may be inclined to pursue much-needed revenue from pipelines and drilling, others favor stricter measures, such as a ban on fracking. Stitt’s remarks came just two weeks after Inhofe, like Stitt, pledged to work with the tribes. Inhofe said that, “working together as neighbors” with tribal leaders, he would help craft legislation to clarify the Supreme Court’s landmark July 9 ruling. After tribal leaders, who bitterly recall his 2005 midnight rider, reportedly warned Inhofe against pushing through “destructive legislation,” Inhofe suggested no new laws were imminent. Inhofe, who did not respond to a request for comment, is a long-time oil champion and climate change denier. He said in his July 20 press release, “We look forward to working with the Tribal Nations, the state, and all stakeholders, to develop a legislative framework that honors tribal sovereignty…” Neither Stitt nor the EPA responded when asked whether Stitt contacted Wheeler. EASTERN OKLAHOMA In the eastern half of Oklahoma, there’s a common expression: “This is Indian Country.” Native Americans, an estimated 9.3 percent of the state’s population, live primarily in the rural areas here and, in a few suburbs of Tulsa, intermingled with white Oklahomans. There are few border markers declaring a reservation. The most obvious indication of tribal land might be a gasoline station with signs in English and perhaps Cherokee along with a slot machine in the back. Even in this pandemic, Oklahoma’s 71,000 slot machines and 102 casinos provide the bulk of the income needed to fund tribal services like police and fire departments. In July, the Supreme Court legally affirmed that most of eastern Oklahoma is still various Native American reservations. McGirt v. Oklahoma gave Jimcy McGirt, a state-convicted pedophile, the right to a federal trial. As a citizen of the Muscogee (Creek) Tribe, whose crime occurred on tribal land, his lawyers argued he was not under Oklahoma’s jurisdiction. HISTORY: THE TRAIL OF TEARS The high court cited 1833 treaties between the United States and five tribes as sovereign nations. These treaties guaranteed the land to the tribes. The tribes were forced to march thousands of miles to Oklahoma from their ancestral lands in southern states including Georgia, Alabama, Florida, and Mississippi. Many died in this brutal mass relocation, known as The Trail of Tears. It was ordered by then-President Andrew Jackson, who signed the 1830 Indian Removal Act. Referred to as the Five Civilized Tribes — Muscogee (Creek), Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw and Seminole — their lands were confiscated to grow lucrative cotton crops using slaves. THE NEW WAR IN OKLAHOMA Last month’s Supreme Court ruling pits Oklahoma’s white ruling class against these five Native American tribes. The high court ruled that they are still legal sovereign nations, governing most of eastern Oklahoma. What was three million acres under tribal and federal jurisdiction reverted back to the original 19 million acres. Beyond criminal law, this has become a battle for the economic control and self-determination of the eastern half of the state and sent shock waves still reverberating through the state. In one fossil-fuel industry publication an oil executive was said to be, “...worried that tribes could impose new taxes or environmental restrictions on developers.” Potentially billions are at stake and could mean tribal or federal regulations for oil and gas facilities that in Oklahoma previously have had few restrictions. A conservative think tank described it as, “chaos." GREEN TRIBAL SOVEREIGNTY? Before the pandemic, Oklahoma was America’s fourth-largest producer of oil and gas. Now, though, Native American environmentalists believe the Supreme Court ruling on the Muscogee Tribal sovereignty provides an opportunity to move the state to a more sustainable, less polluted future. Oklahoman activist Ashley Nicole McCray said before the McGirt ruling that “...recognizing tribal sovereignty can benefit everyone. [Tribes] have banned fracking, wastewater injection, and have passed the Rights of Nature within their original tribal jurisdiction." Now she believes the fossil-fuel infrastructure of Oklahoma’s powerful will try to crush McGirt’s green possibilities, and fears that some tribes will be bought off, because revenues to fund tribal services are so low during this pandemic. Revenues paid Oklahoma from Tribal casinos are down 55 percent from February through July 2020. There is potential for a green future. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, tribal governed areas of Oklahoma have the highest potential for renewable energy development. The state’s wind farms already generate 35 percent of Oklahoma’s electricity, although coal and oil are still the top energy sources. McCray, who is Absentee Shawnee & Oglala Lakota, works with the activist group Indigenous Environmental Network. She ran for Oklahoma’s Corporation Commission (it regulates oil, gas and agriculture in the state); protested the Dakota Access Pipeline; and addressed the Youth Council during the virtual Democratic National Convention as an advocate for the Green New Deal. In Oklahoma, she told TYT, she expects, “…wheeling and dealing by people in power, since oil and gas own our legislature and probably our federal reps as well. It’s a consideration we have to be prepared for.” FOSSIL FUEL VERSUS TRIBES. TWO SIDES ORGANIZE FOR BATTLE Oklahoma’s “people in power” did immediately scramble to respond to the McGirt decision. Within a week, Oklahoma Attorney General Mike Hunter announced a temporary agreement with the five tribes. The next day, two of the five tribes denied they agreed. Now all five tribes want a review before signing a new agreement. Within two weeks of the ruling, Stitt set up the Oklahoma Commission on Cooperative Sovereignty to study the impact of the Supreme Court's decision and the “…uncertainty for many Oklahomans in numerous areas of life and law.” Chaired by Larry Nichols, co-founder of Devon Energy, a multibillion-dollar oil and natural gas company based in Oklahoma City, the commission includes oil billionaire and big Trump contributor Harold Hamm. Also appointed were legislators, attorneys, and agriculture business owners, but in a clear indication of the commission’s goals, it does not have a single tribal member. In response, the chiefs of both the Cherokee and Muscogee (Creek) Nations formed their own separate commissions to deal with the potential consequences of the McGirt decision. The economic stakes are high. In the eastern half of Oklahoma, roughly a quarter of Oklahoma’s oil and gas wells plus some 60 percent of its refinery capacity could now be under federal or Tribal jurisdiction. The pipelines moving crude oil to and from Oklahoma crisscross the new reservation borders. And the largest private America oil storage facility is located in Cushing on tribal land. TYT Investigative Reporter Ti-Hua Chang is an award-winning journalist who has worked for CBS News and other outlets. You can find him on Twitter @TiHuaChang.

Oklahoma Governor Asked EPA to Strip Tribes of Environmental Authority

PlusArticle
    Page:
  • 1