Tag Archives : Build House

Walensky deserves credit, not blame, for reforming a broken CDC

A word of caution in the wake of an internal announcement by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s director, Dr. Rochelle Walensky, about the organization’s shortcomings and the need for essential reform in facing and handling the COVID pandemic and future pandemics. 

It is too easy to scapegoat and too self-serving to hang people out to dry. It makes some people feel better but it isn’t always accurate or fair. It is not accurate or helpful in this case to talk about chopping off the head of the beast, especially when that head is a great infectious disease and public health expert.

Walensky’s admission that there needs to be an essential change in culture in light of an emergency like a pandemic is a refreshing one. Information needs to be presented to the American public in real-time, in a way that is not wonky but digestible. It needs to be fact-based and data-driven but also crystal clear so that the public is inclined to follow it. There needs to be more digitalization and more cooperation from the states.

She said it best to me in an interview for Fox News this past week: 

“What I told our agency is, on that path to the finish line towards publication, we need to stop and pull over. We need to show our work. We need to inform policymakers. We need to update things along the way as we proceed to that finish line … We need practical, timely recommendations that take early peeks of the data and adjust along the way.” 

She said they needed to be more timely in terms of “how quickly we can get our data out there. It doesn’t mean that we won’t go to peer-review publications. But much of the world has moved to preprint, providing online data. We need to do that.”

Walensky told me that the CDC needs to disclose what they don’t know as well as what they do. Though evolving information on masking and vaccines or closures was often convoluted and slow to change, it isn’t entirely the CDC’s fault if states and local municipalities rely on it too heavily or impose mandates based on guidance. Walensky told me that she believes vaccines changed the paradigm at schools, for example, and became a strong justification for keeping them open, even allowing the unvaccinated to attend. She also told me that she continues to believe that masks work to decrease spread, and in fact, I believe it too.

Masks have been a challenging message, she said. “What I will say is we have seen time and time again, data after data, that demonstrate that masks have decreased infection and that they work to decrease infection, especially higher quality masks.”

Of course, school closures caused harm in terms of socialization delays, mental health and nutritional problems, and did little to slow the spread of COVID. The CDC could have been more reactive to this information and pushed to keep schools open earlier in the pandemic. But Walensky was right to defend her policy change when the vaccines came out. “One of the first things I said as vaccinations were rolling out with some controversy was that we did have a capacity to get our kids back to school, even if our teachers, even if everybody wasn’t vaccinated. So this was always part of our vision to be able to get back to school and to get safely back to school.”

Was the CDC’s shift in focus from case numbers to hospitalizations too slow? Yes. But was it correct? Yes. The COVID vaccines are valuable at decreasing severity even if they are less effective at stopping the spread of the emerging omicron subvariants and the proper masks can help protect the most vulnerable, though neither reality should lead to mandates, especially now that COVID spread cannot be prevented with the current tools.

Widespread testing for any emerging infectious disease needs to be available much earlier, not gummed up by protocol or propriety even as the need for verifying quality and predictability remains real.

She said, “If there is a new diagnostic test, we are going to need to work quickly in order to get that out there. But when we have a new diagnostic test like we needed for COVID-19, we can’t sacrifice on making sure that that is the right test, which [was] among the challenges that we had early on.” 

The CDC is limited by the amount of clinical and laboratory information it receives from the states. In the middle of the pandemic, greasing the wheels of information exchange is just as important as reforming from within. The CDC brought us crucial information on the effectiveness of vaccines for COVID and even natural immunity following infection. The delay and the clear connection between emerging science and public policy are what need to change. Walensky is also mindful of extending these tools more effectively and consistently to vulnerable communities, including in rural areas. 

Scapegoating one leader or one essential organization is not the way to bring us to that point of connection. I am confident that Walensky’s judgments are based on science and forward-thinking public policy. 

Marc Siegel, M.D., is a professor of medicine and medical director of Doctor Radio at NYU Langone Health. He is a Fox News medical correspondent and author of the new book, “COVID; the Politics of Fear and the Power of Science.”

Source: TEST FEED1

To keep our children safe, keep guns out of schools

Schools are opening this week, and millions of children are returning to the classroom. After the Uvalde, Texas mass murder of 19 children and two teachers, politicians in Texas called for more teachers to carry guns in classrooms to protect their children and themselves. Ohio recently enacted a law permitting teachers to be armed after 24 hours of training.

A closer look at the data reveals that any benefits of such concealed carry are far outweighed by the risks, particularly to children.

In spite of the perception offered by the media, mass murders, defined as four or more people killed during a single event, excluding the shooter, occur around once every 12 to 13 days, or around 30 such events per year. The range of venues where they occur are highly varied. Mass murders at schools in Uvalde, Texas, Parkland, Florida, and Newtown, Connecticut certainly grab everyone’s attention. Yet, with around 130,000 public and private K-12 schools in the nation, the practical need for concealed firearms by teachers and on school grounds is questionable. 

So, what are the risks and benefits of teachers being armed?

There is risk that any such firearm accidently discharges or inadvertently ends up in the hands of children, both of which could collectively cause significant harm.

In 2021, there were approximately 700 deaths attributed to mass shootings, defined as four or more people killed or injured during a single event, excluding the shooter. Such events occurred around 55 times per month. At the same time, around 600 people were killed unintentionally, including accidental discharges. Therefore, the number of deaths in the nation in 2021 attributed to mass shootings and unintentional events were similar, although the former gets much more attention in the media than the latter. Moreover, mass murders accounted for just 177 of the deaths, yet the media portrays them as the dominant problem.

The loudest argument made by those advocating for guns in schools is that “good people with guns” will stop “bad people with guns.” In theory, this is correct. In practice, the issue is not just the possession of a firearm, but how the firearms can be used and the skills of the user. Law enforcement officers undertake several weeks of training on how to use their firearms judiciously to ensure that if discharged, only the target of a criminal act is impacted. Expecting such a level of precision by all teachers carrying a firearm is unrealistic.

If anything, the biggest value offered by carrying a concealed weapon is its deterrence value. If a possible shooter believes that there may be resistance at a venue, alternative plans would be needed to address any such confrontation. This argument is flawed. Most shooters end up being killed during their act of violence, the shooter’s actions and behavior are suicidal, hence is willing to undertake their shooting with such risks.

Does this mean that teachers must continue to be helpless when confronted with a shooter in their school?

Of course not. What was learned from the Uvalde, Texas response is that rapid response — and decisive action — are necessary. All school room doors must be accessible at any time by appropriate authorities. Waiting for “the right moment” to act is inexcusable. If a shooter is in a room with children, immediate controlled confrontation is imperative. Such actions carry risk to the children. However, the risk of inaction may be even worse.

In an ideal world, all schools would be safe from shooters and others intent on causing harm and destruction. In the real world, there are risks. Such risks also exist in churches and other places of worship, entertainment venues, and shopping malls. Anytime people are prematurely killed or injured during a mass shooting or mass murder, the harm isunspeakably tragic.

The good news is that in a country as large and expansive as the United States, the number of incidents, while all tragic, is small. We would all want it to be zero, much like how we would like to see zero drug overdose deaths and zero automobile accident fatalities. These are aspirational ideals that are worthy objectives, but unrealistic to achieve in practice.

Adding more weapons in schools adds marginal benefits in their deterrence value with significant risk with unintended discharge. Indeed, the laws of unintended consequences often prevail in the most unsuspecting ways, and at the most unsuspecting times.

To keep children safe, keep firearms out of, not in, schools.

Sheldon H. Jacobson, Ph.D., is a founder professor of Computer Science at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. With a background in probability modeling and data science, he applies his expertise in data-driven risk-based decision-making to evaluate and inform public policy.

Source: TEST FEED1

Fauci to leave Biden administration in December

Anthony Fauci will step down from his positions in the Biden administration in December.

Fauci, the chief medical adviser to the president and longtime director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said he will be leaving those positions to “pursue the next chapter in my career.”

“While I am moving on from my current positions, I am not retiring,” Fauci said in a statement. “After more than 50 years of government service, I plan to pursue the next phase of my career while I still have so much energy and passion for my field. I want to use what I have learned as NIAID Director to continue to advance science and public health and to inspire and mentor the next generation of scientific leaders as they help prepare the world to face future infectious disease threats.”

Source: TEST FEED1

Pfizer submits application for updated COVID-19 vaccine booster to FDA

Pfizer said Monday that it had submitted its application to the Food and Drug Administration for an updated COVID-19 vaccine targeting the omicron subvariant currently circulating.  

The application comes ahead of a fall booster shot campaign. Assuming the FDA signs off, the shots are expected to begin in September.  

The application, per instructions previously given by FDA, is for a “bivalent” vaccine that targets the BA.4 and BA.5 subvariants of omicron currently circulating, as well as the original form of the virus.  

The vaccine is designed to be more effective against the current form of the virus, given there has been significant evolution. In addition, protection from the initial shots wanes over time.  

“The agility of the mRNA platform, together with extensive clinical experience with the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, has allowed us to develop, test and manufacture updated, high-quality vaccines that align to circulating strains with unprecedented speed,” Albert Bourla, Pfizer’s CEO, said in a statement.  

“Having rapidly scaled up production, we are positioned to immediately begin distribution of the bivalent Omicron BA.4/BA.5 boosters, if authorized, to help protect individuals and families as we prepare for potential fall and winter surges,” he added.  

The application is for everyone 12 years of age and older.  

“The vaccines that are coming in a few short weeks are specifically designed for the virus that’s out there, and I believe it’s going to be available and every American over the age of 12 will be eligible,” White House COVID-19 response coordinator Ashish Jha said last week on “NBC Nightly News.” 

Pfizer said the first doses are available to ship immediately pending authorization from the FDA.  

The company said that, following FDA guidance, it had submitted clinical data from a slightly different vaccine, targeting the BA.1 strain of omicron, as well as more preliminary data from the BA.4/BA.5 vaccine itself. 

The BA.1 vaccine was “was well-tolerated with a favorable safety profile,” Pfizer said.  

It remains unclear how many people will get the new boosters, despite the potential for a surge of COVID-19 over the fall and winter, given that uptake for the first booster shot has been lagging.  

Only about half of people who got the first two shots received the first booster shot, according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data.  

Source: TEST FEED1

Judge warns redactions in Trump warrant affidavit could render it 'meaningless'

A federal magistrate judge reviewing whether to release the affidavit that pushed him to approve a warrant to search former President Trump’s home said Monday that while he believes public interest favors releasing the document, redactions could make it “meaningless.”

The order from Judge Bruce Reinhart expands on an order from the bench given Thursday that gave the Justice Department until Thursday to propose redactions it says are necessary to protect its ongoing investigation.

“Particularly given the intense public and historical interest in an unprecedented search of a former president’s residence, the government has not yet shown that these administrative concerns are sufficient to justify sealing,” Reinhart wrote, adding that he rejected keeping the entire affidavit under seal.

While Reinhold previously suggested he would release a redacted version of the affidavit, he warned that approach could shift after reviewing DOJ’s proposed redactions.

“I cannot say at this point that partial redactions will be so extensive that they will result in a meaningless disclosure, but I may ultimately reach that conclusion after hearing further from the government,” he wrote.

DOJ had previously argued that what it deemed necessary redactions “would be so extensive as to render the document devoid of content that would meaningfully enhance the public’s understanding.”

DOJ has until noon Thursday to submit its proposal.

The warrant and other associated documents were released earlier this month after Attorney General Merrick Garland said that “the public’s clear and powerful interest in understanding what occurred under these circumstances weighs heavily in favor of unsealing.”

But the department has struck a different tone when it comes to the affidavit used to justify the warrant, arguing it should remain under seal in its entirety because information it contains lays out a “roadmap” to its ongoing investigation, and “highly sensitive information about witnesses,” and “specific investigative techniques.”

Source: TEST FEED1

Majority worried about student loan forgiveness impact on inflation: poll

Roughly six in 10 Americans — 59 percent — say they are worried that forgiving student loan debt could make inflation worse, according to a new CNBC poll.

The survey also found that 34 percent of respondents say only those in need should have debt forgiven, 32 percent say all of those with student loan debt should be forgiven and 30 percent say no debt should be forgiven.

The news comes a day after Education Secretary Miguel Cardona said an announcement from the Biden administration is coming soon regarding student loan debt, just ahead of an Aug. 31 expiration date for a temporary pause on loan payments.

It’s unclear if officials will announce another extension of the student loan freeze or reveal the administration’s intent to cancel some debt per borrower.

President Biden has faced calls to cancel up to $50,000 per borrower, although he has reportedly settled on a goal of forgiving $10,000 per borrower. Biden has previously said he would make a final decision by the end of August.

Just more than half of adults polled by CNBC — 53 percent — said any extra money from student loan forgiveness would go toward paying off other loans. Forty-five percent, meanwhile, said they would save the fund for retirement instead.

Any announcement of student loan forgiveness could come amid a period of economic uncertainty.

The inflation rate has reached a 40-year high and the economy shrank for two consecutive quarters, usually an indicator a country is in a recession.

Republicans have called canceling student debt “wildly inflationary” and have said it would benefit higher income Americans who don’t need the relief.

GOP lawmakers have even introduced bills intended to curb any plan that would forgive student loan debt, although legislation faces an uphill battle in the Democrat-controlled Congress.

Laura Beamer, a lead researcher for higher education finance at the Jain Family Institute, told The Hill this month that forgiving $10,000 in student debt would have a “minimal” impact on inflation.

Beamer also noted it would assist Americans with “higher debt to income ratios.”

“Those people are disproportionately hailing from disadvantaged groups and low socioeconomic status groups,” Beamer said.

More than 44 million Americans collectively owe $1.7 trillion through student loans.

The Biden administration has already canceled $32 billion in student loan relief for more than 1.6 million borrowers, mostly among students who were defrauded or misled by schools.

Around $10 billion of that was forgiven though the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program, which forgives debt for those who work in public service and other qualifying jobs after a certain amount of time.

The CNBC poll was conducted by Momentive among 5,142 adults from Aug. 4 to Aug. 15.

Source: TEST FEED1

Giving Ukraine a fighting chance: More support needed for the Territorial Defense Force

A commander of the Ukraine Territorial Defense Force recently wrote: “It has cost us too many Ukrainian lives, but each of us has made the choice to defend our freedom.”

These words from the front lines of the war in Ukraine dramatize the undaunted courage of civilian volunteers and the price they are paying. Too often, however, members of the Territorial Defense Force are the unsung and under-supported heroes of Ukraine’s extraordinary response to Russia’s invasion. As The Hill has reported, donations fill a key gap for these volunteers. So unless we provide more support for them, these volunteers of Ukraine will not have a fighting chance against Russia’s troops, artillery, and air power. 

Early in the war, the stunning ability of the Ukrainian military — including irregular civilian fighters — to destroy and disrupt the Russian Army’s plan for a lightning attack to capture Kyiv inspired the world. Putin was compelled to abandon his initial strategy to capture Kyiv and was forced to shift to waging a war of attrition in the east of Ukraine. 

To supplement Ukraine’s defense against Russia’s invasion, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky created the Territorial Defense Force (TDF) to give Ukraine additional fighting power. The TDF is composed of over 100,000 civilian men and women from all walks of life defending their cities and neighborhoods. But as Michael Kofman, an expert on Russia and Ukraine military affairs said recently, “They are replacing the soldiers they’ve lost with people who have very little training, who are mobilized personnel, and they’re replacing regular line units with Territorial Defense Forces.”

Often the men and women of the TDF are fighting without the weapons, training and equipment of the regular army. This particularly applies to non-lethal, vitally needed items such as helmets, boots, backpacks, flak vests, night-vision goggles, encrypted cell phones, radios, walkie-talkies, drones, GPS, computers and satellite services. Even basics like meals, blankets, uniforms, and medical supplies are needed. 

We agree Ukraine needs more lethal weaponry to offset Russia’s advantage. But because NATO, the Ministry of Defense and General Staff of Ukraine are understandably and appropriately focusing on the tasks of acquiring, deploying and sustaining heavy weaponry for the main army, the urgent needs of the TDF are the last to be filled. Getting more supplies to the TDF can increase the ability of these volunteers to defend their homes and to fight on the front lines, especially as the colder weather of winter approaches.

Innovation in warfighting can also give a critical edge to the Ukrainian resistance. For instance, young Ukrainians have mashed together civilian drones, communications gear, and satellite information to shift the tactical balance in favor of Ukraine. Novel attacks on Russian forces, logistics, and command centers are confounding Russian forces in effective and surprisingly inexpensive ways, adding disruption and fear to the already low morale of the Russian army. More such innovations in the hands of a well-supplied TDF will provide an even greater advantage.

In addition to more offensive weaponry and systems, we see three changes that will strengthen Ukraine’s chance of winning a prolonged war with Russia.

First, the Departments of Defense and State should dedicate a portion of Ukrainian aid to funding NGOs and other civilian volunteer organizations in Ukraine that have the capacity and networks of trusted relationships to deliver supplies directly to the TDF on the front lines in days rather than weeks.

Second, young American entrepreneurs, hackers, and computer engineers should be encouraged and funded to join with Ukraine’s bright technicians to modify existing technologies to give the TDF the agile, disruptive fighting capability they need.  DARPA, the Defense Innovation Unit, and the National Security Innovation Network have access to the technologies and talent to conceive and deliver innovative solutions quickly.

Third, President Biden should call on American citizens to donate to NGOs such as Fighting Chance Ukraine, Unite with Ukraine, Spirit of America, and Blue/Yellow USA who are ready and eager to deliver supplies to Ukraine’s volunteers and citizens, especially the TDF.

The combination of government and citizen support for a better-equipped TDF is critical if the volunteer heroes of Ukraine are to fight effectively now and in the months to come. A recent email from a TDF commander brings this home: “As a TDF battalion brought together at the beginning of the war, we are deeply appreciative of the support we have received from private American citizens and American NGOs. We have received … body armor and helmets, night vision, drones, sleeping bags, a pickup truck. With such support, we have been able to defend the city of Kharkiv. We still anticipate and are prepared for a long fight.”

Gen. Philip M. Breedlove, USAF (ret.), was the 17^th Supreme Allied Commander Europe and is currently a distinguished professor at the Sam Nunn School at the Georgia Institute of Technology.

John E. Herbst is a former ambassador to Ukraine and Uzbekistan and currently serves as senior director of the Eurasia Center at The Atlantic Council.

Jerry MacArthur Hultin is a former Under Secretary of the Navy and served as president of the Polytechnic Institute of New York University. He is currently chairman of the Global Futures Group.

Source: TEST FEED1

Chinese money laundering scheme boosts drug trafficking in US

Over the last five years, the world was oblivious to a dramatic shift in international money laundering, which occurred when one criminal organization ceded management of its revenue stream to another. This was a bloodless coup, which is why it went unnoticed. However, the implications are profound for law enforcement and compliance departments throughout the private sector.   

The clandestine shake up: Chinese organized crime has taken over money laundering for the Mexican drug cartels, providing a more efficient system for transferring drug sales profits to Mexico. This has increased net profits for the cartels and empowered them to expand their operations.   

To understand the gravity of this shift, imagine offering a multinational corporation the ability to assign all its accounts receivable to a subcontractor that would absorb all collection risk. This subcontractor could also provide funding and do so in a few hours as opposed to days or weeks. No accounts receivable department and markedly improved access to capital: these are the innovations brought by Chinese Money Laundering Organizations (MLOs).    

Around 2016, government analysts noticed declining use of the traditional method of laundering narcotics proceeds, the black-market peso exchange (BMPE). The Mexican and Colombian cartels, which controlled the BMPE through extreme violence, typically accepted a transaction cost of between 7 and 10 percent and waited at least a week to access clean funds. The Chinese MLOs, however, had perfected a cheaper, quicker process. They offered seamless and untraceable methods of moving funds in a fast, reliable, and virtually risk-free environment. Because of their efficiency, Chinese MLOs are now entrenched as the dominant global money launderers.

And it was all an unintended consequence of legislation in the Peoples’ Republic of China, so-called “Capital Flight” laws, which imposed an annual limit of $50,000 on funds transferred out of China. Wealthy Chinese who sought to access their money outside of China turned to the black market to circumvent the law and acquire U.S. dollars.

Every day in the United States, Chinese money brokers pick up narcotics proceeds — from sales of fentanyl, heroin, cocaine, and methamphetamine — in the form of bulk U.S. cash from their customers. The customer might be a street gang in New York that owes payment to the Mexican cartel that supplied the drugs the gang sold. This cash is then sold to Chinese customers who want to spend money in the U.S., acquiring real estate, paying college tuition, or making other investments. These Chinese customers pay in China for the cash they receive abroad. The proceeds in China are used to buy items for export to Mexico or South America, where the goods are sold by the brokers to recoup their funds.

Throughout the process, the Chinese MLOs employ technology to their advantage, advertising the sale of dollars to Chinese customers in internet chat rooms and communicating via popular encrypted messaging networks. 

The Chinese MLOs are successful because there are few restrictions on, or compliance programs that target, bank-to-bank transfers in China. Since no funds leave China, there are no international transactions to monitor. Similarly, the U.S. transactions are made in cash, outside the banking system, meaning there are no indications of potential money laundering for compliance officers to identify. Divorced from the modern banking system, this method of laundering money is extremely difficult to detect and track.   

With the Chinese MLOs assuming all risk, currency laundering has never been faster. What took a week now takes hours or, at most, a day. And with a huge customer base, the Chinese MLOs offer immediately available cash at a transaction fee of 1 to 2 percent with no waiting for assets to be deposited into clean accounts.   

In April 2022, federal prosecutors brought charges against a Chinese MLO in Flushing, Queens, that allegedly laundered several million dollars over four years. To appreciate the magnitude of the problem, one must extrapolate, imagining dozens of sophisticated Chinese money brokers organizing hundreds, if not thousands, of cash pick-ups and drops throughout the U.S. every day.   

Addressing this new reality requires a dramatic shift by U.S. and Chinese financial institutions. U.S. compliance efforts should focus on cash deposits and the issuance of cashier’s checks where Chinese MLOs are known to operate. A substantial increase in the issuance of cashier’s checks — key to some laundering cycles — is a hallmark of the new method.   

Another way is through attacking its efficiency by creating doubts about its reliability. Law enforcement must impose new barriers. The December 2021 executive order implementing sanctions on those in the narcotics trade should be used to deny involved parties access to the international financial network. One reason the Chinese MLOs are successful is because they are trusted. Remove trust in the network and the house of cards will fall.

Christopher Urben is a managing director based in the Washington, D.C., office of Nardello & Co., a global investigations firm. He previously worked for 25 years with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, where he was responsible for developing and leading sensitive global undercover DEA operations that dismantled several of the most significant transnational criminal organizations.

Source: TEST FEED1

Russia accuses Ukrainian agents of killing daughter of Putin ally

Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) on Monday accused Ukrainian secret services of killing the daughter of an influential ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin known as “Putin’s brain.”

The FSB told Russian news outlet Tass that a Ukrainian named Natalia Voyk was behind the killing of TV commentator and journalist Daria Dugina, who died after a bomb exploded in her car on Saturday night.

Russia’s intelligence agency said Voyk fled to Estonia after the killing. The FSB said they are seeking her extradition.

The Hill could not immediately verify the claims and the Tass did not share any evidence from the FSB.

Ukraine has denied involvement in the attack through a statement from Mykhailo Podolyak, a top presidential adviser to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

“We are not a criminal state, unlike Russia, and definitely not a terrorist state,” Podolyak said on Ukrainian national television, according to Al Jazeera.

Dugina, 29, was the daughter of Alexander Dugin, a prominent philosopher and writer who is said to be a close adviser to Putin.

Dugina, who has pushed for the restoration of Russian power and unity, is a supporter of Putin’s invasion of Ukraine and manages an ultra-nationalist website called Geopolitica, which spreads propaganda and disinformation about the U.S. and other western nations. In 2015, the U.S. designated Dugin as a threat to the sovereignty of Ukraine.

Dugina is also a staunch supporter of Russian nationalism and has spread similar rhetoric about Ukraine through the website United World International (UWI). The U.S. sanctioned Dugina in March.

Before an alleged remote-controlled bomb exploded in her Toyota Land Cruiser, Dugina attended a literary and musical festival in Moscow with her father on Saturday.

The FSB on Monday said Voyk traveled to Moscow with her teen daughter Sofya Shaban on July 23 and rented an apartment in the same building where Dugina lived, Tass reported. Russia accused Voyk of spying on Dugina.

Russia’s Investigative Committee has launched a more formal investigation into Dugina’s death and the FSB has handed materials and evidence over for the probe, according to Tass.

An unknown Russian group called the National Republican Army claimed responsibility for the attack on Sunday. According to the Kyiv Independent, a former Russian lawmaker confirmed the group was responsible for Dugina’s murder.

U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), the chairman of the House intelligence committee, said he hoped Ukraine was not behind the attack and that it was an internal Russian affair.

“We have seen terrible war crimes by Russia against Ukraine, and Russia should be held accountable,” he told CNN’s Jake Tapper on Sunday. “And I certainly would never want to see anything like an attack on civilians by Ukraine, and hope that their representations are correct.”

Source: TEST FEED1

Threats to democracy top list of issues facing US: poll

Threats to democracy clocked in as the most important issue facing the country for a plurality of registered voters, according to an NBC News poll.

The poll found that 21 percent of respondents ranked threats to democracy as the most important issue, followed by 16 percent who indicated the cost of living and 14 percent who said jobs and the economy.

When respondents were asked to choose their top two issues, threats to democracy tied with cost of living as a top concern for 29 percent of respondents. Jobs and the economy clocked in at 28 percent, followed by immigration and climate change.

The new poll was conducted days after the FBI searched former President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate earlier this month as part of its investigation into the former president’s handling of classified documents. A now-unsealed property receipt reveals agents seized 33 items from the Florida resort, including 11 sets of classified items. Court documents show Trump is being investigated for potential violations of the Espionage Act and other federal statutes.

The poll also comes weeks after the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol concluded a series of public hearings. The hearings attempted to tie Trump and his allies to the insurrection, detailing their post-election efforts to create slates of fake electors and promote unfounded claims of election fraud.

In May, the cost of living as well as jobs and the economy ranked as the top two issues when the question was asked, although threats to democracy was not one of the polled issues.

Annual inflation in July fell to 8.5 percent, easing from previous months but still close to the 40-year high of 9.1 percent in June. The drop was largely driven by falling gas prices, which have continued to decline to an average price of $3.90 for a gallon of gas as of Monday, according to AAA. Prices briefly surpassed $5 per gallon in June, setting all-time records.

Democrats, facing historical and political headwinds, are hoping the investigation related to the Mar-a-Lago search, a string of recent legislative victories and anger following the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade can avoid a shellacking for the party in November. 

Despite the recent glimmer of hope, President Biden’s approval rating remains underwater, according to the poll. Forty-two percent of respondents in the new survey approved of his performance as president, compared to 55 percent who disapproved.

The poll was conducted Aug. 12-16 through interviews with 1,000 registered voters. The margin of error is 3.1 percentage points.

Source: TEST FEED1