jili 10

jili 10 As expected, the Boise State football team was well represented on the All-Mountain West Team, released Tuesday, with 15 different Broncos being honored. Running back Ashton Jeanty and coach Spencer Danielson picked up some of the biggest awards. Jeanty was named the Mountain West Offensive Player of the Year for the second straight season, the sixth player in league history to earn back-to-back OPOY honors. He leads the nation in rushing by a large margin, with 2,288 yards heading into Friday’s Mountain West Championship Game against UNLV, and has 28 rushing and one receiving touchdown on the season. The Heisman candidate has rushed for at least 125 yards in all 12 games this season, the longest such streak in FBS since at least 1996. He also holds the Mountain West record for most consecutive games rushing for more than 100 yards. He’s passed the 200-yard rushing mark in five games this season, with no other player in the country breaking it more than twice. Danielson was named the conference’s Coach of the Year, one year to the day that he was named the Broncos’ permanent head coach. He took over the Broncos on an interim basis with two games left in the 2023 regular season and had the interim title dropped a day after leading the Broncos to a win against UNLV in last season’s Mountain West Championship Game. In his first full season as head coach, Danielson has led the Broncos to an 11-1 record, including a 7-0 record in Mountain West play, and has the team in position to clinch a spot in the College Football Playoff with a win against UNLV (10-2) in Friday’s championship game. Additionally, six Broncos were named to the All-Mountain West first team, two more were second-team selections and five were honorable mentions. Jeanty was a unanimous first-team selection at running back, while two of his offensive linemen, guard Ben Dooley and tackle Kage Casey, also earned first-team selections. Casey played a team-high 802 offensive snaps this season, not allowing a sack in 370 opportunities. He was a second-team selection last year. Dooley allowed just one sack in 358 opportunities and was not penalized once this season. He was a second-team selection in 2021 Tight end Matt Lauter was also named to the first team after leading Mountain West tight ends in receptions (38), yards (461) and touchdowns (6). Defensively, defensive ends Ahmed Hassanein and Jayden Virgin-Morgan and linebacker Marco Notarainni were first-team selections. Hassanein, earning first-team honors for the second straight season, finished the year with 8.5 sacks and 12.5 tackles for a loss. He ranked fourth in the country with 13 quarterback hits and seventh with 51 pressures. Virgin-Morgan, playing opposite of Hassanein, had nine sacks and 13.5 tackles for a loss. He also forced on fumble and recovered another. Notarainni, an honorable mention last season, had 53 tackles, 4.5 tackles for a loss and one sack this season. He recovered two fumbles and was also a key contributor on special teams for Boise State. Boise State also had second-team selections from defensive tackle Braxton Fely and safety Seyi Oladipo. Fely led all defensive tackles in the Mountain West with 5.5 sacks and anchored a line that limited opponents to 106.6 rushing yards per game, second in the Mountain West. Oladipo had 5.5 sacks, tied for most among defensive backs in the nation. He was an honorable mention in 2023. Safety Ty Benefield, wide receiver Cameron Camper, quarterback Maddux Madsen, safety Alexander Teubner and kicker Jonah Dalmas were each honorable mentions. UNLV got three Player of the Year awards, with linebacker Jackson Woodard named Defensive Player of the Year, wide receiver Ricky White III earning Special Teams Player of the Year and kicker Caden Chittenden being named Freshman of the Year.

The Territory’s 25 best new cafes, bars and restaurants of 2024

DULUTH — Installation of a new video board at Amsoil Arena is ongoing with Minnesota Duluth’s men’s and women’s hockey teams on hiatus for the holidays. The project began Monday with dismantling of the original, 14-year-old scoreboard that had served Amsoil Arena since it opened in December 2010. The framing of the original scoreboard will remain — the architecture of Amsoil Arena prevents the installation of a larger one — and is being used to house the new, high-resolution video board and its internals. ADVERTISEMENT A new bottom ring — used for the game time, score, shots, penalties and advertising — is being installed underneath the main video board, replacing the aging original ring. The new video board is a Daktronics video board, just like the original. The production equipment — which was also 14 years old — used to operate the video board is also being replaced by new equipment. DECC officials didn’t have an exact timeline on when the project would be completed, however, those working at Amsoil Arena this week were hoping to light up the new video board early next week. Work will pause over the weekend, and the scoreboard will be lifted, for youth hockey on Friday night, Saturday and Sunday. DECC executive director Dan Hartman told the News Tribune in August that $800,000 was budgeted for a 10-year-lease of the new video board and production equipment. The Bulldogs are scheduled to return to the ice at Amsoil Arena right after New Year’s, with the women hosting Syracuse on Jan. 2-3 and the men hosting Alaska on Jan. 3-4.

One of the cornerstones of Amazon rainforest protection – the Soy Moratorium – is under unprecedented pressure from Brazilian agribusiness organisations, politicians, and global trading companies, the Guardian has learned. Soy is one of the most widely grown crops in Brazil, and posed a huge deforestation threat to the Amazon rainforest until stakeholders voluntarily agreed to impose a moratorium and no longer source it from the region in 2006. The voluntary agreement brought together farmers, environmentalists and international food companies such as Cargill and McDonald’s, and decided that any detection of soy planted on areas deforested after 2008 would result in the farm being blocked from supply chains, regardless of whether the land clearance was legal in Brazil. In the 18 years since, the moratorium has been hailed as a conservation success story that improved the reputation of global brands, enabled soy production to expand significantly without Amazon destruction and prevented an estimated 17,000 square kilometres of deforestation. But next week the main soybean body – the Brazilian Association of Vegetable Oil Industries (ABIOVE) – will ballot its members about a reform that conservation groups say would gut its effectiveness and embarrass the government of Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva ahead of next year’s COP30 climate conference in Belém. The association is proposing a change in the way the moratorium is monitored. Instead of assessing an entire farm, it breaks down the analysis to the level of individual fields, which would allow growers to pick and choose which areas of their land are in compliance. In a statement to the Guardian, the association said it remained in favour of the moratorium, but was planning unspecified changes: “Despite all pressures from different stakeholders, in all forums, ABIOVE and its members maintain defence of the Amazon Moratorium, striving to meet the demands of both farmers and consumers, including proposing some updates to the current model.” But conservation groups warn this reform would create a huge loophole and they have threatened to withdraw from the moratorium if it goes ahead. “The question this raises is why the leadership of ABIOVE is pressing ahead with this vote, when it appears to undermine the commitments of its member companies,” said David Cleary, global director for agriculture in the Nature Conservancy. ‘The proposed changes to shift to a sub-farm level monitoring system make it possible for farmers to sell to moratorium companies from one part of the farm and non-moratorium companies from another. The monitoring of the moratorium has worked well since 2008. If it isn’t broken, it doesn’t need fixing.” WWF said any move to end or weaken the soy moratorium could open up 1.1m hectares of forest for soy production and push the Amazon closer to a calamitous tipping point and emitting 300m tonnes of CO2 from deforestation. “This is not just an environmental issue but a critical economic and reputational risk for the entire Brazilian soy industry,” WWF noted in an email statement. “In addition, this could lead to an increase in land speculation, land grabbing and potential conflict in the region.” Others noted the threat to the moratorium would introduce greater complexity and uncertainty into the supply chain, weakening enforcement mechanisms and making it more difficult to hold traders and producers to account. Jane Lino, deputy director of the non-profit Proforest Latin America, said this was part of a wider political agenda. “This movement is not just about the Soy Moratorium,” she said. “It reflects broader resistance to external pressures perceived as infringing on national sovereignty and disrespecting Brazil’s environmental laws.” The proposals come amid moves by rightwing legislators at state and federal level to enact new laws that would also undermine the moratorium. Earlier this year, the state of Mato Grosso approved a new regulation that revoked tax incentives for companies engaged in agreements like the Soy Moratorium. Similar proposals are being put forward in other states and discussed in the national Congress. The national association of soy producers, Aprosoja, is opposed to the moratorium and is using its influence inside the powerful agribusiness lobby, which dominates domestic politics, , influences many local governments, and frequently undermines President Lula and his environment minister Marina Silva, to diminish its influence. Brazil’s Administrative Council for Economic Defense has also been prompted to investigate producer claims that the moratorium infringes antitrust regulations. Carlos Klink, a former deputy minister for the environment, emphasised that the political dynamics of Brazil had changed dramatically since the moratorium was introduced. “Look, then and now,” he said of the rise of the agribusiness lobby. “These sectors and these people have come to power. Remember also that the Brazilian government is not that strong.” Part of this is a pushback against the European Union’s deforestation-free trade law, which many Brazilian farmers feel is being used to punish them and help French competitors. Most farmers, who are in compliance with the moratorium, argue they deserve compensation for going beyond the requirements of the law, and conservation groups acknowledge that most farmers are not involved in deforestation and many – now badly affected by drought and fire – should be given more encouragement and technical and financial support to conserve vegetation. “The complaint that if you’re asking farmers to go beyond legal compliance you need to offer incentives is actually reasonable. First world governments and funders need to pay much more attention to the incentives question,” Cleary said. “A lot of Brazilian farmers are fully on board with the climate change agenda, including ending deforestation. They’re the most affected by it. But that opinion isn’t reflected in the louder producer associations, who have a different political agenda.” Moves to weaken the moratorium could be quashed if global traders, retailers and finance institutions publicly defended it. Some such as Bunge and have been strong supporters. Others have sent mixed signals. Conservation groups are concerned that Cargill may not vote to maintain the Amazon Soy Moratorium in its current form, despite a to eliminate deforestation in their Brazil supply chains by the end of 2025. Until now, the moratorium has given Brazil a reputational advantage. Many want that to remain. With the Abiove vote still days away and the Mato Grosso governor yet to decide how the state’s new regulations will be applied, Klink said the outcome was not yet certain and urged all involved to focus on the progress that has been made. He noted that deforestation fell dramatically in the Amazon last year, and also declined in the Cerrado savanna this year. Other state soy associations, such as that of Goias, did not agree with the Mato Grosso move, he said, and any further steps would damage the national reputation. “Ending the moratorium without anything else to replace it would not bode well for the Brazilian COP and it would create tension for civil society, and even many farmers’ associations,” he said. “I think this has a long way to go, but we have never seen this pressure.”

By KATE BRUMBACK ATLANTA (AP) — A judge is weighing whether a Georgia state Senate committee has the right to subpoena testimony and documents from Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis as it looks into whether she has engaged in misconduct during her prosecution of President-elect Donald Trump. The Republican-led committee sent subpoenas to Willis in August seeking to compel her to testify at its September meeting and to produce scores of documents. The committee was formed earlier this year to examine allegations of “various forms of misconduct” by Willis, an elected Democrat, during her prosecution of Trump and others over their efforts to overturn the former president’s 2020 election loss in Georgia. Willis’ attorney, former Democratic Gov. Roy Barnes, told Fulton County Superior Court Judge Shukura Ingram during a hearing Tuesday that although the Georgia General Assembly has subpoena power, that power is not automatically conferred on a single legislative chamber or its committees. Even if the committee did have such power, he argued, the subpoenas in question are overly broad and not related to a legitimate legislative need. Barnes said the focus on Willis and her investigation into Trump shows that the committee was politically motivated and not a legitimate inquiry into the practices of district attorneys’ offices: “What they were trying to do is chill the prosecution of Donald Trump and find out what they had.” Josh Belinfante, a lawyer representing the lawmakers, said there is nothing in the Georgia Constitution that prohibits the Senate from issuing a subpoena. The duly formed interim committee is looking into whether new legislation is needed to regulate the practices of district attorneys’ offices in the state, he argued. “They are investigating and making an inquiry into these allegations that may show that existing state laws, including those establishing the processes for selecting, hiring and compensating special assistant district attorneys, are inadequate,” Belinfante said. The resolution creating the committee focused in particular on Willis’ hiring of special prosecutor Nathan Wade , with whom she had a romantic relationship , to lead the prosecution against Trump and others. It says the relationship amounted to a “clear conflict of interest and a fraud upon the taxpayers” of the county and state. One of the committee’s subpoenas orders Wills to produce documents related to Wade, including documents related to his hiring and payment, documents related to money or items of value that Wade and Willis may have exchanged, text messages and emails between the two, and their phone records. The committee also requested any documents her office sent in response to requests from the U.S. House, as well as communications Willis and her office had with the White House, the U.S. Justice Department and the House relating to the 2020 presidential election. And they asked for documents related to federal grant money Willis’ office has received. Before the deadlines in the subpoenas, Willis challenged them in court. Willis’ challenge was pending in mid-September when she skipped a hearing during which the committee members had hoped to question her. In October, the committee asked Ingram to require Willis to comply with the subpoenas. The committee’s lawyers wrote in a court filing that Willis’ failure to do so had delayed its ability to finish its inquiry and to provide recommendations for any legislation or changes in appropriations that might result. Barnes also argued that once the regular legislative session has adjourned, which happened in March this year, legislative committees can meet to study issues and come up with recommendations but do not have the power to compel someone to appear or produce documents. Belinfante rejected that, saying the state Constitution expressly permits the creation of interim committees and allows them to make their rules. Even if these subpoenas were validly issued, Barnes argued, they ask for too much, including private and personal information that is not a legitimate target of a legislative subpoena. Related Articles National News | Are you a former SmileDirectClub customer? You might be eligible for a refund National News | Justice Department announces sweeping reforms to curb suicides in federal prisons and jails National News | Defense makes closing argument in murder trial of Cash App founder Bob Lee National News | A judge has once again rejected Musk’s multi-billion-dollar Tesla pay package. Now what? National News | Is Enron back? If it’s a joke, some former employees aren’t laughing Belinfante said the lawmakers are simply trying to do their jobs. He asked that Willis be ordered to appear before the committee in early January. He also asked that she be ordered to provide the requested documents and explain what privilege justifies any that are excluded. With a glaring lack of state case law on the issue of the General Assembly’s subpoena power, that’s one issue Ingram will have to address. She said she will consider the arguments and release her order as soon as she can. Willis and Wade have acknowledged that they had a relationship but have said it began after he was hired and ended before the indictment against Trump was filed. Trump and other defendants argued that the relationship created a conflict of interest that should disqualify Willis and her office from continuing with her prosecution of the case. Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee ruled in March that Willis’ actions showed a “tremendous lapse in judgment,” but he did not find a conflict of interest that would disqualify Willis. He said she could continue her prosecution as long as Wade stepped aside, which he did. Trump and others have appealed that ruling to the Georgia Court of Appeals, and that appeal remains pending.PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — A pair of conservative groups on Friday challenged a Maine law that limits donations to political action committees that spend independently in candidate elections, arguing that money spent to support political expression is "a vital feature of our democracy.” Supporters of the referendum overwhelmingly approved on Election Day fully expected a legal showdown over caps on individual contributions to so-called super PACs. They hoped the referendum would trigger a case and ultimately prompt the U.S. Supreme Court to clarify the matter of donor limits after the court opened the floodgates to independent spending in its 2010 Citizens United decision. Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings. Get the latest news, sports, weather and more delivered right to your inbox.BY MELISSA GOLDIN Social media users are misrepresenting a report released Thursday by the Justice Department inspector general’s office, falsely claiming that it’s proof the FBI orchestrated the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021. Related Articles National News | OpenAI whistleblower found dead in San Francisco apartment National News | Judge rejects an attempt by Trump campaign lawyer to invalidate guilty plea in Georgia election case National News | Texas’ abortion pill lawsuit against New York doctor marks new challenge to interstate telemedicine National News | US military flies American released from Syrian prison to Jordan, officials say National News | Nearly half of US teens are online ‘constantly,’ Pew report finds The watchdog report examined a number of areas, including whether major intelligence failures preceded the riot and whether the FBI in some way provoked the violence. Claims spreading online focus on the report’s finding that 26 FBI informants were in Washington for election-related protests on Jan. 6, including three who had been tasked with traveling to the city to report on others who were potentially planning to attend the events. Although 17 of those informants either entered the Capitol or a restricted area around the building during the riot, none of the 26 total informants were authorized to do so by the bureau, according to the report. Nor were they authorized to otherwise break the law or encourage others to do so. Here’s a closer look at the facts. CLAIM: A December 2024 report released by the Department of Justice’s Office of the Inspector General is proof that the Jan. 6 Capitol riot was a setup by the FBI. THE FACTS: That’s false. The report found that no undercover FBI employees were at the riot on Jan. 6 and that none of the bureau’s informants were authorized to participate. Informants, also known as confidential human sources, work with the FBI to provide information, but are not on the bureau’s payroll. Undercover agents are employed by the FBI. According to the report, 26 informants were in Washington on Jan. 6 in connection with the day’s events. FBI field offices only informed the Washington Field Office or FBI headquarters of five informants that were to be in the field on Jan. 6. Of the total 26 informants, four entered the Capitol during the riot and an additional 13 entered a restricted area around the Capitol. But none were authorized to do so by the FBI, nor were they given permission to break other laws or encourage others to do the same. The remaining nine informants did not engage in any illegal activities. None of the 17 informants who entered the Capitol or surrounding restricted area have been prosecuted, the report says. A footnote states that after reviewing a draft of the report, the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington said that it “generally has not charged those individuals whose only crime on January 6, 2021 was to enter restricted grounds surrounding the Capitol, which has resulted in the Office declining to charge hundreds of individuals; and we have treated the CHSs consistent with this approach.” The assistant special agent in charge of the Washington Field Office’s counterterrorism division told the inspector general’s office that he “denied a request from an FBI office to have an undercover employee engage in investigative activity on January 6.” He, along with then-Washington Field Office Assistant Director in Charge Steven D’Antuono, said that FBI policy prohibits undercover employees at First Amendment-protected events without investigative authority. Many social media users drew false conclusions from the report’s findings. “JANUARY 6th WAS A SETUP!” reads one X post that had received more than 11,400 likes and shares as of Friday. “New inspector general report shows that 26 FBI/DOJ confidential sources were in the crowd on January 6th, and some of them went into the Capitol and restricted areas. Is it a coincidence that Wray put in his resignation notice yesterday? TREASON!” The mention of Wray’s resignation refers to FBI Director Christopher Wray’s announcement Wednesday that he plans to resign at the end of President Joe Biden’s term in January. Other users highlighted the fact that there were 26 FBI informants in Washington on Jan. 6, but omitted key information about the findings of the report. These claims echo a fringe conspiracy theory advanced by some Republicans in Congress that the FBI played a role in instigating the events of Jan. 6, 2021, when rioters determined to overturn Republican Donald Trump’s 2020 election loss to Democrat Joe Biden stormed the Capitol in a violent clash with police. The report knocks that theory down. Wray called such theories “ludicrous” at a congressional hearing last year. Asked for comment on the false claims spreading online, Stephanie Logan, a spokesperson for the inspector general’s office, pointed The Associated Press to a press release about the report. In addition to its findings about the the FBI’s involvement on Jan. 6, the report said that the FBI, in an action its now-deputy director described as a “basic step that was missed,” failed to canvass informants across all 56 of its field offices for any relevant intelligence ahead of time. That was a step, the report concluded, “that could have helped the FBI and its law enforcement partners with their preparations in advance of January 6.” However, it did credit the bureau for preparing for the possibility of violence and for trying to identify known “domestic terrorism subjects” who planned to come to Washington that day. The FBI said in a letter responding to the report that it accepts the inspection general’s recommendation “regarding potential process improvements for future events.”

NoneBest Bets for NCAA Basketball Picks Against the Spread for Saturday, December 14

By JUAN A. LOZANO, Associated Press HOUSTON (AP) — An elaborate parody appears to be behind an effort to resurrect Enron, the Houston-based energy company that exemplified the worst in American corporate fraud and greed after it went bankrupt in 2001. If its return is comedic, some former employees who lost everything in Enron’s collapse aren’t laughing. “It’s a pretty sick joke and it disparages the people that did work there. And why would you want to even bring it back up again?” said former Enron employee Diana Peters, who represented workers in the company’s bankruptcy proceedings. Here’s what to know about the history of Enron and the purported effort to bring it back. Once the nation’s seventh-largest company, Enron filed for bankruptcy protection on Dec. 2, 2001, after years of accounting tricks could no longer hide billions of dollars in debt or make failing ventures appear profitable. The energy company’s collapse put more than 5,000 people out of work, wiped out more than $2 billion in employee pensions and rendered $60 billion in Enron stock worthless. Its aftershocks were felt throughout the energy sector. Twenty-four Enron executives , including former CEO Jeffrey Skilling , were eventually convicted for their roles in the fraud. Enron founder Ken Lay’s convictions were vacated after he died of heart disease following his 2006 trial. On Monday — the 23rd anniversary of the bankruptcy filing — a company representing itself as Enron announced in a news release that it was relaunching as a “company dedicated to solving the global energy crisis.” It also posted a video on social media, advertised on at least one Houston billboard and a took out a full-page ad in the Houston Chronicle In the minute-long video that was full of generic corporate jargon, the company talks about “growth” and “rebirth.” It ends with the words, “We’re back. Can we talk?” Related Articles Enron’s new website features a company store, where various items featuring the brand’s tilted “E” logo are for sale, including a $118 hoodie. In an email, company spokesperson Will Chabot said the new Enron was not doing any interviews yet, but that “We’ll have more to share soon.” Signs point to the comeback being a joke. In the “terms of use and conditions of sale” on the company’s website, it says “the information on the website about Enron is First Amendment protected parody, represents performance art, and is for entertainment purposes only.” Documents filed with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office show that College Company, an Arkansas-based LLC, owns the Enron trademark. The co-founder of College Company is Connor Gaydos, who helped create a joke conspiracy theory that claims all birds are actually surveillance drones for the government. Peters said that since learning about the “relaunch” of Enron, she has spoken with several other former employees and they are also upset by it. She said the apparent stunt was “in poor taste.” “If it’s a joke, it’s rude, extremely rude. And I hope that they realize it and apologize to all of the Enron employees,” Peters said. Peters, who is 74 years old, said she is still working in information technology because “I lost everything in Enron, and so my Social Security doesn’t always take care of things I need done.” “Enron’s downfall taught us critical lessons about corporate ethics, accountability, and the consequences of unchecked ambition. Enron’s legacy was the employees in the trenches. Leave Enron buried,” she said. Follow Juan A. Lozano on X at https://x.com/juanlozano70