CHICAGO – A white Chicago police officer who fatally shot black teenager Laquan McDonald was assaulted by inmates in his cell at a Connecticut prison, the officer’s wife said Wednesday.

Jason Van Dyke was transferred earlier this month to a federal prison in Danbury, Connecticut. He was placed in the prison’s general population hours after his arrival and was assaulted there, the Chicago Sun-Times reported.

“We are all petrified and in fear for Jason’s life,” his wife, Tiffany Van Dyke, told the newspaper. “Jason just wants to serve his sentence. He does not want any trouble. I hope prison officials will take steps to rectify this right away. He never should have been in the general population.”

Details of the incident weren’t immediately clear. A spokesperson for the Federal Correctional Institution in Danbury wasn’t available for comment when The Associated Press called on Wednesday night.

A Cook County, Illinois, jury in October found Jason Van Dyke guilty of second-degree murder and 16 counts of aggravated battery with a firearm for the 2014 killing of McDonald, who was shot 16 times. In January, Van Dyke was sentenced to six years and nine months in prison.

Prosecutors on Monday asked the Illinois Supreme Court to review the sentence. They said they believe Judge Vincent Gaughan improperly applied the law when sentencing Van Dyke.

Absent a new sentence, Van Dyke will likely serve only about three years, with credit for good behavior.

Van Dyke was being held at the Rock Island County Jail in Rock Island, Illinois, about 150 miles (240 kilometers) west of Chicago, before the move to the low-security Connecticut prison. County authorities said he was kept out of the Illinois jail’s general population.

___

For the AP’s complete coverage of the Jason Van Dyke case: https://apnews.com/tag/LaquanMcDonald

California Gov. Gavin Newsom, under budgetary pressure to provide more government health care for illegal immigrants and more housing for the working poor, just threw the Green New Deal’s nationwide train network under the bus by canceling the state’s high-speed rail project.

Speaking Tuesday at his first State of the State address, Gov. Newsom admitted there “simply isn’t a path” to finish the train.

Instead of running 520 miles, connecting San Francisco to Los Angeles, Newsom proposed that the system will run just 150 miles – in the middle of the state’s Central Valley agricultural region – connecting Bakersfield, Fresno and Merced (with a population of about one million of the state’s 40 million residents).

AMERICA, DON’T BE LIKE CALIFORNIA – MISERY LOVES COMPANY

Initially sold to the public as a clean, high-speed way to get from the Bay Area to L.A. for about the time and cost of an airplane ticket, the government train project was promised to cost $40 billion with no tax money to operate. With big companies and organized labor promoting the plan, it passed with 52.7 percent of the vote in 2008 (an election with Obama at the top of the ticket).

Reality quickly mugged the dream. Soon after the voters approved borrowing almost $10 billion to kickstart the project, planners were forced to admit that instead of being operational by 2022 and costing $33 billion, the effort would consume $77 billion to $98 billion and take years longer to finish.

Furthermore, instead of traveling from L.A. to San Francisco in 2 hours and 40 minutes – compared to commercial flights taking an hour, plus TSA security time — the travel time for the fastest train stretched out to more than 3 hours.

The projected ticket prices doubled – more than airfare would cost – as expected ridership plummeted.

Lastly, not a penny of the billions in expected private investment ever materialized, leaving California and federal tax payers on the hook for billions, with about $3.5 billion in federal funds spent and about a similar amount of state funds – much of it from California’s costly cap-and-trade climate change program, which has increased gasoline prices by 10-12 cents per gallon.

A spokesperson for Gov. Newsom insisted that the governor really isn’t canceling the project, he’s simply trying to finish what was started while working on environmental planning for the longer route, “…that would allow the project to continue seeking other funding streams.”

What he really meant to say is that California wants to avoid being found in breach of its agreement with the federal government and at risk of having to refund $3.5 billion.

So California will pretend to work on the train to avoid having to return the billions – money that could be repurposed to pay for more than half of President Trump’s wall. In the meantime, at the rate money is being spent on the project, it would take more than 100 years to finish.

That California, America’s most populous state led by its most progressive politicians, would abandon a government-run high-speed rail system within a week of the Green New Deal’s introduction in Congress says much about the Green New Deal’s viability.

The Green New Deal plan, introduced on Feb. 7 by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , D-NY, and Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., calls for “investing in … high-speed rail” as part of a 10-year national effort. The FAQ accompanying the congressional resolution, since removed from Ocasio-Cortez’s website, envisioned a “build(ing) out (of) high-speed rail at a scale where air travel stops becoming necessary.”

It’s important to note here that California voters approved their high-speed rail project more than 10 years ago — and not a single passenger has yet ridden the train. And there’s no operational date in sight.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

The fact is that America is a continental nation. They may have high-speed trains in France and Japan, but Texas is the size of France and California is about the size of Japan. Most Americans would scoff at the quaint notion of boarding a train in Boston and arriving in L.A. 15 hours later.

The Green New Deal’s dirty little secret is this: its revolutionary backers want to make cars and planes so expensive to use that only the rich will be able to afford them. The rest of us can take the train – whenever it arrives at the station.

CLICK HERE TO READ CHUCK DEVORE

A federal judge on Wednesday found that Paul Manafort, President Trump’s former campaign manager, “intentionally” lied to Special Counsel Robert Mueller in response to some, but not all, of their inquiries — a ruling that voids his plea deal and exposes Manafort, at a minimum, to a harsher sentence.

In her decision, U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson pointedly rejected some of the claims by Mueller’s team, while noting that legally, prosecutors were entitled to deference on the question of whether Manafort breached the terms of his plea deal as long as they made the claim in “good faith.”

Manafort, 69 seemingly avoided a second trial in Washington, D.C., before Jackson last year by agreeing to cooperate with investigators and pleading guilty to two felony conspiracy charges related to his overseas lobbying work. Prosecutors, in turn, agreed to recommend he receive a reduced sentence.

Manafort has denied intentionally misleading Mueller’s team during the approximately 50 hours of interviews with investigators that he participated in following his plea deal, and said he is under stress and physically ill.

“The Office of Special Counsel (OSC) made its determination that the defendant made false statements and thereby breached the plea agreement in good faith,” Jackson wrote. “Therefore, the Office of Special Counsel is no longer bound by its obligations under the plea agreement, including its promise to support a reduction of the offense level in the calculation of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines for acceptance of responsibility.”

Jackson’s ruling proceeded to respond point-by-point to Mueller’s allegations against Manafort to assess whether he had, in fact, breached the plea agreement — and, in some cases, Jackson rejected the special counsel’s contentions as wholly unfounded.

For example, Jackson wrote: “OSC has failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that on October 16, 2018, defendant intentionally made a false statement concerning his contacts with the administration.”

LAST WEEK: JUDGE GRILLS MUELLER TEAM ON CLAIM MANAFORT LIED

The preponderance of evidence standard is among the lowest possible standards and means only that it is more likely than not that Manafort lied. Toward the end of a contentious hearing last week, Jackson took particular umbrage at prosecutors’ contentions that Manafort had lied about his contacts with the Trump administration.

“And of all of them, this is the one where I have the most difficulty figuring out where the real contradiction is of moment to the investigation,” Jackson said.

At that point, a member of Mueller’s team replied that Manafort had lied by denying having any direct or “indirect” contacts with the administration — and that the “indirect” statement was a lie.

Also in her ruling Wednesday, Jackson found that “OSC has failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that on October 16, 2018, defendant intentionally made false statements concerning Kilimnik’s role in the obstruction of justice conspiracy” to tamper with witnesses in the Russia probe.

That was a reference to Russian-Ukrainian political consultant Konstantin Kilimnik, who has ties to Russian intelligence. Prosecutors said Manafort made false statements about sharing polling data during the 2016 presidential election with Kilimnik.

Jackson held separately: “OSC has established by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant intentionally made multiple false statements to the FBI, the OSC, and the grand jury concerning matters that were material to the investigation: his interactions and communications with Kilimnik.”

Top Mueller deputy Andrew Weissmann told Jackson that Manafort’s connection to Kilimnik — whose Aug. 2, 2016, meeting with Manafort at the Grand Havana Club cigar bar in New York is under particular scrutiny — “goes, I think, very much to the heart of what the Special Counsel’s Office is investigating. … In [August] 2016 there is an in-person meeting with someone who … is understood by the FBI, assessed to be — have a relationship with Russian intelligence.”

The meeting occurred while Manafort was still in a high-ranking role in the Trump campaign. Rick Gates, Manafort’s longtime deputy and also a Trump campaign aide, attended. And prosecutors say the three men left separately so as not to draw attention to their meeting.

HOUSE DEMS PLANNING MORE RUSSIA PROBES, EVEN AFTER MUELLER WRAPS IT UP

Additionally, Jackson found by a preponderance of evidence that Manafort had lied about a wire transfer sent in 2017 to a firm by a political action committee that spent millions to help Trump’s candidacy.

“OSC has established by a preponderance of the evidence that defendant
intentionally made false statements to the FBI, the OSC, and the grand jury
concerning the payment by Firm A to the law firm, a matter that was material to the investigation,” Jackson wrote.

Jackson told Manafort’s lawyers last week she wasn’t entirely convinced by their argument that his “succession of inconsistent explanations” about the wire transfer could be chalked up to confusion caused by accounting practices.

The judge specifically ruled that the lies regarding Kilimnik and the wire transfer were “material to the investigation,” as prosecutors had claimed.

CLICK TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Additionally, Jackson ruled that “OSC has established by a preponderance of the evidence that on October 5, 2018, the defendant intentionally made false statements that were material to another DOJ investigation.” It was not immediately clear what investigation was implicated.

Jackson said the precise impact on Manafort’s upcoming sentencing on two felony charges related to his Ukrainian lobbying work, set for March 13, will be determined at a later date. It appeared unlikely Manafort would face new charges as a result of Jackson’s ruling Wednesday, but it remained possible.

Manafort faces up to ten years in prison in the separate case in Virginia, where he was convicted on tax and fraud charges.

Fox News’ Jake Gibson contributed to this report.

Brock Long, the administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA), announced Thursday that he was resigning from his position, saying “it is time for me to go home to my family.”

In a statement, Long said FEMA had provided assistance on “more than 200 declared disasters” and thanked President Donald Trump, Vice President Mike Pence and Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, whom he said “have been extremely supportive of me, the FEMA workforce and our mission.”

“As a career emergency management professional, I could not be prouder to have worked alongside the devoted, hardworking men and women of FEMA for the past two years,” Long added. ” … I leave knowing the Agency is in good hands.”

Long had been investigated by the Department of Homeland Security’s internal watchdog last year over allegations that he inappropriately used government vehicles to travel to his home in North Carolina. Officials found he had misused vehicles, but Long was not asked to resign, and he agreed to reimburse the government. Homeland Security sources told Fox News that they did not know whether the controversy had anything to do with Long’s decision to step down, but added that no one at DHS had asked the administrator to resign.

FEMA Deputy Administrator Peter Gaynor will become acting administrator upon Long’s departure. Trump must nominate a permanent replacement for Long and that person must be confirmed by the Senate. Sources told Fox News that Long submitted his resignation when he did so the White House could identify, nominate and have a successor confirmed in time for the forthcoming hurricane season.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

“Over the last two years, Administrator Long has admirably led the men and women of FEMA during very difficult, historic and complex times,” Nielsen said in a statement. “Under Brock’s leadership, FEMA has successfully supported State and Territory-led efforts to respond and recover from 6 major hurricanes, 5 historic wildfires and dozens of other serious emergencies.  I appreciate his tireless dedication to FEMA and his commitment to fostering a culture of preparedness across the nation.”

Sources told Fox News the tempo of the job may have played a role in Long’s resignation, noting that FEMA had more disasters and emergencies to deal with in the past 15 months than it had in the previous 10 years.

Fox News’ John Roberts and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

The border security compromise package on Capitol Hill aimed at averting another government shutdown is running into problems, with one conservative source telling Fox News that the bill “is leaking oil right now” — and President Trump not saying if he’ll support it.

The text of the bill was expected to be available later Wednesday. But one source close to the process said lawmakers are “struggling” to finish it.

TRUMP ‘NOT HAPPY’ WITH BIPARTISAN BORDER DEAL, BUT DOESN’T WANT ANOTHER SHUTDOWN

The difficulties come as the conservative lawmakers on the House Freedom Caucus, who want more funding for the wall, said Wednesday they’re pushing for a one-week continuing resolution to fund the government — giving lawmakers more time to work out a deal with more wall funding.

“The conference report is projected to be thousands of pages long and was negotiated behind closed doors,” House Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows, R-N.C., said in a statement. “We believe that members should be given enough time to read it before voting on it, so they can decide whether or not a better deal can be negotiated.”

Congressional negotiators announced Monday that they’d reached “an agreement in principle” on border security funding that includes more than $1.3 billion for physical barriers along the U.S.-Mexico border. The White House initially requested $5.7 billion for the border wall.

TRUMP SIGNALS SUPPORT FOR BORDER SECURITY DEAL AFTER MEETING WITH SHELBY

Lawmakers have until 11:59 p.m. Friday to get the agreement through both houses of Congress and signed by Trump before several Cabinet-level departments shut down and hundreds of thousands of federal workers are furloughed in what would be the second partial government shutdown this year.

When asked Wednesday if they had an agreement that Trump would approve, Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., the chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, told reporters: “We think so. We hope so.”

But on Wednesday, the president remained noncommittal about signing.

“Well, we haven’t gotten it yet,” Trump told reporters at the White House. “We’ll be getting it and we’ll be looking for land mines — because you could have that.”

Now,the administration is dangling the possibility that Trump could declare a national emergency and divert money from the federal budget for wall construction, but that move would almost certainly be challenged in both Congress and the courts..

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

A highly placed administration official told Fox News on Wednesday that there has been no decision to sign the compromise legislation – and that Trump, White House officials and Department of Homeland Security officials will first need the opportunity to go through the entire bill with a fine-tooth comb.

The possibility of declaring a national emergency is still on the table, the official said, though no decision has been made on that front, either.

Fox News’ John Roberts and Sam Chamberlain and The Associated Press contributed to this report.