Tag Archives : Build House

GOP lawmakers adopt ‘defund’ rallying cry for FBI, not police

The killings of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor and many other Black Americans by police officers in recent years have sparked protests around the country. Many activists demanded cities defund their police, an idea scorned by Republicans. 

Now, though, some GOP leaders have adopted the rallying cry when it comes to the FBI and former President Trump.

After the FBI conducted a search of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence on Monday, Republicans reacted in outrage, with a handful calling for the FBI to be defunded or abolished.

South Carolina Rep. Jeff Duncan (R) wrote on Twitter, “The FBI has proven time and again that it is corrupt to the core. At what point do we abolish the Bureau and start over?” 

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) tweeted “DEFUND THE FBI!” and is now selling apparel bearing the same slogan. 

It’s quite a turnaround for any Republican to talk about defunding a national law enforcement group, given that the GOP has used calls from progressives to “defund the police” as a political attack line.

In fact, those GOP arguments were so politically potent that most Democrats have abstained from the “defund the police” slogan even when they are deeply in favor of police reform. President Biden has made it clear he does not want to defund the police.

Most Republicans attacking the FBI over its search of Trump’s estate also were not calling for the FBI to be defunded, even as they did question its actions.

Those that did use the phrase, however, showed few signs of walking it back, even after a search warrant was released publicly on Friday and showed authorities are looking into whether the Espionage Act was evaded through classified materials being brought to Mar-a-Lago.

Greene’s office said she was not available for an interview with The Hill. But she has been active on social media, accusing Biden of “weaponizing” the FBI and the Department of Justice in a Telegram post.

In an interview on former Trump strategist Steve Bannon’s podcast, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) compared the FBI officers to East German Stasi officers. 

“The antidote has to be not one more damn penny for this administrative state that has been weaponized against our people in a very fascist way,” said Gaetz. 

However, in a statement to The Hill, Gaetz said his comments “do not call for defunding the FBI” but for “reformation of the worst elements of the administrative state. Congress should use the power of the purse to achieve that goal.”

He added, “Taxpayer money shouldn’t fund any agency that targets its political opponents.” 

It’s quite a shift from the GOP rhetoric about state and local police in the context of their policing of minority communities in particular.

Republicans have criticized Democratic lawmakers for encouraging the notion of “defunding” and even “abolishing” police forces. 

Some Republicans have claimed Democrats’ approval of the idea has led to a recent uptick in crime across the country — despite the fact that Biden has pushed back at the defunding language. 

“Crime is exploding in Democrat-run cities … this is 100% the result of their left-wing policies of defunding the police, backing BLM / ANTIFA, destroying families, and coddling of criminals!” Greene tweeted in June 2021.

In a 2020 Twitter thread, Duncan said that while he supports the right for people to “peacefully protest about policing concerns,” most law enforcement officers are “great public servants” who “care deeply about protecting individual rights.”

“It’s a sad and scary day in America when we have citizens calling to defund and dismantle the police,” Duncan’s thread said. “This dangerous call to action would NOT make our communities safer. It would only weaken law & order and cause far more chaos than we’ve already seen.”

Duncan’s office did not respond to request for comment.

Advocates for defunding the police have said the idea is to provide different, more humanitarian resources for overpoliced communities, and that Republicans have twisted the meaning behind the phrase. 

Alicia Garza, principal of Black to the Future Action Fund and a co-founder of the Black Lives Matter organization, said the Republican lawmakers’ “hypocrisy” over the phrase is nothing more than “political theater.”

“They’re playing this role where they’re going to try and stir up as much false outrage as possible,” she said. “People use these kinds of moments not only to create wedges between communities but to distract people from what’s really at stake and, frankly, to distract people from the fact that they don’t have real solutions to some of the challenges that we’re facing.”

She added that the demands to defund police are “fundamentally trying to bring humanity back to communities who have been dehumanized” and these politicians “don’t deserve to stand on that same platform.”

“Hospitals are closing in our communities, and grocery stores and quality schools — all the things that make communities thrive,” said Garza. “Black people are saying, we need our communities refunded. Our communities have been stripped of all of the services and safety net protections that we have fought hard for … What I hear Black communities saying through our year-long Black Census Project is not necessarily that they want to defund police. What I hear is we want police to be held accountable when they commit crimes in our communities.” 

But Garza said she’s not holding her breath for those conversations to take place.

“These are the real kinds of policy discussions that we should be having,” said Garza. “Unfortunately, because this is mostly theater, we’re not going to have those conversations.”

Source: TEST FEED1

US missiles credited as key in Ukraine fight with Russia

U.S.-provided anti-radiation missiles have helped take out some of Russia’s most dangerous weapons systems in Ukraine in recent days.

But the missiles, only recently confirmed to be in the hands of Ukraine’s air force, are just one part of a complicated strategy to expel Kremlin forces completely from the country, a Ukrainian fighter pilot told The Hill.

The pilot, who identifies himself by his call sign “Juice,” said the country’s air force has recently used the anti-radiation missiles to suppress Russian air defense systems.

Their presence in Ukraine was confirmed for the first time Monday by Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Colin Kahl, who said the missiles have been included in several recent lethal aid packages from the United States and make existing Ukrainian capabilities more effective.

“It’s a great support for us. Actually, it’s one of the most advanced weapons that we have at the moment,” Juice said, but stressed that the missiles are only “one part of the complex mission.” 

Though Department of Defense officials have not identified the specific anti-radiation missiles or the amount sent, CNN reported that the munitions are AGM-88 High Speed Anti-Radiation Missiles, which can hit targets more than 30 miles away.

“They are very expensive and we have a limited number,” Juice said, adding that they have to be selective in their targeting, taking out the Russian army’s “most dangerous” long-range missile systems.

The U.S. anti-radiation missiles are thought to be involved in the destruction of at least five Russian anti-aircraft artillery systems, four S-300 long-range surface-to-air missile systems and a Pantsir-S1 missile system, the Kyiv Post reported Monday. 

Such battlefield successes are key in breaking through intense, yet stagnant, fighting along what is considered a 2,000 kilometer (1,243 mile) front line, dividing Ukraine from the Russian-occupied territory in the east and south. 

But the nation needs more help, according to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who has continued to push for the international community to step up its support. The aid is critical for Ukraine’s armed forces to push Russia back by destroying its supply lines and breaking down its will to fight before winter, when conditions could change the battlefield and the geopolitical stage, he warns.

To that end, the Pentagon has signaled it is preparing to scale up its collaboration with Ukraine’s air force — a critical component in the country’s defense — to include U.S. service members beginning to train Ukrainian pilots on advanced American fighter jets. 

“There are real questions about what would be most useful in terms of assisting the Ukrainian Air Force and improving its capabilities. It’s not inconceivable that down the road, Western aircraft could be part of the mix on that, but the final analysis has not been done,” Kahl said in a briefing with reporters. 

Even as Ukrainian ground troops put to effective use American-provided High Mobility Rocket Systems (HIMARS) and multiple launch rocket systems — celebrated for their ability to disrupt and destroy Russian military supply lines — Juice said that he hopes the U.S. will help with the needs of the air force. 

“I totally understand that HIMARS and Howitzers, UAVs, all of that are critically important for our armed forces,” he said. “But we are still saying that the air force, in modern war, is too important, too critical. And we need to improve our capabilities.” 

Alex Gorgan, a Ukrainian infantry officer who launched a private initiative that is training Ukrainian pilots on Western aircraft, seconds that, calling Ukrainian pilots “priceless”. 

Gorgan said it is impossible for Ukraine to retake occupied territory from the Russians without quickly building up its air force capacity.

Gorgan launched his initiative, called the Training Center for Pilots of Advanced Military Aircrafts, alongside Andrey Vavrysh, CEO of SAGA Development, and in coordination with the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense. 

Gorgan said the idea for this initiative came while fighting in the trenches of eastern Ukraine in March, under intense shelling from Russian forces. 

“I thought ‘oh my god, we need this specific airplane, A-10 Thunderbolt, which gives close air support for infantry,’” he recalled.

“But the United States cannot give the plane because we don’t have pilots, but we don’t have pilots because we don’t have planes, so we have to break this circle. The weakest point of this circle is the ability to have previous study,” he said. 

Gorgan’s initiative focuses on using flight simulators to begin training pilots on the A-10, as well as other advanced aircraft Ukraine hopes to receive. 

U.S. lawmakers have identified pilot training as key to beginning the process of delivery of advanced war planes.

A proposal by Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.), included in the House-passed version of the National Defense Authorization Act, aims to provide $100 million to train Ukrainian pilots to use American planes.

The list of needs, demands and hopes are long.

Ukrainian officials have long called for American-made F-15 and F-16 fighter jets. 

The Ukrainians also view attack helicopters as critical in carrying out a robust defense — Juice brought up Boeing’s AH-64 Apache helicopters, though conceded it is unlikely, and that they would settle for the Bell AH-1 SuperCobra or Bell AH-1Z Viper.

“Of course I’m not a helicopter expert, but in general I know their needs and all these helicopters are the platforms for modern aiming systems, reconnaissance and modern precision missiles,” he said. 

“We could provide the very precision attacks without any civilian casualties … exactly, precisely, to target, and from large distances to be safe from the enemy’s air defense.”

The Ukrainian air force has long been in touch with the U.S. Air Force, and since the start of the invasion, Juice said, the Americans have provided not only advice in those first few critical weeks, but also friendship.

“They are trying just to help, just by any possible way, even just a friendly conversation, ‘how are you, are you still alive?’” he says with a laugh, but adds more seriously that the pilots consider each other “brothers in arms,” referring back to a tragic training accident in 2018 when both a Ukrainian and an American pilot were killed. 

“U.S. Air Force became the real brothers in arms for us, with blood on our soil,” he said, adding that the 2018 exercise was critically important in their training as it was designed specifically to prepare against a full-scale Russian invasion — four years after Moscow had seized territory in Ukraine’s east and on the Crimean peninsula. 

“We understood that, these fallen guys, won’t ask [us not] to continue, their wish was to make this, make it happen, to continue to complete this mission,” Juice said.

“Because the mission of this exercise was to prepare us against war with Russia.”

Source: TEST FEED1

The Memo: What the latest dramatic twists mean in the Trump-FBI saga

The 45th president of the United States is under investigation for potential violations of the Espionage Act.

That one potent fact was the most explosive bombshell on Friday as the saga of the FBI investigation into former President Trump took several new turns.

The story has sidelined every other piece of news in the political world this week. The starting gun was fired when Trump himself confirmed early reports of a search of his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida on Monday. The pace of developments has not eased since.

Trump being Trump, even news of possible crimes committed by him had a downside for Democrats. The passage of a major piece of legislation, the Inflation Reduction Act, long sought by President Biden and his party, became a sideshow to the Trump-centric main event.

Political insiders of every stripe are wondering what to make of the most recent discoveries — and where the story goes from here.

The possible crimes

We now know the FBI search of Trump’s estate was premised on an investigation of three potential offenses. 

One of those possible charges had been widely predicted: it pertains to the concealment or removal of official documents.

Another covers the destruction, alteration or concealment of records “with the intent to impede, obstruct or influence” an investigation — an intriguing charge given the number of other probes directed at Trump. 

The biggest shock came with the inclusion of a third possible offense under section 793 of Title 18 of the U.S. Criminal Code.

The language of the statute is complicated, but its main thrust is that it is a criminal offense for someone to misuse, mishandle or fail to guard national security information that they believe “could be to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation.”

What that means, exactly, in relation to Trump is so far unknown — though it appears on its face plausibly consistent with a Thursday evening Washington Post scoop that asserted investigators were looking for information about nuclear weapons.

The things we don’t know

The feverish speculation that has gripped Washington is partly the result of the extraordinary nature of an FBI search of a former president’s home — something that has never happened before. 

But it is also a consequence of a situation in which many key details have been revealed in part, but not entirely.

The revelation about the Espionage Act came with the release of two documents Friday — the search warrant for Mar-a-Lago and the inventory of items seized. 

The previous day, Attorney General Merrick Garland had announced at a brief press conference that he wanted those documents unsealed. His request met with no opposition from the former president and his legal team.

Importantly, however, neither the Department of Justice nor Trump’s team expressed any wish to make the affidavit that underlies the search public. 

That document would give much more insight into investigators’ thinking, since it made their case to a federal magistrate for believing that a crime or crimes had been committed.

The inventory is key nevertheless. It asserts that among the items seized were numerous instances of classified material, including “various classified/TS/SCI documents” — an abbreviation that refers to one of the highest levels of classification: Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information.

The list also included such intriguing entries as “Info re: President of France,” “Handwritten note” and “Leatherbound box of documents.” An executive order granting clemency to longtime Trump ally Roger Stone was also among the items taken.

The broader view

The 30,000-ft view is one in which every new tidbit becomes ammunition in the nation’s increasingly bellicose partisan wars. 

The past week has seen Trump critics gleeful at what they imagine to be his imminent indictment, if not imprisonment; and his diehard supporters just as adamant that he is the victim of a nefarious plot by the ill-defined “Deep State.”

Trump is arguing that the information in his possession at Mar-a-Lago was already declassified. That claim is sure to be scrutinized and tested.

The usual coterie of his staunchest allies is rallying around. Late Friday, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) told reporters at the Capitol that she was on her way to file articles of impeachment against Garland. She accused the attorney general of using his powers “to politically persecute Joe Biden’s enemies.” 

The current moment is only likely to become more febrile with that kind of rhetoric. It’s dangerous enough as is.

On Thursday, a man was shot and killed by law enforcement in Ohio after allegedly trying to breach security at the FBI office in Cincinnati.

The man was identified as Ricky Shiffer. A social media account in that name had encouraged attacks on the FBI. Another post, on the day of the Mar-a-Lago raid, alluded to a crossing of the rubicon against which citizens should rise up.

“We must not tolerate this one,” the post said. “This time we must respond with force.”

One account bearing Shiffer’s name also appeared to indicate its author had been in or around the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

As for Trump, he faces legal dangers on several fronts. He repeatedly pleaded the Fifth Amendment earlier this week during a deposition in a civil case in New York. At least three other criminal probes could endanger him.

Legal experts say that, when it comes to the Mar-a-Lago matter, charges could be months away if they are pressed at all. 

The former president has skated away from trouble many times before. He remains, in spite of it all, the favorite to win the GOP nomination in 2024, should he enter the race.

But right now, the former president is once again sailing in uncharted waters.

The Memo is a reported column by Niall Stanage.

Source: TEST FEED1

How Alaska’s new voting system works

Voters in Alaska head to the polls Tuesday to weigh in on several primary contests, including Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s (R) bid to keep her seat after voting to convict former President Trump in his second impeachment trial.

The state is rolling out changes this year to how its residents vote in primary and general elections after voters approved a ballot initiative in 2020.

The initiative created an open primary system, with candidates from all parties appearing on a single ballot. The top four vote-getters move onto the general election.

In the general election, Alaska residents will for the first time use a ranked-choice voting system.

Rather than mark a single candidate, voters rank their preferences. If a candidate receives a simple majority in the first round of vote counting, they automatically win the election.

But if no candidate wins the simple majority in the first round of vote counting, the candidate who receives the fewest number of votes gets eliminated from the race. The voters who ranked the eliminated candidate as their first choice have their votes applied to their second-choice candidates.

That continues until a candidate has more than 50 percent of the votes.

Voters got to test the open primary system earlier this year as voters weighed in on the primary to replace the late Rep. Don Young (R) after he died suddenly in March. A special election to fill in the remainder of his term will also take place Tuesday using the ranked-choice system.

The open primary system is likely an asset for Murkowski given she only needs to be among the top four vote-getters to move onward to the general election in November.

The moderate senator and frequent swing vote trails Trump-backed candidate Kelly Tshibaka in the polls.

Murkowski drew Trump’s ire after she voted with six other Senate Republicans to impeach the former president following the Capitol riot. 

Trump visited her state last month to boost Tshibaka, calling Murkowski “worse than a Democrat.”

“She’s a total creature of the Washington swamp but much worse than that and a tool of a corrupt establishment, the likes of which we’ve never seen. The fake news media loves her,” Trump said.

Source: TEST FEED1

On The Money — Dems’ big bill makes it out of Congress

Democrats just passed their mammoth tax, climate and health care bill, advancing key parts of President Biden’s agenda ahead of the critical November elections. We’ll look at just what’s inside the bill, a recent ruling on an Obama-era freeze on coal leasing on public lands, and more. 

But first, where will you find Schumer, sunflowers and a supermoon altogether? Check out The Hill’s photos of the week to find out. 

Welcome to On The Money, your nightly guide to everything affecting your bills, bank account and bottom line. We’re Aris Folley and Karl Evers-Hillstrom. Subscribe here.

Dems pass mammoth climate, tax, health package

House Democrats passed their sweeping tax, climate and health care bill on Friday, sending the $740 billion legislation to President Biden’s desk and securing a significant victory for Democrats less than three months before the midterm elections.

The bill, titled the Inflation Reduction Act, passed the House in a 220-207 party-line vote. Four Republicans did not vote, while every Democrat voted in support. 

• Passage through Congress marks the culmination of more than a year of negotiations among Senate Democrats on a spending package. The legislation will increase taxes on corporations, address climate change and bring down the prices of prescription drugs, all while lowering the deficit.
• The bill offers incentives to businesses and consumers to make cleaner energy choices, including utilizing lower-carbon and carbon-free energy, and it creates new programs that will bolster investments in climate.
• On the health care end, the measure will allow Medicare to negotiate lower prices for 10 high-cost drugs starting in 2026. By 2029, that number is expected to grow to 20 drugs. Additionally, the measure allows caps to be placed on some drug costs, but mainly for Medicare. 

Every Democrat backed the bill, including Rep. Jared Golden (Maine), the only Democrat to oppose an earlier, larger measure approved by the House that was blocked by Manchin in the Senate. He called it “common-sense legislation” and “fiscally responsible” in a statement prior to the vote.  

However, some progressive lawmakers had grumbled about the bill not being as expansive as they had hoped. 

The Hill’s Mychael Schnell breaks it down here. 
 

SEE ALSO: Here’s what’s in the Inflation Reduction Act, the sweeping bill impacting health, climate and taxes 

LEADING THE DAY 

Democrats’ signature economic bill puts $200 billion toward deficit reduction: analysis 

A sprawling Democratic economic package slated to pass Congress this week could contribute to more than $200 billion in cumulative deficit reduction, according to an analysis released by the Penn Wharton Budget Model (PWBM) on Friday. 

The analysis estimates the latest iteration of the bill, which is poised to sail out of the House on Friday after passing the Senate last week, would reduce the country’s non-interest cumulative deficits by $264 billion over the next 10 years.  

• The figure is $16 billion higher than a previous version of the bill, dubbed the Inflation Reduction Act, analyzed by the PWBM late last month, following changes made to tax provisions of the plan intended to raise revenue ahead of its passage in the upper chamber days ago.
• The analysis found the bill would not have a “meaningful effect on inflation in the near term,” although it estimated the plan would help reduce “inflation by around 0.1 percentage points by the middle of the first decade.” 

However, Democrats have argued that the bill will have a positive impact on inflation, while also providing some relief to Americans with policies to reform prescription drug pricing by allowing Medicare to negotiate costs for some drugs. 

The analysis also found that most tax increases that would result from the bill would “fall on higher income households,” but not all of them. 

“People alive today bear the burden of business tax increases in the form of lower investment returns and lower wages in the near term,” the analysis states. “However, future generations gain from the adoption of the Act, including positive gains to capital formation from reducing the debt as well as the increase in total factor productivity from reducing carbon emissions relative to baseline.” 

Aris has more here. 

SEE ALSO: When will Americans feel the impact of the Inflation Reduction Act?

OBAMA-ERA FREEZE 

Federal court restores Obama-era freeze on coal leasing on public lands 

A federal judge on Friday restored a 2016 moratorium on coal leasing on federal lands that had been overturned by the Trump administration. 

In the ruling, Judge Brian Morris of the District of Montana, an Obama appointee, ordered the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to reimpose the moratorium until it has conducted a more thorough environmental analysis. 

Former Trump-appointed Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke had reversed the Obama-era hold in 2017. In January, the Biden administration rescinded Zinke’s specific order but did not fully reimpose the moratorium. 

Leasing of federal lands for coal mining accounted for about 40 percent of U.S. coal production in 2015. 

The Hill’s Zack Budryk has the details here. 

GOOGLE GETS FINED 

Google fined $43 million for misleading users over data 

An Australian court has ordered Google to pay roughly $43 million ($60 million AUD) for misleading users about the collection and use of their location data, an Australian competition watchdog said Friday.  

The court found Google breached Australian Consumer Law between January 2017 and December 2018 by misrepresenting to some Android users what settings allowed Google to collect and use personal location data, according to the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission’s announcement.

• The court found that Google represented to some users that the “Location History” setting was the only one that affected whether Google collected, kept and used data about a user’s location, but another “Web & App Activity” setting also let it collect and use the data when turned on, the watchdog said. 
• The watchdog estimates that 1.3 million Google account users in Australia may have been impacted. Google took remedial steps to address the issue by December 2018, according to the competition watchdog. 

The Hill’s Rebecca Klar has more here. 

Good to Know

Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) told The Hill on Friday that he will push for the permitting deal between Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Democratic leadership to be a standalone vote — rather than attached to another vehicle that may incentivize more of his colleagues to vote for it. 

Grijalva said that he and a handful of colleagues planned to make a request on Friday that the vote — on an agreement he fears will weaken environmental standards — be a standalone. 

Here’s what else we have our eye on: 

• The State Department announced that it was offering a reward of up to $10 million for information leading to the identity and location of five individuals believed to be tied to the Conti ransomware group. 

That’s it for today. Thanks for reading and check out The Hill’s Finance page for the latest news and coverage. We’ll see you next week. 

VIEW THE FULL EDITION HERE

Source: TEST FEED1

Hillicon Valley — Google fined over location data claims

An Australian court fined Google $43 million for misleading users about how they collect and use their location data.

Meanwhile, a new report shows that online shopping prices have fallen for the first time in two years.  

This is Hillicon Valley, detailing all you need to know about tech and cyber news from Capitol Hill to Silicon Valley. Send tips to The Hill’s Rebecca Klar and Ines Kagubare. Subscribe here.

Australian court hits Google with $43 million fine 

An Australian court has ordered Google to pay roughly $43 million ($60 million AUD) for misleading users about the collection and use of their location data, an Australian competition watchdog said Friday.

The court found Google breached Australian Consumer Law between January 2017 and December 2018 by misrepresenting to some Android users what settings allowed Google to collect and use personal location data, according to the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission’s announcement.

• The court found that Google represented to some users that the “Location History” setting was the only one that affected whether Google collected, kept and used data about a user’s location, but another “Web & App Activity” setting also let it collect and use the data when turned on, the watchdog said.
• “This significant penalty imposed by the Court today sends a strong message to digital platforms and other businesses, large and small, that they must not mislead consumers about how their data is being collected and used,” Australian Competition & Consumer Commission Chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb said in a statement. 

What Google is saying: “We’ve invested heavily in making location information simple to manage and easy to understand with industry-first tools like auto-delete controls, while significantly minimizing the amount of data stored. As we’ve demonstrated, we’re committed to making ongoing updates that give users control and transparency, while providing the most helpful products possible,” a Google spokesperson said in a statement.  

Read more here.

Online shopping prices drop 

Gas prices are easing and inflation shows signs of cooling – but wait, there’s more good news: online shopping prices fell for the first time in two years, according to new data from Adobe Analytics.

On Tuesday, Adobe released its latest Digital Price Index report, which showed that July’s prices fell 1 percent year-over-year and 2 percent on a monthly basis. It was the first recorded period of deflation after 25 months in a row of rising prices for goods, Adobe found.

So if you opted not to splurge on Prime Day and regret it, or simply have a little room in your summer budget, just remember that all categories of online prices didn’t behave equally.

The five biggest declines month-over-month were: 

• Apparel 
• Computers  
• Toys 
• Jewelry 
• Electronics 

Of the 18 categories Adobe tracks, the only ones that continue to see red-hot inflation numbers were Pet Products, Grocery, Nonprescription Drugs and Tools & Home Improvement. Pet Products led the pack month-over-month with a 1.72 percent jump.

Read more here. 

ARMY DEVELOPS TACTICAL BRA FOR FEMALE SOLDIERS

For the first time ever, the United States Army is creating a tactical bra for female soldiers.   

The bra, dubbed the Army Tactical Brassier, is in development at the U.S. Army Combat Capabilities Development Command Center in Natick, Mass., according to the Army Times, which was the first to report the bra’s development.   

Four different prototypes of the bra are currently being developed. The Solider Center’s Design Pattern Prototype Team is expected to present the prototypes for an evaluation this fall to the Army Uniform Board, the outlet reported.   

The bra is meant to add an extra layer of protection for female soldiers and work into their body armor.   

Read more here. 

Media outlets request info on FBI raid

A group of four major media companies filed a motion on Thursday to unseal all court documents related to the search warrant that the FBI executed at former President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago property on Monday.  

• The Washington Post, CNN, NBC News and E.W. Scripps Company filed the motion in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida to ask for documents pertaining to the search warrant.
• The outlets want documents including the search warrants themselves, the warrant application, “all probable cause affidavits filed in support of the search warrant” and any motion to seal the “warrant-related records,” among others. 

On Thursday, the Justice Department asked the district court to unseal a warrant authorizing the search warrant of Trump’s property in Palm Beach, Fla., that was executed on Monday.

In the court filing, the department cited “the public’s clear and powerful interest” in understanding the search. U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland later stated that he personally approved the application and execution of the search warrant. 

The media organizations argued that the public interest in having access to the records outweighs any interest in them remaining private. 

Read more here. 

BITS & PIECES

An op-ed to chew on: When it comes to green energy, ‘friend-shoring’ shouldn’t cut out China

Notable links from around the web: 

The Summer of NIMBY in Silicon Valley’s Poshest Town (The New York Times / Erin Griffith) 

How Google found itself under pressure from all sides after Roe’s demise (CNN / Jennifer Korn) 

Search warrants for abortion data leave tech companies few options (The Washington Post / Naomi Nix and Elizabeth Dwoskin) 

🚲 Lighter click: Weekend here we come! 

That’s it for today, thanks for reading. Check out The Hill’s Technology and Cybersecurity pages for the latest news and coverage. We’ll see you Monday!

VIEW THE FULL EDITION HERE

Source: TEST FEED1

Energy & Environment — House passes landmark climate bill

The biggest climate bill in U.S. history is headed to President Biden’s desk, plus a federal judge restores a freeze on coal leasing on public lands. 

This is Overnight Energy & Environment, your source for the latest news focused on energy, the environment and beyond. For The Hill, we’re Rachel Frazin and Zack Budryk. Subscribe here.

House sends climate bill to Biden in party-line vote 

House Democrats passed their sweeping tax, climate and health care bill on Friday, sending the $740 billion legislation to President Biden’s desk and securing a significant victory for Democrats less than three months before the midterm elections.

• The bill, titled the Inflation Reduction Act, passed the House in a 220-207 party-line vote. Four Republicans did not vote, while every Democrat voted in support. 
• House passage came four days after the Senate approved the bill in a party-line vote, with Vice President Harris casting a tie-breaking vote. 

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) touted the bill on the House floor during debate on Friday, arguing that it “saves the planet while keeping more money in your pockets.” 

“This bill, the Inflation Reduction Act, a package for the people, increases the leverage of the public interest over the special interests, and expands health and financial security now and for generations to come,” she added.  

Passage through Congress marks the culmination of more than a year of negotiations among Senate Democrats on a spending package. 

The legislation will increase taxes on corporations, address climate change and bring down the prices of prescription drugs, all while lowering the deficit. 

The package specifically includes more than $369 billion in energy security and climate investments and $64 billion to expand Affordable Care Act subsidies for two years.

Refresher on climate and energy provisions in the bill:

• Tax credits aimed at deploying commercial wind, solar, nuclear, hydrogen and other no or low-carbon energies
• Tax credits aimed at consumer energy efficiency and household clean energy generation — as well as electric vehicles, though the EV credits come with stipulations that may make it difficult for many cars to qualify
• Creating an incentive-and-fee program aimed at cutting methane emissions from oil and gas production
• Making the future of solar and wind energy on public lands and waters conditional on oil and gas lease sales — and requiring additional sales in the near term
• Provisions aimed at helping communities that face disproportionate levels of pollution 

Read more about the bill’s passage here.

More from The Hill:

• The health, climate and tax provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act

Judge reinstates Obama-era coal leasing moratorium

A federal judge on Friday restored a 2016 moratorium on coal leasing on federal lands that had been overturned by the Trump administration. 

In the ruling, Judge Brian Morris of the District of Montana, an Obama appointee, ordered the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to reimpose the moratorium until it has conducted a more thorough environmental analysis. 

• Former Trump-appointed Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke had reversed the Obama-era hold in 2017. In January, the Biden administration rescinded Zinke’s order but did not reimpose the moratorium. 
• Leasing of federal lands for coal mining accounted for about 40 percent of U.S. coal production in 2015. 

Morris had previously sided in 2019 with a coalition of tribal and environmental groups, ordering a new environmental analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Calling the new analysis inadequate, the groups sued again in 2020.  

“BLM’s NEPA analysis should have considered the effect of restarting coal leasing from a forward-looking perspective, including connected actions,” Morris wrote. “The ‘status quo’ that existed before the Zinke Order was a moratorium on coal leasing.

Because the baseline alternative must consider the status quo, BLM was required to begin its analysis from that point.”  

Read more about the decision here.

GRIJALVA WANTS PERMITTING DEAL TO BE STANDALONE VOTE 

Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) told The Hill on Friday that he will push for the permitting deal between Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Democratic leadership to be a standalone vote — rather than attached to another vehicle that may incentivize more of his colleagues to vote for it. 

Grijalva said that he and a handful of colleagues planned to make a request on Friday that the vote — on an agreement he fears will weaken environmental standards — be a standalone. 

He said he hopes the reforms are not attached to must-pass legislation such as a continuing resolution, which keeps the government funded temporarily in the absence of an appropriations bill.  

“We’re going to start early to urge a separate vote,” said Grijalva, chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee and former co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. 

“I’m going to make my request…and I hope that they understand. This is not trying to torpedo anything, this is saying the [continuing resolution] and the budget is critical, yes, but let’s do this other one where everybody is accountable,” he added. 

Not part of the talks: He acknowledged that there is a deal between Manchin and Senate Majortiy Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) to advance the permitting reform deal, but said he doesn’t feel an “obligation” to uphold a deal that he did not help negotiate.  

“I don’t feel an obligation…to support the deal,” Grijalva said. “I didn’t shake hands, I wasn’t part of the negotiations.” 

When Manchin and Schumer announced they had reached a deal on the climate and tax legislation, they also agreed to take up reforms to the environmental reviews that are required in order to permit energy or other construction projects.   

They said that they reached an agreement with President Biden and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to pass the changes before the end of the fiscal year in October. 

Read more about his push here.

WHAT WE’RE READING

• Even low levels of air pollution can damage health, study finds (The Guardian)
• Estonia Never Needed to Import Gas by Ship. Until It Did. (The New York Times) 
• ‘All bad options’ as Biden administration faces Western water crisis (Politico) 
• Exclusive: U.S. questioned Cheniere pollution controls during LNG plant permitting (Reuters) 
• A disastrous megaflood is coming to California, experts say, and it could be the most expensive natural disaster in history (CNN) 

ICYMI

• Antarctica’s ice shelves may be melting faster than anticipated: study 
• Chemical leak shuts down California freeway, prompting evacuations 
• How the Democrats’ inflation bill could cut consumer energy costs 
• Johnson & Johnson to stop sale of talc-based baby powder in 2023 

🌊 Lighter click: New isopod just dropped.

That’s it for today, thanks for reading. Check out The Hill’s Energy & Environment page for the latest news and coverage. We’ll see you next week.  

VIEW THE FULL EDITION HERE

Source: TEST FEED1

Freedom Caucus and McCarthy find synergy on proxy voting strategy

Republicans in the House Freedom Caucus got a stamp of approval from House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) on a last-ditch strategy to throw a wrench in Democrats’ tax, climate and health care bill that passed the House on Friday.

While the tactic failed, it provided some encouragement about the Freedom Caucus’s prospects of working with House GOP leadership in a potential majority next year.

“It didn’t work, but I have to tell you, here’s what I thought was amazing – because it’s the first time I saw it happen – was leadership and the Freedom Caucus working together on something,” said Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.). “In our conference, that was a really big deal.”

Members of the confrontational conservative caucus devised a plan to try to turn the House’s proxy voting rule, a pandemic-era feature that allows members to vote remotely due to the coronavirus pandemic, against the Democrats.

If they could get a majority of members to vote by proxy on the legislation, they thought, it would allow future challenges to the law based on the fact that there was not a physical quorum present when it passed.

House rules for the current Congress allow proxy votes to count toward a quorum, but those in the Freedom Caucus saw a path for a constitutional challenge based on physical presence.

“It would still pass, but we would be able to test in court whether you can establish a quorum – you know, make-believe that a quorum means something that it doesn’t. And a quorum means physically present,” said Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio).

An absence of members physically present during the House’s single-day return from August recess to pass the bill created an opportunity to test the plan.

“It became evident just in the last couple days that there was an opportunity to sow a fatal defect potentially, in the Democrats legislative centerpiece,” said Rep. Dan Bishop (R-N.C.). 

Republicans have criticized the rule and promised to eliminate it in the majority. The Supreme Court declined to take up a lawsuit led by McCarthy over the rule earlier this year, after an appeals court ruling found that federal courts do not have jurisdiction to hear such disputes between lawmakers. This line of legal challenge would be different, they hoped.

The plan ultimately failed, with only 187 members having filed proxy letters as of Friday afternoon. At least 216 would have been needed to constitute a majority voting by proxy.

But it gave some Freedom Caucus members encouragement about prospects for working with leadership, should the GOP take over the house after the 2022 midterms.

“It gives me a lot of hope for the majority that’s coming up for the 118th Congress,” Greene said. “You’ve never heard me say things like that before.”

McCarthy met with House Freedom Caucus Chair Scott Perry (R-Pa.), Bishop, Greene, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), and Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) in his office on Friday morning to discuss the plan. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), who is not a member of the House Freedom Caucus, was also involved, Greene said.

“I think [McCarthy] had some misgivings about it playing out in a way that would have members just walking and not leaving Washington, or not coming to Washington. But it was a question of having more proxy votes so that the quorum issue would be laid bare. He decided he could get behind that,” Bishop said. “He and his staff helped to popularize that among the Congress.”

As members and their staff scrambled to reach Republicans about the plan, they ran into resistance.

“Unfortunately, the problem at the end was that Republicans wouldn’t embrace it,” Bishop said. “The will to win fell short, and we’ve got to correct that. We have to be prepared to seize opportunities like this.”

Not all Republicans appeared aware of the proxy voting plan.

“I’ll be really honest, I didn’t hear anything about it,” said Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas). “We’ve been battling the bill, so, yeah, no one talks about that process.”

And Democrats blasted the effort by their colleagues across the aisle.

“It’s a McCarthy-led shenanigan that again demonstrates his continued willingness to put politics over people,” Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), a member of Democratic leadership, told The Hill.

Rep. James P. McGovern (D-Mass.) knocked the effort as “a pain-in-the-ass tactic, which that’s all they do.”

Aris Folley contributed.

Source: TEST FEED1

Republicans rally behind Trump after search warrant is unsealed

House Republicans on Friday wasted no time rallying behind former President Trump following a court’s decision to unseal the search warrant that had empowered the FBI to search his Mar-a-Lago residence in South Florida earlier in the week. 

The newly public warrant revealed that the Justice Department had suspected Trump of violating the Espionage Act, among other federal statutes, when he stockpiled reams of documents at Mar-a-Lago after he left office last year.

FBI agents on Monday retrieved 11 sets of documents categorized as classified to some degree, an inventory of the items seized showed, including one set labeled “various classified/TS/CSI documents,” a highly-classified category of sensitive items typically pertaining to national security. Agents also retrieved four sets of “top secret” items.

But Republican lawmakers on Friday dismissed the news, accusing the Department of Justice (DOJ) of conducting a political witch hunt designed for the sole purpose of harming Trump politically as he weighs another run at the White House in 2024. 

“What they’ve been doing to President Trump is a political persecution,” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) told reporters on the steps of the Capitol. “Merrick Garland has abused his position of power, as the attorney general, to politically persecute Joe Biden’s enemies. And the whole purpose of this is to prevent President Trump from ever being able to hold office.” 

“We cannot tolerate this in America,” she continued, “where our great institutions are wielded and abused in such a way to defeat people’s political enemies.” 

Greene then walked into the Capitol and introduced articles of impeachment against Garland. 

She was hardly alone. Other GOP lawmakers also defended Trump against a DOJ they’re portraying as out of control. Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.), another close Trump ally, wondered why the department isn’t continuing its investigation into Hillary Clinton, the former secretary of state, who came under scrutiny for using a private server to conduct official business, but was never charged. 

“Did they find Hillary Clinton’s 33,000 deleted emails in the safe? That’s what I want to see,” said Boebert, who also endorsed the effort to impeach Garland. 

Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.), chair of the Republican Study Committee, didn’t go quite so far, but accused Garland of withholding information vital to the public’s understanding of the investigation.  

“The fact that Merrick Garland is selectively working through the media rather than releasing further details, is again – makes all of this very fishy,” he said. “There’s so much that the American people deserve to know that we don’t know.” 

Other Republicans brought up various DOJ investigations of the past, suggesting the department goes soft on Democrats and their allies while dropping the hammer on Republicans and other conservatives. 

Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas) cited another concern, saying he’s worried that the DOJ was overly aggressive in targeting a former president. 

“People are rightfully upset [about] the precedent this sets. It seems highly unnecessary to be sending in armed FBI agents into Mar-a-Lago when he could have just subpoenaed these documents. He supposedly knew they were there. He was being cooperative already … with other documents,” said Crenshaw. 

Earlier in the year, Trump had turned over 15 boxes of documents and other materials to the National Archives. The DOJ had later subpoenaed Trump for additional documents the agency suspected he had withheld. 

Garland on Thursday had delivered a highly unusual statement defending Monday’s search, saying the DOJ had first attempted “less intrusive means,” which failed to yield the remaining materials. 

Democrats, meanwhile, have defended the agency. While they’re eagerly awaiting more details, they’re voicing concerns that at least some of the documents might have been related to defense and national security.  

“If the nature of these documents is what [it] appears to be, this is very serious,” said Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

Emily Brooks contributed. 

Source: TEST FEED1

Nuclear deterrence: Actions speak louder than words

Nuclear threats are back with, a hard-nosed, in-your-face rhetoric. The Cold War had crises, but it was primarily a bi-polar standoff. It is now known Russia and the United States similarly feared an existential war that neither wanted. On both sides, the costs involved were simply too unpalatable for leaders, most of whom had direct experience of major conflict during World War II.

Today is starkly different with proliferation of nuclear weapons to several more states such as North Korea, Pakistan, India and an aspirational atomic Iran to name a few. The leadership of many of these countries have an off-hand attitude to major conflicts and are seemingly unconcerned about the costs in blood and treasure involved. Indeed, some consider making nuclear threats as mere “politics by other means,” unheeding of the possible dire consequences of their rhetoric and suggesting nuclear warfighting as a viable, realistic option.

At the same time, there is an era of “great power proliferation” the West faces with Russia and now China. With Russia, the war in Ukraine pivots around nuclear weapons. The Russians likely would not have invaded Ukraine, a non-NATO country, had Ukraine kept its Soviet Era nuclear forces. Russia has not attempted to physically stop the flow of conventional weapons from NATO countries, presumably because NATO has nuclear weapons. Russia has succeeded in constraining the flow of conventional weapons to Ukraine by making regular nuclear threats.

On the other hand, Ukraine cannot attack Russia directly. Russian strategic doctrine deliberately highlights nuclear weapons first-use if hostile forces invade Russian territory. Russia now looks toward annexing the parts of Ukraine it has captured, so this doctrine also inherently applies to occupied territories. All of this is reinforced by the sheer irrationality of the Russian attack on Ukraine. Russian President Vladimir Putin and his leadership group do not appear to have the cost-benefit calculus of others, which suggests they may use nuclear weapons with the same scant consideration.

There are parallels in the Pacific where a rising China is turning bellicose while rapidly building up its nuclear triad. China tends to make threats, often verbally lashing out at neighboring countries to defer to China’s wishes, mainly over its desires to gain new territory. In grey zone actions across East Asian waters and deep into the South China Sea, China is shaping the strategic environment in its favor through incremental actions that are trending in an ever more dangerous direction. The extraordinarily intense reaction to U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) Taiwan visit indicates that today’s China is imbued with its savage nationalism and could easily chose major war.

Against this, China has not fired a shot in anger since 1979. China’s leadership continually skirts close but stays below the international threshold of war. The leaders prefer predictability with the latest Taiwan crisis appearing pre-planned with its considerable detail and tight script. Apparently, China’s leaders consider others will self-deter as these nations do not want to fight a China convinced of its own military might.

The return of nuclear threats carries implications, three of which are readily apparent.

1) The notion that theories alone are enough to persuade potential adversaries is clearly foolish. Yet, this is how nuclear deterrence is presently referenced — not as a weapon system but as a messaging system that signals resolve. Like all theories these are simply ideas that may or may not be proven true in some future crisis. Nuclear deterrence, as messaging, should describe the weapon systems that can and would be used in response to any perceived or actual threat to the United States and our allies.

As the United States’ nuclear forces have aged, so has the messaging until it is now more of a debate or discussion of future nuclear force aspirations that tries to convince adversaries to maintain the peace. Continuing to accept this style of messaging as the foundational component of nuclear deterrence, when nuclear threats permeate the Ukraine conflict and with China set to repeat this in a possibly near-term Taiwan crisis, is dangerously ignoring reality.

2) It is time for nuclear deterrence to be discussed as an action and not an idea. The world is watching in real-time the deterioration of American nuclear deterrence strategy and policy that will have long-term impact absent of action. Words without action are empty, meaningless and void of power. In comparison, action matched with military ability and weapon systems capability can deter adversaries acting against our national interests. Why are the leaders of Russia, China and North Korea so enthusiastic about parading their weapons? They use a language that stresses projecting national strength and resolve through exhibiting military might, giant missiles, and new weapons.

It is time to use this language that they clearly understand to similarly highlight national power and modernize the triad, warheads, as well as the command, control and communications system while doubling down on public-private investments in nuclear labs and supporting infrastructure.

3) Nuclear deterrence does not hold the luxury to later watch back the tape post-game and gain lessons learned. The post-Cold War status quo was comforting but it no longer exists. Russia and China are building new nuclear forces that feature novel delivery systems, large numbers, ever more automated command and control, as well as unique employment doctrines. Simply returning to the “good, old” Cold War ways will not be enough in an age of tri-polarity at the great power level and multi-polarity at the middle powers and rogue state level.

Unrelenting emphasis on devising new employment strategies should proactively counter these threats, with additional verification occurring through rigorous red teaming and wargaming. This means a renewed focus on military training exercises between the United States and allies, and crucially solving what to do about extended nuclear deterrence in the Pacific in the absence of NATO. The Ukraine war shows what can happen without a NATO and its nuclear sharing posture in place.

Nuclear deterrence is more than simply messaging, “I told you so.” Nuclear deterrence is unmistakably demonstrating, “I can — and will — show you so.”

It is time to take action.

Brooke Taylor, Ph.D., is vice president of wargaming for the Small Business Consulting Corporation. Taylor is the creator and principal investigator for Air Force Global Strike Command (AFGSC) “National Nuclear Strategy and Global Security Workshop for Practitioners.” Taylor was a U.S. Congressional Nuclear Security fellow where she managed the Congressional Nuclear Working Group. Taylor is also a distinguished faculty for Missouri State University Deterrence and Strategic Studies Doctoral Program.

Peter Layton, Ph.D., is a visiting fellow at the Griffith Asia Institute at the Griffith University, in Australia and a Royal United Services Institute associate fellow. He was awarded the United Sates Secretary of Defense’s Exceptional Public Service Medal and for work at the Pentagon on force structure. He contributes regularly to the public policy debate on defense and foreign affairs issues and is the author of the book “Grand Strategy.”

Source: TEST FEED1