Chris Wright, Trump’s pick for energy secretary, is wrong about green energy, experts say

Chris Wright, Trump’s pick for energy secretary, is wrong about green energy, experts say
Chris Wright, Trump’s pick for energy secretary, is wrong about green energy, experts say
Steve Christo – Corbis/Corbis via Getty Images

(WASHINGTON) — The United States has seen a significant increase in the use of clean energy over the last few years; however, Chris Wright, President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for secretary of energy, has claimed otherwise.

Wright, chief executive of Liberty Energy — the world’s second-largest fracking services company — has made several comments chastising efforts to fight climate change. One example is a video he posted to LinkedIn last year in which he denies the existence of a climate crisis and disputes a global transition to green energy.

“There is no climate crisis, and we’re not in the midst of an energy transition either,” Wright said.

Wright has been an outspoken critic of policies aimed at curbing climate change, including the Department of Energy’s goal to reach net-zero carbon emissions by 2050.

While Wright does not dispute the existence of climate change, he has argued that policies aimed at reducing the impact of climate change are misguided and alarmist, claiming that any negative impacts of climate change are “clearly overwhelmed by the benefits of increasing energy consumption.”

But the IPCC, the world’s most authoritative body on climate change, has stated that human-amplified climate change is already affecting many weather and climate extremes in every region across the globe, and this has led to widespread adverse impacts and related losses and damages to nature and people.

And the clean energy momentum the country is experiencing will continue as alternative sources of fuel take more market share in the energy sector, experts told ABC News. That’s despite efforts by Republican politicians to bolster the fossil fuel industry in the U.S.

The Department of Energy’s website even states, “A clean energy revolution is taking place across America, underscored by the steady expansion of the U.S. renewable energy sector.”

And the world now invests almost twice as much in clean energy as it does in fossil fuels. Investment in solar panels now surpasses all other generation technologies combined, according to the International Energy Agency.

“The U.S. is definitely in an energy transition, as is the rest of the globe,” Lori Bird, U.S. energy program director at the World Resource Institute, told ABC News.

Coal is one of the industries in which the energy transition is most apparent, Bird said.

Coal plants are seeing an average of 10,000 megawatts of capacity closures per year, according to the Institute for the Energy Economics and Financial Analysis. Installed U.S. coal-fired generation capacity peaked in 2011 at 317,600 megawatts and has experienced a consistent downward trend ever since, the analysis found. In 2020, during the pandemic, coal’s share of power generation in the U.S. fell below 20% for the first time. In 2024 so far, coal’s share of power generation barely topped 16%.

“Based on current announcements and IEEFA research, we expect operating coal capacity to continue its steady decline for the remainder of the decade,” the report states.

Accompanying the sharp decrease in coal generation and usage has been the increase in capacity and storage for electricity generation from solar, wind and battery power, Bird said.

A record 31 gigawatts of solar energy capacity was installed in the U.S. in 2023 — roughly a 55% increase from 2022, according to a report by the World Resource Institute that found that clean energy continues to be the dominant form of new electricity generation in the U.S.

 

“Everywhere you look, in every facet of the economy, there are clean technologies ramping up and being brought to bear,” Julie McNamara, senior analyst at the Union of Concerned Scientists, told ABC News.

In addition, the Inflation Reduction Act stimulated an “unprecedented” slate for the creation of domestic clean energy manufacturing facilities, the report found. Since August 2022, 113 manufacturing facilities or expansions, totaling $421 billion in investments, have been announced, according to American Clean Power.

The Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law that came before it includes tax credits for both the home and commercial installation of charging stations for electric vehicles, evidence in the growing market share for EVs, which reached 10% in U.S. automotive sales in the third quarter of 2024, Bird said.

But the federal government isn’t the ultimate decider of the energy transition in the U.S., Bird said. While there could be a slowdown in progress during the next administration, the energy transition will continue to be driven by other stakeholders “who want this to happen,” she said.

“It would be impossible to halt the energy transition at this stage,” Bird said.

States in the U.S. are also continuing to pass ambitious climate and energy policies, a trend experts expect to continue despite who is living in the White House. State actions are considered critical to ensuring a successful clean energy transition, as federal actions alone are insufficient, according to the WRI. There are 29 states that have renewable electricity standards or clean energy standards in place, and a third of U.S. states have have standards to shift to 100% clean electricity, Bird said.

At the beginning of 2023, Minnesota adopted a 100% clean energy standard, while Michigan did the same later that year, joining states like California and New York in passing permitting reforms intended to make it easier to build clean energy and transmission.

“While the federal leadership may slow some of this transition, it’s being driven by states,” Bird said.

Another critical piece of the energy transition is tech companies, which are very large users of energy. committing to using sustainable energy to power their data centers, Bird said. One example is Microsoft paying to restart one of the nuclear reactors at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania to power the company’s AI data center.

“Those companies that are driving a lot of this want clean energy,” Bird said. “That’s not going to go away. They’re committed.”

Throughout the 2024 election, Republicans stuck to party lines when it comes to rhetoric about the fossil fuel industry, which invests heavily into GOP politicians and candidates, David Konisky, a professor of environmental politics at Indiana University’s O’Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs, told ABC News in August. The rhetoric often includes misrepresentations on clean energy solutions rather than all-out climate denial, experts told ABC News.

The fossil fuel industry, through its lobbying in government, has attempted to slow any efforts at the energy transition, McNamara said.

“The only reason to say there’s no energy transition underway is to attempt to solidify policies and incentives that that anchor short-term profits for fossil fuel interests,” McNamara said.

Misinformation and disinformation about the climate crisis is “not helpful to the situation,” especially given that people all over the world are already experiencing the impacts of a warming climate in the form of extreme weather events, Bird said, adding that bipartisan support will be crucial going forward.

“We’re hopeful that with the new administration, that additional progress could be made,” Bird said.

ABC News’ Peter Charalambous, Matthew Glasser, Calvin Milliner and Ivan Pereira contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Can Trump deliver on his promise to ax the Department of Education?

Can Trump deliver on his promise to ax the Department of Education?
Can Trump deliver on his promise to ax the Department of Education?
www.fuchieh.com/Getty Images

(WASHINGTON) — President-elect Donald Trump has proposed a plan to eliminate the Department of Education to “send all education work and needs back to the states,” according to his Agenda47 policy platform.

According to education experts, an end to the Department of Education could leave billions of funds, scholarships, grants and more hanging in the balance for the millions of K-12 and college students attending schools in the U.S.

Critics of the department argue that federal education spending has ballooned since its founding — costing $23 billion to date in the 2025 fiscal year, about 4% of government spending so far — but measures of student success like reading and math scores have fallen in recent years.

What does the Department of Education do?

The DOE was established as a Cabinet-level agency in 1979 under then-President Jimmy Carter, but was initially created in the late 1800s to collect data on what is working effectively in education for policymakers and educators.

The education agency facilitated the expansion of federal support for schooling over the years. After World War II, the GI Bill expanded education assistance for war veterans. After the Soviet Union launched Sputnik into space, the agency led to the expansion of science, math and foreign language instruction in elementary and secondary schools and supported vocational-technical training.

In the 1960s and 1970s, anti-poverty and anti-discrimination efforts shaped the Department of Education’s mission to provide equal access to education nationwide. This led to the founding of Title I funding to reduce educational achievement gaps between low-income and rural students and non-low-income schools.

The DOE also holds schools accountable for enforcing non-discrimination laws like Title IX based on gender, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Americans with Disabilities Act based on disability and Title VI based on race.

Federal Student Aid, awarding more than $120 billion a year in grants, work-study funds, and low-interest loans to approximately 13 million students, is also backed by the Department of Education.

The Department also holds schools accountable under the Every Student Succeeds Act, which requires each state to provide data on subject performance, graduation rates, suspensions, absenteeism, teacher qualifications, and more.

The department states on its website that it does not develop school curricula, set requirements for enrollment and graduation, or establish or accredit schools or universities.

However, it has played a major role in school funding for decades, particularly as state investment in K-12 schools worsened amid the 2008 Great Recession.

According to the Education Law Center, U.S. students lost almost $600 billion from states’ disinvestment in their public schools in the decade following the Great Recession.

The complicated nature of a department closure includes administering the billions of DOE funds directly to the individual states, according to higher education expert Clare McCann. McCann said doling out the money is something skilled employees at the DOE would be equipped to do.

“There’s a reason the Department of Education was created and it was to have this kind of in-house expertise and policy background on these [education] issues,” McCann told ABC News, adding, “The civil servants who work at the Department of Education are true experts in the field.”

Education Analyst Neal McCluskey at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, argues that dismantling the department could be as simple as giving states the funding, but allowing them to decide how it’s administered.

“What I’ve seen most often, and I’ve written about myself, is you could, for instance, take all the K-12 money, Title One, IDEA [Individuals with Disabilities Education Act] etc. — You would, of course, have to change the law, but one of the things you could do is block grant it; You’d say, ‘we’re going to fund these things, but we’re going to give it to the state so they can decide how it’s administered,'” he told ABC News.

Some education experts like Wendy A. Paterson, a professor and dean at Buffalo State University’s School of Education, told ABC News in an interview that she “could not see how serving families and children under the offices of the Department of Education could continue” without a federal department.

Paterson said that if funding itself is changed, it will likely worsen the national teacher shortage and impact the targeted communities the Department of Education specializes in — including low-income, disabled or FAFSA-seeking students.

“There’s an intimate relationship between our schools and the society that we create and that we pass along to our children, and it’s that important,” said Paterson. “So if we don’t have a federal organization that acknowledges the importance of schools and post-secondary education and the right of all children to have access to education, what are we saying about democracy?”

Why does Trump want to get rid of the Department of Education?

In a 2023 statement on his plans for schools, Donald Trump said that “one thing I’ll be doing very early in the administration is closing up the Department of Education in Washington, D.C., and sending all education and education work and needs back to the states.”

“We want them to run the education of our children because they’ll do a much better job of it,” said Trump.

Trump’s Agenda47 does not state how the dismantling of the department would impact the programs the Department of Education runs.

However, on the campaign trail, in interviews with Elon Musk and on “Fox & Friends,” Trump has repeatedly said he wants to shutter the agency and instead choose one education department official for his Cabinet, aligning with Trump’s goals of dismantling “government bureaucracy” and restructuring the government agencies for more efficiency.

Several prominent conservatives and Republican figures have similarly proposed department closures over the years, including Ronald Reagan, Vivek Ramaswamy, and lawmakers on Capitol Hill.

McCluskey said in a recent essay that the department is “unconstitutional,” arguing that it exerts too much power over schools above local and state entities.

House Education and the Workforce Committee Chairwoman Virginia Foxx has also argued that it’s not a constitutional requirement to have such a department: “I can’t find the word education in there [the Constitution] as one of the duties and responsibilities of Congress or the federal government,” Rep. Foxx, R-North Carolina, told ABC News.

Is it possible to eliminate it?

While possible in theory, education policy experts who spoke with ABC News suggest that would be an extremely chaotic – and unrealistic — task on Jan. 20, 2025, Inauguration Day.

The bold initiative won’t happen immediately, but McCluskey told ABC News it could be done through Congress.

“The Department of Education was created through legislation,” McCluskey told ABC News. “Legislation comes through Congress. If you want to take the Department of Education apart, you have to do that through legislation,” McCluskey added.

At this point, without congressional approval, McCluskey said the campaign trail messaging by the president-elect has no standing.

“I think that what is said on the campaigns and what actually is done have to often be two different things because, in campaigns, politicians say a lot of things that make it seem like it’s easy to do what they want to do,” McCluskey said.

“No president can just fire everybody in the Department of Education and have one person administer those programs,” he added.

Trump’s education policy

Trump, however, does list several federal policies he hopes to implement in schools nationwide. This includes instructing a future education department to cease programs that he claims “promote the concept of sex and gender transition, at any age” as well as punish teachers or schools who do so.

He hopes to create a credentialing body to certify teachers “who embrace patriotic values and support the American way of life,” though he does not further elaborate on what that consists of.

He also would prevent Title IX from allowing transgender women to compete in sports. He said he will create funding preferences and favorable treatment for states and school districts that abolish teacher tenure and adopt merit pay for educators for grades K-12 and allow parents to vote for principals.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Nebraska independent Dan Osborn launches group for working-class candidates, reflects on Senate run

Nebraska independent Dan Osborn launches group for working-class candidates, reflects on Senate run
Nebraska independent Dan Osborn launches group for working-class candidates, reflects on Senate run
Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

(LINCOLN, NE) — Dan Osborn, a former union president and Navy veteran who ran an unusually competitive U.S. Senate campaign in deep-red Nebraska as an independent, is launching a new political action committee meant to help working class candidates like himself run for office.

“At least the idea is to help other people like me, who are teachers, nurses, plumbers, carpenters, bus drivers, to be able to run for office in their particular counties, states, areas, and we can help them accomplish that,” Osborn told ABC News in an interview by phone on Monday.

“You know, we’ve created something pretty special here in Nebraska. And I just want to continue that.”

The organization, the Working Class Heroes Fund, is a new hybrid political action committee (PAC) that will support working-class candidates and mobilize working class voters, according to an announcement and a PAC spokesperson. The group will also advocate for labor unions, including supporting strike funds, which help union workers cover expenses if they go on strike.

Osborn hopes the PAC’s work will help bring more workers’ perspectives to government, about how “people don’t want handouts from their government… they just want to know when you go and you put in your time, you put in your eight hours work for eight hours pay, that your paycheck matters, right?” Osborn said. “And going to be able to afford your mortgage and your cars and hopefully set aside money for college and some Christmases.”

The PAC is a new organization and not a conversion of Osborn’s campaign committee, according to a spokesperson. It will vet and consider which working-class candidates to support on a case-by-case basis, and will support candidates across political parties.

Could supporting candidates across party lines lead to pushback? Osborn, who eschewed party labels or support during his Senate bid, feels that doesn’t matter.

“I’ve never really understood why, if you’re a part of a party, that you have to have a specific set of beliefs, and you have to reject the other set of beliefs, and vice versa,” he said.

Osborn had campaigned explicitly on his labor bonafides, including his work as a steamfitter and mechanic, as well as his insistence that he’d be a truly independent voice in the Senate.

On Election Day, Osborn lost to Fischer by 8 percentage points — not as thin of a margin as some polls had predicted, but well ahead of the margin between President-elect Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris; Harris lost statewide to Trump by 21 points. (Harris did lead Trump in the state’s 2nd Congressional District, netting her one Electoral College vote.)

Asked if he was surprised by the margin between him and Fischer, Osborn said, “Yes, I was, actually — and it sucked. I suppose if I had to describe it in one word, it sucked.

“You know, I really thought that the people in Nebraska saw the value in electing a working-class person,” he said, but a late influx of money into the race supporting his opponent made a difference. “Does it hurt a little bit? Sure, but again, I think we created something here.”

His family is “not taking [the loss] as good as I am,” Osborn said later with a chuckle. “Everybody goes back to school and we go back — I’m going back to work tomorrow, and my wife, she was working the whole entire time to help pay for the endeavor. But, you know, we were all hoping for different results, and we didn’t see it.”

Osborn said he was not surprised by the larger margin between Trump and Harris, given Nebraska’s deep Republican lean.

One of the trickier dynamics in the race was that as Osborn tried to maintain an independent image, some national Democrats or Democratic groups indicated that if he was elected to the Senate, he would caucus with Democrats. (Throughout his campaign, Osborn emphasized he would not plan to caucus with either party.)

Did that hurt his campaign? Osborn thinks it made a difference.

“I can’t consult with those people. I don’t even know who they are. They’re making money off of my name, which is completely ridiculous,” he said, adding that he wants independent expenditures out of politics more generally.

His own organization, however, is allowed to make independent expenditures, as a hybrid PAC. Asked about that, Osborn acknowledged the irony but said the PAC will support candidates who support campaign finance reform and want an end to how money influences politics.

“The independent expenditure is part of the problem, and I would love nothing more than our elected officials to get rid of my PAC because it shouldn’t exist. You know what I mean? None of this should exist.”

Even as he launches the PAC, however, Osborn said he is also heading back to work as a steamfitter.

“The debt collectors do not care that I ran the closest Senate race in the country, unfortunately,” he told ABC News. (Pre-Election Day polling had found the race among the closest Senate races in the country, although the final results have been closer in other Senate races, such as in Michigan and Pennsylvania.) “So I got to pay my bills. So yes, I’m going back to work.”

Would he run again for public office? Osborn said he wouldn’t rule it out: “I’m open to everything that’s going to be on the table.”

“In my neighborhood, there’s a position open: the dogcatcher’s open,” he added, “So I should probably start there,” he said, although he immediately clarified, “That’s a joke.”

-ABC News’ Brittany Shepherd, Will McDuffie, Isabella Murray, and Kate Walter contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Would an ‘all-party primary’ system give frustrated voters more ‘mainstream’ candidates?

Would an ‘all-party primary’ system give frustrated voters more ‘mainstream’ candidates?
Would an ‘all-party primary’ system give frustrated voters more ‘mainstream’ candidates?
Daniel Slim via Getty Images

(WASHINGTON) — Amid mounting frustration from centrist voters and shifting party coalitions, one group thinks it has the solution to making parties and political candidates: comprehensive election reform.

Unite America, a philanthropic venture fund, is in the middle of a yearslong effort to support ballot initiatives that would fundamentally alter the way candidates are elected. Rather than hold party primaries, some of which independent voters can’t partake in, states would hold one large primary for all candidates for a race. Then, general election voters would be able to sift through winners in some form, including a ranked choice system or a competition between the top two vote getters.

In an interview with ABC News, Unite America Executive Director Nick Troiano said the system is intended to make the general election the race of consequence rather than low-turnout primaries in safe red or blue areas, making candidates accountable to voters of all stripes.

“If you’re a candidate, the advantage is you’re no longer only having to appeal to one side. You can talk to all the voters, and then all the voters can vote for whomever they want,” Troiano said.

“It’s really about trying to make the general election the election of consequence, meaning the primary, everybody can vote, everybody can run, but it winnows down to just a few candidates in a general election, when most people vote, should really be when the decision is made.”

The reform movement is ramping up at a time of transformation for both parties. Democrats, smarting from Vice President Kamala Harris’ loss, are looking to make a brand more palatable to working-class voters. And Republicans are expected to be tied even closer to President-elect Donald Trump after his win this month.

But the election reform efforts are coming off a rough election cycle.

Voters in Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada and South Dakota shot down ballot initiatives that would have instituted all-party primaries rather than contests grouping candidates of one party together. The effort marked a setback given rising conversations around other democracy-related issues like gerrymandering.

Troiano conceded the defeats, noting spending from both parties against the ballot initiatives and insisting that progress is not anticipated to be “linear.” Unite America’s advisors include those who worked on the marriage equality movement, which saw several states ban the practice in the 2004 election cycle but only to see same-sex marriage become federally legalized in 2015.

“Sometimes it’s two steps forward, one step back. But that’s how any movement that has made meaningful change in our country has worked. And so, we’re disappointed but not deterred from this mission,” Troiano said.

Some states already have versions of what Unite America is proposing.

Voters in 2022 implemented all-party primaries followed by ranked-choice general elections. Maine already has ranked choice voting. And other states like California and Louisiana institute so-called jungle primaries, which hold all-party primaries and then send the top two candidates to the general election if no contender hits 50%.

Rising independent voter registrations give Troiano hope that momentum will build for the reforms Unite America is pushing.

In the meantime, the group will conduct more research, link up with interest groups and push more ballot measures, Troiano said.

And, Unite America insists, both parties can benefit.

Democratic strategists have theorized that Harris lost this year’s presidential race because of a brand that was viewed as too far to the left — a reputation that could be confirmed by party primaries fueled by the most liberal voters. And Republicans have ceded ground in the suburbs, historically GOP power bases, with a reputation too firmly tied to Trump.

Democratic senators-elect who scored victories in Trump-won states were able to establish brands detached from that of the national party, and the only two Republican House members who impeached Trump left standing — California Rep. David Valadao and Washington Rep. Dan Newhouse — use all party primaries.

“I think both parties have a medium to long-term advantage in these reforms because it will help them nominate more mainstream candidates,” Troiano said. “Both parties have a declining market share of the electorate as independents continue to grow, so it is to their advantage to think about ways to broaden their appeal.”

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Manhattan DA to propose next steps in Trump’s criminal hush money case

Manhattan DA to propose next steps in Trump’s criminal hush money case
Manhattan DA to propose next steps in Trump’s criminal hush money case
Justin Lane – Pool/Getty Image

(NEW YORK) — Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is expected to propose the next steps in Donald Trump’s New York hush money case Tuesday after the “unprecedented circumstances” of the former president’s election following his conviction on 34 felony counts earlier this year.

Trump’s sentencing in the criminal case is tentatively scheduled for Nov. 26, though defense attorneys have urged New York Judge Juan Merchan to dismiss the case ahead of Trump’s impending inauguration.

“The stay, and dismissal, are necessary to avoid unconstitutional impediments to President Trump’s ability to govern,” defense attorney Emil Bove told the court last week.

Since July, Trump’s attorneys have been pushing to have the conviction vacated and the case dismissed by arguing that prosecutors filled “glaring holes in their case” with evidence of official acts that the Supreme Court recently ruled off limits in its landmark presidential immunity decision.

Trump’s lawyers have also argued for a dismissal by citing the Presidential Transition Act of 1963, which urges government officers to take “lawful steps to avoid or minimize disruptions” to the presidential transition.

While prosecutors have argued that the Supreme Court’s ruling that Trump is entitled to immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts undertaken while in office has no bearing on Trump’s conviction, they haven’t publicly signaled a position on the upcoming sentencing since Trump’s election.

Prosecutors requested additional time to advise the court about the “appropriate steps going forward” based on the impact of Trump’s victory.

“The People agree that these are unprecedented circumstances,” prosecutor Matthew Colangelo told the court last week.

Following the joint request for additional time, Judge Merchan delayed his ruling on how the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity decision impacts Trump’s case, which he originally planned to release last week.

Trump was convicted in May of all 34 felony counts of falsifying business records related to a hush money payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels to silence allegations about a 2006 sexual encounter with Trump in order to boost his electoral prospects in the 2016 presidential election.

His conviction carries a maximum penalty of up to four years in prison, but first-time offenders would normally receive a lesser sentence.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Trump vetting a Project 2025 architect for top administration post: Sources

Trump vetting a Project 2025 architect for top administration post: Sources
Trump vetting a Project 2025 architect for top administration post: Sources
Allison Robbert-Pool/Getty Images

(WASHINGTON) — During his campaign for president, Donald Trump and his advisers worked to vehemently distance themselves from Project 2025, the controversial plan to overhaul the federal government proposed by a closely aligned conservative group. But several individuals connected to the plan have already received posts in the new administration, and one of the plan’s top architects is under consideration for a top position, according to multiple sources familiar with the discussions.

Russ Vought, who authored a chapter on “Executive Office of the President” for Project 2025’s “Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise,” which Project 2025 describes as “a comprehensive policy guide for the next conservative U.S. president,” is under consideration for a cabinet-level position in the next administration and has been vetted by Trump’s transition team, sources said.

Vought not only authored a chapter in the 922-page Project 2025 plan, but he was also deeply involved in drafting Project 2025’s playbook for the first 180 days of a new Trump administration. His Center for Renewing American is also listed as a member of Project 2025’s advisory board, according to the plan’s website.

Vought — who has been seen at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Club in recent days meeting with Trump’s top advisers — served in Trump’s first administration as the director of the Office of Management and Budget, and has been in active discussions to return to the next administration, sources familiar with the matter said.

It’s not clear what position Vought could ultimately get, but he’s been discussed as a candidate for his previous job or for a top White House post that focuses on economic policy, the sources said.

When asked for comment, the Trump transition team pointed to President Trump’s comments in his debate with Kamala Harris where he stated, “This was a group of people that got together, they came up with some ideas, I guess some good, some bad, but it makes no difference. I have nothing to do [with it].”

During his run for the White House, Trump claimed he knew “nothing” about Project 2025 and his campaign advisers fiercely worked to distance the campaign from it.

Trump transition co-chair Howard Lutnick told the Financial Times last month that Project 2025 “is an absolute zero for the Trump-Vance transition.”

“You can use another term — radioactive,” Lutnick said.

While personnel decisions are not final until Trump announces them, sources told ABC News that Trump’s transition team has considered several other individuals with ties to the plan, including Project 2025 authors as well as several contributors to the document.

Gene Hamilton, the author of the Department of Justice chapter, is among those being considered for a top legal role in Trump’s administration, according to sources. In his Project 2025 chapter, Hamilton criticizes the DOJ, claiming it has been “captured by an unaccountable bureaucratic managerial class and radical Left ideologues who have embedded themselves throughout its offices and components.”

Hamilton calls for a sweeping “top-to-bottom overhaul” of the Justice Department, as well as an internal review of “all major active FBI investigations,” recommending the termination of any that are deemed unlawful or contrary to national interests.

Another name that has been floated for a potential position in the Trump administration is Reed Rubinstein, who contributed to Project 2025 and is under consideration for the next general counsel for the Department of Treasury, according to one potential personnel list reviewed by ABC News.

In recent days, Trump has announced other selections to fill out the coming administration who also have ties to Project 2025, marking a stark reversal from how he campaigned.

On Sunday, Trump’s team said that Brendan Carr will serve as the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission — a selection that places one of tech billionaire Elon Musk’s active defenders in charge of regulating the nation’s airwaves. Carr, who has used his position to defend Musk’s companies, authored the chapter of Project 2025 that detailed how he intended to run the agency.

Former ICE Director Tom Homan has been picked to serve as “border czar” for the incoming administration, overseeing the mass deportations that have been promised by Trump throughout his 2024 campaign, and immigration hard-liner and top adviser Stephen Miller will serve as Trump’s deputy chief of staff for policy. Both Homan and Miller have ties to Project 2025.

Homan is a Visiting Fellow at The Heritage Foundation, the Trump-aligned group behind the controversial plan, and is also listed as a contributor to the Project 2025 document. Miller’s organization, America First Legal, originally appeared on the list of advisory board members to Project 2025.

ABC News reported in July that Miller asked for his group to be removed from the Project 2025 website’s list of advisory board members amid ongoing attacks from Democrats about the plan on the campaign trail.

A major part of Project 2025’s agenda is to expand presidential power and drastically cut federal agencies like the Department of Education — moves that Trump, on the campaign trail, has supported.

The proposal also calls for a reversal of the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the abortion pill mifepristone and calls for health agencies to promote “fertility awareness” as an “unsurpassed” method of contraception.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Alex Jones asks judge to halt sale of Infowars site to The Onion

Alex Jones asks judge to halt sale of Infowars site to The Onion
Alex Jones asks judge to halt sale of Infowars site to The Onion
Joe Buglewicz/Getty Images

(New York) — Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones accused The Onion and Sandy Hook Elementary School families of “collusive bidding” and asked a bankruptcy court judge to halt the sale of his Infowars platform.

Jones, who defamed the Sandy Hook families by calling the 2012 massacre a hoax and the parents of the 20 first graders actors, called The Onion’s winning $1.75 million bid “sheer nonsense” because it’s half of what the losing bidder offered.

The Onion began a “systematic effort to confuse Mr. Jones’s personal public following with messages espousing gun control in a manner such that Mr Jones’s personal public following would be utterly confused and misled,” Jones said in an overnight court filing.

His request follows a similar push for an injunction by First United American Companies, which is affiliated with Jones through the sale of dietary supplements.

The plaintiffs nor the trustee immediately responded to Jones but the trustee has previously called the auction result legitimate and asked the court for approval.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Germany, Finland warn of ‘hybrid warfare’ as Baltic undersea cables are damaged

Germany, Finland warn of ‘hybrid warfare’ as Baltic undersea cables are damaged
Germany, Finland warn of ‘hybrid warfare’ as Baltic undersea cables are damaged
Stefan Sauer/picture alliance via Getty Images

(LONDON) — The foreign ministries of Germany and Finland said Monday that they were “deeply concerned” by the severing of an undersea cable connecting the two countries across the Baltic Sea — one of two Baltic Sea connections suddenly damaged in recent days.

Finnish company Cinia reported a “fault situation” with its C-Lion-1 submarine cable on Monday afternoon, saying in a statement that investigation and repair work was underway.

Cinia did not offer any explanation for the interruption to the connection and said that undersea cable repairs generally take between 5 and 15 days. The 730-mile cable has connected Finland to central European communication networks since 2016.

The German Interior Ministry confirmed to ABC News that authorities believe the cable to have been severed by an external force near the Swedish island of Oland.

Berlin and Helsinki said they were “deeply concerned about the severed undersea cable.”

“The fact that such an incident immediately raises suspicions of intentional damage speaks volumes about the volatility of our times,” the joint foreign ministries statement continued.

“A thorough investigation is underway. Our European security is not only under threat from Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, but also from hybrid warfare by malicious actors. Safeguarding our shared critical infrastructure is vital to our security and the resilience of our societies.”

The damage to the C-Lion-1 cable came one day after Telia Lietuva — a Swedish telecoms company in Lithuania — said one of its undersea telecommunications cable linking Lithuania and Sweden across the Baltic Sea sustained damage.

That cable — which intersects with the C-Lion-1 Finnish-German cable — was damaged on Sunday morning, company spokesperson Andrius Semeskevicius told local media.

The damaged cable has been the subject of faults and accidents in the past. But, Semeskevicius told Lithuanian National Radio and Television, “since both are damaged, it is clear that this was not an accidental dropping of one of the ship’s anchors, but something more serious could be going on.”

The cause of the damage to the cables is yet to be established. The interruptions come against a backdrop of concerns over Russian sabotage operations in Europe and elsewhere, prompted by Western support for Ukraine in its defensive war against Moscow.

The Baltic Sea has been the scene of mysterious undersea incidents in recent years, such as the sabotage attacks on the Nord Stream 1 and 2 natural gas pipelines running from Russia to Germany in 2022.

The following year, a Chinese container ship — the Newnew Polar Bear — dragged its anchor for more than 100 nautical miles through the Gulf of Finland, damaging an undersea natural gas pipeline and two telecommunications cables. Finnish and Estonian authorities are conducting a joint criminal investigation into the incident.

ABC News’ Aicha El Hammar and Ellie Kaufman contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Russia says Ukraine’s use of Western rockets could prompt nuclear response

Russia says Ukraine’s use of Western rockets could prompt nuclear response
Russia says Ukraine’s use of Western rockets could prompt nuclear response
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov is pictured on the sidelines of the BRICS summit in Kazan, Russia, on Oct. 24, 2024. (Maxim Shemetov via Getty Images)

(LONDON) — Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told journalists that new changes to Russia’s nuclear weapons doctrine signed by President Vladimir Putin on Tuesday mean “the use of Western non-nuclear rockets by the Armed Forces of Ukraine against Russia can prompt a nuclear response.”

Peskov’s remarks came shortly after three U.S. officials confirmed to ABC News that President Joe Biden had approved Ukraine’s use of the long-range American-made MGM-140 Army Tactical Missile System — colloquially known as the ATACMS — to hit targets in Russia’s western Kursk region.

The administration hasn’t publicly confirmed the policy change. State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller told journalists at a Monday briefing he would not confirm or deny approval for ATACMS use inside Russia, but said the U.S. response to Russian and North Korean military cooperation in the war “would be firm.”

There are now some 10,000 North Korean troops in Russia’s Kursk region intended for deployment to the battlefield, U.S. officials have said.

The changes to Russia’s nuclear doctrine were unveiled several weeks ago but only signed by Putin on Tuesday, as officials in Moscow expressed anger at the U.S. decision to allow ATACMS use on Russian territory.

The doctrine now says Russia can launch a nuclear attack against a country assisting a non-nuclear country in aggression against Russia that critically threatens the country’s state integrity.

Moscow has repeatedly threatened nuclear weapon use against Ukraine and its Western partners throughout its full-scale invasion of the country.

Western leaders including President Joe Biden have said that avoiding a direct clash between Russia and NATO is a top priority given the danger of nuclear war.

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Escaped primates open can of worms for South Carolina’s Alpha Genesis research lab

Escaped primates open can of worms for South Carolina’s Alpha Genesis research lab
Escaped primates open can of worms for South Carolina’s Alpha Genesis research lab
Yemassee Police Department

(YEMASSEE, SC) — With four primates still on the loose after 43 of them escaped on Nov. 6 from the Alpha Genesis Inc. research laboratory in South Carolina, the Low Country facility has come under intense scrutiny.

Animal rights groups have cited the company’s history of violations and previous monkey breakouts; a member of Congress has called for an inquiry into its oversight by multiple federal agencies; and residents voiced concern the furry fugitives might spread disease throughout their community.

On top of it all, Alpha Genesis founder and CEO Gregory Westergaard told ABC News his company is investigating whether the release of the monkeys was “an intentional act” by an employee.

The quest for freedom by the pack of young female rhesus macaques coincides with the rapid expansion of the 100-acre Alpha Genesis facility and is casting light on a disruption in the U.S. medical research industry that sounds like a plot for a science fiction thriller. A 2023 report sponsored by the National Institutes of Health warned of a crisis involving the Chinese government that “undermines the security of the nation’s biomedical research enterprise.”

The case of the absconding primates has also raised questions about why the amount of federal contracts received by the testing and breeding operation has jumped more than 160% since 2021. According to USASpending.gov, a government website that tracks federal spending, the company has been granted $19 million in federal contracts this year alone.

“It’s shocking how much money is being spent on testing primates,” Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., told ABC News.

Mace’s district encompasses the Beaufort County community of Yemassee, where the 6,701 primates housed at the sprawling Alpha Genesis facility nearly triple the number of town residents.

In a formal letter to the NIH, the agency that funds laboratory research, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which inspects and regulates breeding facilities, Mace expressed “very urgent concerns regarding federal oversight of Alpha Genesis.” Mace said the prolonged attempts to recapture all of the primates are “placing the animals and my constituents at risk.”

“A lot of constituents were concerned about whether or not the primates that escaped were sick or ill, or have been tested on,” Mace told ABC News. “There were a lot of folks concerned about the facility being a breeding facility and the testing that goes on there as well.”

The escape highlights an ‘issue of national security’

The incident some locals have referred to as “the great escape” has illuminated the international crisis hitting the animal research industry that Alpha Genesis’ Westergaard said has become “an issue of national security.”

In 2020, the Chinese government, the world’s primary breeder of research monkeys, banned the exports of nonhuman primates (NPH) to labs in the United States and elsewhere, triggering an international shortage of the animals just as research scientists were scrambling to come up with vaccines to combat the COVID-19 pandemic, according to a May 2023 report by National Academy of Engineering and National Academy of Medicine.

Primates, according to the NIH-supported report, are valuable in answering certain research questions because of their genetic, anatomic, physiologic and behavioral similarities to humans. However, the China ban on exporting research animals exacerbated the shortage and stalled NIH-funded research, according to the report.

The report concluded that the United States “needs to prioritize expansion” of domestic primate breeding programs.

“Relying on importing these animals from other countries is unsustainable, and dependence on international sources undermines the security of the nation’s biomedical research enterprise,” the report warned.

In 2021, the National Primate Research Centers could not meet two-thirds of researcher requests for rhesus macaques, according to the report.

“Researchers also face increased wait times for animals, and costs have risen 10% to 200% for a single animal, depending on the species,” the report said.

What we know about Alpha Genesis’ research

The crisis prompted Alpha Genesis to increase its domestic breeding of research primates. According to Rep. Mace, the company also manages the NIH’s so-called “Monkey Island” on Morgan Island in Beaufort County, which holds another 3,300 primates.

Westergaard told ABC News that Alpha Genesis employs 275 people, plus 30 or so contractors.

In addition to breeding lab monkeys, Alpha Genesis provides researchers across the country with biological products and materials, including serum, plasma, whole blood and tissue samples from a wide variety of research species, according to the company’s website. The private company’s researchers have helped develop several therapeutic drugs and vaccines, including those to treat the COVID-19 virus.

According to NIH online records provided to USASpending.gov, the crisis appears to be in accord with a boost in federal contracts Alpha Genesis has received, jumping from $7.3 million in 2021 to $12.3 million in 2022, $14.2 million in 2023 and $19 million this year.

Primates are worth up to $30,000 each

“The price of research monkeys has indeed increased a great deal since the Chinese banned all exports,” Westergaard said in an email to ABC News. “Prior to the ban monkeys sold for around $4K – $6K, after the ban prices have increased to $10K – $30K+ due to increased costs of raising animals in the US compared to China. An important point to note is that the shortage remains severe and a great deal of research in the US simply cannot be done because animals are not available at any cost.”

Westergaard said some suppliers of laboratory primates have turned to the illegal sourcing of wild-caught monkeys from Cambodia, “which we have not done.”

“It should also be noted that the Chinese government is seeking worldwide domination in medical research and the development of bio-weapons to target US citizens and our allies,” Westergaard said.

He added, “Alpha Genesis is a leading provider of NHPs to the US market and has been instrumental in attempting to fill this void. The alternative is to allow the Chinese to dominate medical development to the severe detriment of our National Security interests.”

“It should also be noted that the Chinese government is seeking worldwide domination in medical research and the development of bio-weapons to target US citizens and our allies,” Westergaard said.

He added, “Alpha Genesis is a leading provider of NHPs to the US market and has been instrumental in attempting to fill this void. The alternative is to allow the Chinese to dominate medical development to the severe detriment of our National Security interests.”

Human error or intentional act?

Asked by ABC News whether the rapid expansion of Alpha Genesis’ breeding and testing operations might have played a role in the escape of the 43 primates, Westergaard said the cause of the escape remains under investigation, including whether it was the result of “human error” or an “intentional act.”

“All the information we have thus far indicates that this is human error due to an employee failing to secure containment doors behind her, and a third door directly containing the animals, while doing routine cleaning and feeding,” Westergaard said in an email. “The enclosure was brand new and in perfect working order. We continue to investigate in an attempt to determine to the greatest extent possible whether this was or was not an intentional act.”

Westergaard said that immediately after the incident occurred, the employee’s supervisor told her she could be fired if it was determined that no structural failure of the primates’ enclosure led to the incident. Westergaard said the employee walked off the job and has not returned.

As of early Tuesday, four of the escaped primates remained on the loose, Westergaard said. Two were caught Monday, he said.

“The girls from today are in good health and the others continue to thrive,” Westergaard said Monday. “We believe the four monkeys remaining are probably all together either in the area adjacent to our property or somewhere else very close by.”

Mace has requested answers from NIH Director Monica Bertagnolli, USDA Deputy Administrator for Animal Care Sarah Helming, and Acting Director Axel Wolf of the NIH’s Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare. She also noted that this was not the first time problems had arisen at the research lab.

Mace, who told ABC News she is against animal testing, cited in her letter a September 2022 USDA inspection report of Alpha Genesis that found six separate incidents of animals escaping from their primary enclosures between January and August of 2022. Mace also cited escapes dating back to 2014, when more than two dozen monkeys slipped out of the facility, resulting in a fine from the USDA.

The 2022 USDA inspection report, which ABC News reviewed, also found an infant monkey died after becoming entangled in a stretch of gauze material used in an enclosure to hold a water bottle; said two primates were found dead in their enclosures with their fingers entrapped in structures inside their cages; and documented that one animal died from trauma and four others required veterinary care after they were placed in incorrect enclosures and were attacked by other primates unfamiliar with them.

As a result of the inspection, Alpha Genesis, according to the report, took corrective action to secure enclosures and “made significant changes” to avoid putting primates in the wrong enclosures.

The latest USDA routine inspection of Alpha Genesis lab was conducted on May 21 and concluded, “No non-compliant items identified during this inspection,” according to USDA online records.

“This is also true of several other inspections in recent years,” Westergaard said. “For a facility of this size that is quite remarkable.”

Mace said she met with Westergaard last week to discuss the escape and what Alpha Genesis is doing to round up the monkeys.

“It was an interesting conversation,” Mace said. “He tried to tell me how good the primates have it at his facility. And my response was, they have it good until you kill them with disease.”

Asked about the conversation, Westergaard responded: “I spoke to the congresswoman last week and at that time she said that she recognized the economic importance of our company to the people of the Low Country and that as a locally-owned business, she would continue to offer her full support.”

Alternatives to testing primates

Angela Grimes, CEO of Born Free USA, an international wildlife conservation and animal protection organization, told ABC News that her group has sent a letter to Alpha Genesis offering to rehome the escaped primates to its animal sanctuary in South Texas, where more than 200 rhesus macaque monkeys now reside, including some rescued from U.S. research labs. She said an anonymous donor has pledged $250,000 to help move the animals to the sanctuary.

“What we’d like to see is these animals be released to the Born Free USA sanctuary in South Texas, where they can have some of that freedom that they’ve just gotten a taste of,” Grimes said.

Grimes said Alpha Genesis has not responded to her group’s offer.

The nonprofit Born Free USA Primate Sanctuary, a 175-acre facility in Dilley, Texas, has been accredited since 2009 by the Global Federation of Animal Sanctuaries, GFAS executive director Valerie Taylor told ABC News, adding that her group conducts rigorous assessments and inspections of animal sanctuaries across the United States and around the globe to ensure the highest standard of animal care possible. Taylor said U.S. animal sanctuaries undergo accreditation every three years and that her organization recently visited the Born Free USA sanctuary as part of the reaccreditation process.

“We meet and exceed GFAS’ highest standards,” Grimes said.

Grimes said the medical research industry needs to research alternatives to subjecting primates to experimental testing of deadly diseases.

“I understand human health is important, but I also look at the other viable alternatives that are out there that do not result in the suffering and death of animals,” Grimes said.

Westergaard said testing of primates is necessary, though.

“There is no safe or effective way to make the leap from simpler model organisms like mice and rats to humans without using NHPs as an intermediary,” Westergaard said. “The therapeutics created using NHPs as research models directly lead to lifesaving and life-prolonging treatments and cures for human disease. Without NHPs as a research model, the world would still be ravaged with wide-spread polio, smallpox wouldn’t be eradicated, and HIV would still be a death sentence.”

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.