DESANTISLAND

Employees told investigators DeSantis’ affordable housing director was abusive, sexist

Lawence Mower
Thu, September 7, 2023 

Florida Housing Finance Corp.

Gov. Ron DeSantis’ affordable housing executive director yelled and screamed at staff, made sexist comments, talked about their weight and threatened their jobs, employees of the Florida Housing Finance Corp. told an inspector general during an investigation.

The behavior of Mike DiNapoli, a former New York City financial adviser chosen by DeSantis to lead the corporation, created a hostile work environment that violated the organization’s policies, the corporation’s inspector general told board members Thursday.

“The conduct is severe and pervasive enough to create a work environment that a reasonable person would consider intimidating, hostile or abusive,” said the inspector general, Chris Hirst.

The investigative report into DiNapoli, which was not released publicly, was highly anticipated by those in Florida’s close-knit affordable housing community. Since the board approved hiring DiNapoli in February, 15 employees — 10% of the corporation’s workforce — were either fired by DiNapoli or quit.

DiNapoli was placed on paid administrative leave by the board in July. Last month, DeSantis reinstated him, with a spokesperson for the governor telling Politico that he never should have been suspended and that the investigation “has found nothing to justify the placement of Mr. DiNapoli on administrative leave.”

Board members, who were briefed in a Jacksonville hotel conference room on Thursday, called the report “disturbing” and lamented the “toxic environment” in the corporation.

“Reading it put tears in my eyes,” said Olivia Hoblit, a regional manager for a hotel chain. “That’s not how we treat people.”

READ MORE: DiNapoli struggled with personal debt for years. DeSantis put him in charge of billions

DiNapoli did not attend Thursday’s meeting and did not respond to a request for comment left with the corporation. Meredith Ivey, a former DeSantis spokesperson who is a member of the board and a deputy secretary of the Department of Commerce, also did not attend Thursday’s meeting. In February, Ivey endorsed DiNapoli and touted his “great personal success” in his previous career in finance.

The Legislature this year assigned the corporation record funding to address the state’s affordable housing crisis.

A spokesperson for DeSantis lashed out at the board in a statement Thursday, calling the board members “clearly incapable of exercising prudent judgment.”

“If anyone wonders what the deep state looks like, this is it,” spokesperson Jeremy Redfern said. “It’s clear to us that at least some members of this Board believe they can wield unchecked power to recklessly disparage a public official and tarnish his reputation without basic fairness and due process.”

He added, “We will explore every available tool to ensure proper management and oversight of the board and its staff, including the Inspector General, and to ensure further that this agency ultimately remains accountable to the people of Florida.”

Inspector general says there were more issues

Hirst revealed other findings from his office’s nearly two-month investigation, which included interviews with 24 current and former employees.

DiNapoli also serves on the board of the First Housing Development Corp. of Florida, which contracts with the corporation. Three of the corporation’s general counsels, who doubled as ethics officers, said it was a conflict of interests. Hirst agreed and concluded it was a violation of the corporation’s policies.

When asked about the conflict, DiNapoli said it was a “gray line,” and “an appearance of a conflict is not a conflict,” Hirst said.

“Furthermore, the subject [DiNapoli] did not think that the policy required employees to avoid the appearance of conflicts of interests and felt the policy may be outdated,” Hirst said.

DiNapoli also ordered the corporation’s chief financial officer, who manages the organization’s bond portfolio, to sell its Disney bonds, at a loss, Hirst said, in reaction to the entertainment company’s ongoing dispute with DeSantis over control of its Orlando-area special taxing district.

“The subject stated that holding the Disney bond was a bad look and stated this was because of Disney’s lawsuit against the state of Florida,” Hirst said.

Hirst said selling a bond at a loss for a non-pecuniary reason appeared to be a violation of the corporation’s ethics policies. He referred it to the state’s ethics commission, governor’s office and chief inspector general for their opinions.

Policies violated in hiring DiNapoli, IG says

Hirst also found that the corporation violated its hiring policies when it chose DiNapoli.

The corporation was supposed to advertise the executive director position, conduct interviews, do background checks and call work references. None of that happened, Hirst said. The corporation doesn’t even have an application or a resume on file for DiNapoli, he added.

Instead, DiNapoli was simply appointed by DeSantis, with the only letter of recommendation coming from James Uthmeier, DeSantis’ chief of staff who is currently leading DeSantis’ campaign for president.

The Times/Herald has previously reported that, before taking the job with the Florida Housing Finance Corp., DiNapoli had struggled with financial issues, including a bankruptcy, debtors garnishing his wages and a foreclosure on an Ocala home. Weeks after losing his job with UBS in New York City in 2015, a woman who claimed DiNapoli was her brother and financial adviser filed a complaint alleging that DiNapoli “stole money from her account as well as forged her name to a check that was addressed to her and deposited those funds in another account.”

Hirst said the financial history brings “into question the subject, and therefore Florida Housing’s, ability to demonstrate it is a creditworthy institution, and that its principal owners and corporate officers are creditworthy individuals.” Those are requirements to do business with the Federal Housing Administration, Hirst noted.

“The totality of information received during the course of this investigation reveal a pattern of behavior and/or management style of the subject which elevated Florida Housing’s overall risk and increase the potential threat of corporate instability,” Hirst said.

The corporation is effectively a multibillion-dollar bank for the state, distributing hundreds of millions of affordable housing dollars each year and issuing bonds.

No background check was ‘mind-blowing’

The fact that the corporation didn’t do a background check and assumed that the Department of Commerce, where DiNapoli previously worked as a manager since 2017, had done one was “mind-blowing,” said board member Ryan Benson, who works for a home builder.

“The answer of, ‘We received a recommendation from the Office of the Governor and it was move forward,’ is not acceptable to me,” Benson said.

The board meets again Friday morning, where it could recommend DiNapoli be disciplined or removed, or it could opt to do nothing. The ultimate decision will be up to the Department of Commerce secretary, Alex Kelly, who is currently DeSantis’ acting chief of staff.

Board chairman Mario Facella defended his decision to suspend DiNapoli, saying that he’d been hearing complaints from employees for months.

The last complaint came two weeks ago, from the corporation’s longtime human resources director, Facella said. Her resignation letter was sent after DeSantis reinstated DiNapoli. The director was the one who made the initial complaint to the inspector general’s office, Hirst said.

In her resignation, the director cited “the abuse and trauma of the last six months,” Facella said, and said she was resigning because she was “told that Mike will fire me” when he returns to work, and she didn’t want to have a termination on her record.

“That is, to me, ridiculous that we’re even having employees having to say that,” Facella said.

Melting ice in Norway revealed a 4,000-year-old arrow that was likely lost while ancient hunters targeted reindeer — but is now a 'bull's eye for archaeology'

Sebastian Cahill
Fri, September 8, 2023 

A field photo of the Stone Age arrow found in Norway.Secrets of the Ice

• Archeologists just found an arrow from the Stone Ages previously caught in ice.

• The discovery predates other findings in the area by over 2,000 years.

• It was likely lodged in the ice while ancient hunters chased reindeer.

Archeologists in Norway were thrilled when they discovered a rare find in late August — a 4,000 year-old arrow from the Stone Age, previously frozen in ice.

Archeologists from the group Secrets of the Ice — part of Norway's Department of Cultural Heritage — found the arrow on the side of Mount Lauvhøe, co-director Dr. Lars Holger Pilø told Insider.

Lauvhøe is part of the Jotunheimen Mountains in Norway. In recent years, the ice around the mountain has melted more, exposing more ground to researchers. Pilø said the archeologists were last at the site in 2017 when there was less area to survey.

Before this most recent arrow was found, Pilø said, the oldest arrows found in the ice dated from 500 to 1,700 years ago, during the Iron Age and the Middle Ages.

"This new find adds a lot more time depth to the site," said Pilø in an email. "The site of Lauvhøe is one out of 66 such ice sites in our county alone. We currently have more than 4,000 finds from the ice."

According to NPR, the archeologists originally thought the arrow was from the Iron Age, but discovered it was much older after cleaning off the glacial silt.

Likely, Pilø said, the arrow ended up in the ice while hunters were pursuing reindeer, which gathered near ice and snow on hot days to avoid botflies.

"The ancient hunters knew this and would have hunted the reindeer en route to and on the ice patch," said Pilø in an email. "Sometimes, when an arrow missed its target, it burrowed itself deep into the snow and was lost. Sad for the hunter but a bull's eye for archaeology!"

Moving forward, archeologists will continue their search in the area, which remains fruitful.

"We have just found a horse bit and bridle, possibly from the Viking Age," Pilø said

1960'S TEK

Gepard's 35mm Cannons Blast Russian Drones Out Of The Sky In First-Person Video

Oliver Parken
Fri, September 8, 2023 

Gerpard Shahed 136 night

A new video shows just what it looks like from a first-person point of view when a German-made Gepard self-propelled anti-aircraft guns (SPAAG) lets loose a barrage 35mm shells from its twin barrels and splashes a Shahed-136 kamikaze drone.

The video is a reminder of the very important role that the Gepards have played so far in Ukraine's air defense. The Gepard has proved highly effective against Russian drones, and in some cases cruise missiles, owing to its intended use in a point defense role against various low-flying aerial targets.

https://twitter.com/Archer83Able/status/1699782851724792197?s=20

According to Ukraine’s Southern Air Command, which posted the video to its official Facebook page yesterday, the footage depicts one of the systems shooting down two of Russia’s Iranian-designed Shahed-series kamikaze drones. The caption reads: “Video of the combat work of the soldiers of the ‘Southern’ air command against the ‘Shahed-136/131’ attack UAVs on the night of September 7, 2023 in Odesa [Oblast, southern Ukraine]! The German ‘Gepard’ hunted down enemy ‘shahedis’!” Iran has been providing Russia with Shahed drones since September last year.

Based on the chassis of the Leopard 1 main battle tank, Gepards — which translates to cheetah in English — feature twin radar-aimed 35mm automatic cannons, mounted on a single turret. The German variant sports an S-band search radar and a Ku-band tracking radar. These radars are critical to the Gepard's ability to locate, track, and engage targets at night and amid poor weather conditions. As we've highlighted in the past, many of Russia's Iranian-made kamikaze drone strikes occur at night to help improve the types' survivability.

Examples of how Germany's Gepards have been put to use in Ukraine against low-flying aerial threats can be seen below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PWJ97KcnmA https://twitter.com/JimmySecUK/status/1599808349981138945?s=20

To date, six Gepards have been delivered to Ukraine by Germany, with another 46 pending delivery. Germany announced as far back as April 2022 that it would send a number of its since retired Gepards to Ukraine, which were originally produced for what was then the West German military during the Cold War. Visual confirmation that German Gepards were being used on the battlefield in Ukraine came later in August 2022.

A German Gepard variant. Hans-Hermann Bühling via Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 3.0

More recently, the U.S. Army has bankrolled the transfer of an undisclosed number of Gerpards to Ukraine from Jordan, in a contract worth ​​$118,375,740. Unlike the German variant, Jordan’s stockpile of Gepards are ex-Dutch. Acquiring a total of 95 vehicles, starting in the 1970s, the Dutch Armed Force’s Gepards feature a visually distinct radar configuration compared to their German counterparts. Dutch Gepards boast an X-band search radar and a tracking radar that can operate in the X and Ka bands. In 2013, the Netherlands agreed to sell 60 retired Gepards to Jordan as well as 350,000 rounds of 35mm ammunition, amongst other assets.

A Dutch Gepard during an exercise in 1990, with its distinctive radars at the front and rear of the turret. Dutch Ministry of Defense

Sourcing the necessary ammunition for Ukraine's German Gepards during the war has proved difficult. As we’ve noted previously, the vehicles' 35mm automatic cannons were produced in Switzerland, as are significant stockpiles of shells for them. That country’s policy of neutrality in regard to the conflict forced the German government to pursue a deal with domestic defense contractor Rheinmetall to restart production of 35mm ammunition earlier this year.

The first batch of said ammunition was recently delivered to Ukraine, with 40,000 rounds promised by the end of 2023 as part of the deal. So far, Germany has delivered 86,122 rounds of Gepard ammunition from Bundeswehr and industry stocks, according to the latest government figures, with 289,920 rounds still to be sent.

35mm ammunition rounds handled by the military of Brazil. Ministry of Defense of Brazil

Alongside other short-range air defense (SHORAD) capabilities given to Ukraine by Western allies, such as the AN/TWQ-1 Avenger, of which 20 were supplied by the U.S. starting in late 2022, Gepards remain critical assets for the defense of key cities and infrastructure deep within Ukraine. As they are highly mobile, they can easily be maneuvered to forward areas as needed. This is also significant given how few of them have so far arrived in the country.

There is also an important cost factor to their use against loitering munitions such as Shahed kamikaze drones, too, which are relatively cheap for Russia to procure. Shahed-136 drones reportedly cost around $10,000 to $20,000 apiece. The price per-shot against these drones when using Gepard ammunition is far more cost-effective compared to using expensive man-portable air-defense systems (MANPADS) or larger surface-to-air missiles (SAMs).

https://twitter.com/Aviation_Intel/status/1539887496539959296?s=20

The threat of Iranian-designed Kamikaze drones is not going away, either. Russia is standing up full-scale production within its own border in order to make 6,000 more by the summer of 2025.

With the promise of more Gepards to be delivered in the future, and more ammunition for the type on the way, these systems, which were up until recently viewed broadly as antiquated, will continue to play an important role in the defense of Ukraine's skies.

PHOTOS: Step inside one of the US-made Bradley fighting vehicles keeping Ukrainian troops alive through mines and enemy fire

Jake Epstein
Updated Fri, September 8, 2023 

A soldier from Ukraine's 47th Mechanized Brigade runs past a US-made Bradley Fighting Vehicle as the engine is started at a secret workshop in a wooded area in the southern Zaporizhzhia Region.

Ed Ram/For The Washington Post via Getty Images

US-provided Bradley infantry fighting vehicles have proven to be valuable assets for the Ukrainians.


Kyiv's troops have praised the heavy armor for keeping them alive in combat missions.


New photos show the Bradley's up close and what it looks like on the inside.

Facing incoming Russian fire, minefields, and other hazards, US-made Bradley infantry fighting vehicles have helped keep Ukrainian forces alive as they continue to battle Moscow's troops amid their grinding counteroffensive.

Washington first announced its intent to supply Ukraine with these vehicles earlier this year as part of a massive effort by the West to arm Kyiv with advanced heavy armor. M2A2 Bradleys eventually reached the battlefield in April, just weeks ahead of the much-anticipated offensive, and they have proven to be a valuable asset in the months since.

Ukrainian soldiers have credited the Bradleys with saving their lives in combat, arguing that they would likely be dead had they been riding in a less-advanced Soviet-era vehicle. Bradleys have even been used to help rescue endangered civilians under heavy fire. That said, these vehicles are not indestructible, and they have still fallen victim to Russia's defenses and artillery.

The US has provided a total of 186 Bradleys to Ukraine, according to the latest Pentagon data. But 53 of these have been destroyed, damaged, or abandoned, according to open-source intelligence collected by Oryx. Though it's a possibility, none appear to have been captured by the Russians yet.

Recent photos offer a look inside a Bradley operated by Ukraine's 47th Mechanized Brigade in the southeastern Zaporizhzhia region.

Gunner 'Molfar', 39, a Bradley IFV crew member of the 47th Magura Mechanized Brigade who took part in the fighting to liberate Robotyne village from Russian invaders, stands in the hatch of the vehicle.Dmytro Smolienko/Ukrinform/Future Publishing via Getty Images

Gunner 'Molfar' stands in the hatch of the Bradley.Dmytro Smolienko/Ukrinform/Future Publishing via Getty Images

The Bradley is a highly maneuverable and quick-moving armored vehicle capable of transporting troops to and from the battlefield, providing them with fire support, and carrying out reconnaissance missions.

Designed and manufactured by BAE Systems as a response to Soviet infantry fighting vehicles, the Bradley entered service in the 1980s. It was deployed to the Gulf War in the 1990s and then again sent to Iraq the following decade.

Gunner 'Molfar' is pictured inside the Bradley.Photo by Ukrinform/NurPhoto via Getty Images

Gunner 'Molfar' is pictured inside the Bradley.Dmytro Smolienko/Ukrinform/Future Publishing via Getty Images

The Bradly is a tracked vehicle, so it is sometimes misidentified as a tank. In early January, when it was announced that the US would send Bradleys to Ukraine, Pentagon Press Secretary Air Force Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder was asked by reporters at a briefing to describe how the vehicle is different from a tank.

"It's not a tank, but it's a tank killer. A Bradley is an armored vehicle that has a firepower capability that can deliver troops into combat," he explained. "It will provide a significant boost to Ukraine's already impressive armor capabilities. And we're confident that it will aid them on the battlefield."

Gunner 'Molfar' is pictured inside the Bradley.Photo by Ukrinform/NurPhoto via Getty Images

Gunner 'Molfar' carries a belt of munitions.Photo by Ukrinform/NurPhoto via Getty Images

Bradleys are operated by a three-person crew that includes a commander, a driver, a gunner and can carry up to six fully equipped soldiers. The vehicle can travel at speeds of just over 40 mph and has an operational range of around 300 miles.

They are armed with a 25 mm M242 Bushmaster chain gun, a 7.62 mm M240C machine gun, and Tube-Launched, Optically-Tracked, Wire-Guided (TOW) missiles, which can hit armor in the distance. A 1992 Government Accountability Office report on the Bradley's Gulf War performance praised the vehicle, noting that it "proved to be lethal" and its weapons were "effective against a variety of targets."

Gunner 'Molfar' is seen inside the vehicle.Photo by Ukrinform/NurPhoto via Getty Images

Gunner 'Molfar' is seen inside the Bradley.Dmytro Smolienko / Ukrinform/Future Publishing via Getty Images

According to the Pentagon's inventory of security assistance to Ukraine, which was updated this week, the US has sent over 7,000 TOW missiles and more than 1.8 million rounds of 25 mm ammunition.

This weaponry is just a small component of the nearly $44 billion in military aid Washington has provided since Russia launched its full-scale invasion in February 2022. The Biden administration has also sent nearly 500 Stryker and M113 armored personnel carriers, as well as drones, artillery, air-defense capabilities, and advanced rocket systems.

Gunner 'Molfar' is pictured inside the Bradley.Dmytro Smolienko / Ukrinform/Future Publishing via Getty Images

Gunner 'Molfar' (R) and mechanic and driver 'Revo.'Dmytro Smolienko / Ukrinform/Future Publishing via Getty Images

In the Zaporizhzhia region, where these photos were taken, Ukrainian forces have started gaining momentum against Russia's formidable defensive lines and fortifications. There, Kyiv's troops have managed to carve out a small pocket of liberated territory south of Orikhiv, battling through minefields, anti-tank ditches, and dragon's teeth obstacles.

Though Ukraine launched offensives in multiple directions along the sprawling front line, Kyiv's goal for this particular axis of attack seems to be to fight its way down to the Sea of Azov, where it ultimately hopes to divide Russian-held land and sever the link between occupied regions in the east and south.

Opinion

Ukraine’s minefield of corruption

The New Voice of Ukraine
Fri, September 8, 2023 

Jake Sullivan

We are at risk of being compared to instances of U.S. policy failures: Afghanistan and Iraq.

The perception in the West is that there is corruption in Ukraine, and it is getting worse. I looked through a couple of dozen publications about the change of the Minister of Defense. Some of them talk about personal matters, some about non-personal matters. But in every single one of them, and I've probably looked at 50, it's only about corruption in the Defense Ministry. In many of them, they say eggs for 17 UAH a piece, winter jackets, summer jackets. When this shows up and when people read it, I, for one, feel quite sad.

Read also:

• Ukraine’s defense minister replaced amid wartime corruption crackdown

• Russia detains two generals responsible for Moscow's air defense in corruption probe

• Deputy Head of President’s Office Shurma on systemic corruption — interview

We are thus walking into a minefield. I deliberately make such comparisons, realizing that our soldiers are now walking through minefields. But we have a political minefield. We recognize that there is an inevitable fatigue in many societies. We see signs of fatigue in polls; we see it in personal communication. When we have the topic of corruption, which is superimposed on fatigue, it is a political minefield among our friends. When we are discussing the strategy for the winter, for the next year, the strategy of financial, military, whatever kind of assistance, we are, of course, creating problems for ourselves, but also for those who are helping us very sincerely, not only from the mind, but from the heart. Therefore, finding the right solution and walking on the edge is a public demand and, in fact, a demand from our friends. We have to pay attention to the requests of our friends, even though this is our story, because we are fighting together with them and with the help of what they give us in assistance. True, not as much as we would have liked, or on time, but it is still critical for us. That is why the story is very serious.

In the West, they sometimes see us in a very simplistic way, according to some kind of mold.

That is, our enemies will use all these stories.

For example, US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken came to Kyiv. I have known him for many years. He is definitely a friend of Ukraine. I'll say maybe more than I need to: even in the American administration, he is one of our most consistent and best friends. I don't want to show who is better or not better there. Friends are always friends. I'm absolutely sure that he will talk about strategy; he will speak about Volodymyr Zelenskyy's upcoming visit to the United States, about weapons, and financial assistance. He will talk about the upcoming election campaign in the United States – how it will affect the discussion on weapons or financing. He will talk about what we are doing inside the country. Any of these perceptions and emotional outbursts around corruption or whatever will affect the administration's efforts. The Republicans in Congress, and we know that many say, "Let's put some conditions on it; let's talk first," they will say, "We already need to control all this aid; it's billions that could go to Americans." But here, we don't see 100% that it's concrete. This is, of course, manipulation, pure manipulation. Nevertheless, we are opening a window for these manipulations without clear communication.

American journalists have been pestering us for the last few days, asking us how the fight against corruption will affect our campaign. They have now come up with a story that Mr. Kolomoisky, who has been indicted, may somehow be connected to the stories around the Republicans. And how this, in turn, can come out during the campaign. I would really like us to avoid such talk. If we are a controversial issue during the presidential campaign, it will affect how Americans will work with us. Here, we have to be not just excellent students but get a grade that doesn't exist. Of course, we can argue or whine about this, but we have to be perfect here. Perfect, because Russia and those who want to leave will deliberately promote this whole internal story. In Europe, I already see people who want to go and say, "Well, you know, you have corruption here, and it's complicated here, but let's talk some more." That is, our enemies will use all these stories.

The President of Lithuania, Gitanas Nausėda, also said that Ukraine's corruption greatly influences Western countries when they make decisions about supplying weapons to Kyiv. He said this quite deliberately. What he said (and he is a true friend of Ukraine) should be seen as a signal that is very clear to all of us. I don't know how this perception of these conversations will directly affect the supply of weapons. I don't see how it will affect, for example, the discussion in Ramstein in a week. But politically, we know these discussions are taking place.

Read also:

• Zelenskyy to increase penalties for court corruption

• Reznikov to resign if uniform procurement corruption allegations prove to be true

• SBU exposes draft dodging corruption scheme

Look at the situation in Germany. There, the right-wing party, which is being pulled by the collar by the Russians, is at 20%. In some federal states, the latest polls say 29%. That is the first batch. Not just the second place, but the first in some federal states. They will certainly raise these issues in the Bundestag. In other countries, as well. This is not the actual scale of corruption in Ukraine; it is a deliberate manipulation that will take place during elections in other countries. We always talk about the United States. But next year, we have tough elections to the European Parliament, where the right-wing will try to jump, regardless of their ratings. By the way, this month, on the 30th, we have elections in Slovakia, where those much more friendly to Russia may come to power. We have Polish elections. We have a lot going on. We must not give our enemies any reason to spin these issues.

Again, we will end up in a political minefield where psychological fatigue is absolutely normal. There may be psychological fatigue, and we can talk to our friends, to the people. But if it is superimposed on the fact that "why are we helping these Ukrainians? They are still corrupt. They are like everyone else. Of course, they need help, but not in the same way we have been helping for the past year and a half."

Such conversations will begin this fall, first more quietly, then more loudly. We have to be ready for them. The high-level visits and Volodymyr Zelenskyy's visit to the United States are also crucial in this sense. We should not give any reason to suspect us of being non-transparent, dishonest, hiding something, beating around the bush, or manipulating. Every moment will be used for sure. That is, a different political reality will begin this fall. In this political reality, we have to show that we are the best; we are more remarkable than the most excellent students. I don't even know how else to say it.

I will return to the thesis about the Lithuanian president, and this is a crucial point. We also face the threat that we will be compared to the stories of defeat for the United States: Afghanistan, Iraq. They are considered stories where, yes, the Americans lost a lot of money. Then, look, these are all corrupt, corrupt projects that failed. From the Taliban, it came in a matter of weeks. Part of the reason is that the Taliban is considered incorruptible by the people of Afghanistan. This whole story, which the Americans supported, is also true in Iraq. Ukraine has to be different here. This is the key to ensuring that we will be sympathized with, inspire, and be helped. The West will help us only when we become a success story. It will be challenging to become a success story when there are doubts. This is our chance to say that we are entirely different. Helping us means helping yourself and helping those who share your values. If we share values, we have to be almost perfect. More perfect than they are, if you will. No matter how we perceive it.

Given the mentality of the West, it will be difficult for us to get security guarantees during the war today. A significant number of Western countries are, unfortunately, very skeptical. They say that providing security guarantees in times of war leads them to direct conflict with Russia as a nuclear power. Commitments, or whatever you want to call it, in the area of military and financial assistance are fundamental. The critical story is that, first of all, they should be based on clear criteria. Ideally, it's not what we want, but we don't get that. However, it should not be something the West can give and wants to provide at a particular time. Based on clear criteria and our commitment to a common strategy of deterring and weakening Russia, there should be a clearly agreed logic of what and when. Just as in the case of Israel, there are clear indicators of what it means to have a qualitative military advantage over those around Israel. So, in our case, this should be agreed upon and spelled out with our key allies.

The second point is the certainty that some other American administration may see things differently. Therefore, it is difficult to get legal approval. There are challenging discussions around this now; spears are being broken. But then the obligations have to be guaranteed in some other way, in a different way.

Read also:

• NATO ‘stands in solidarity’ with Romania after Russian drone debris found in country

• NATO must clearly define 'red lines' for Putin in Europe — Kurt Volker

The third point is that this should be done in such a way that it is part of our path to NATO, even while we do not have membership. I have my own ideas about security guarantees. They are not easy, first of all, for our allies, but so far, we are discussing the commitment of military and financial assistance. These are different from the classic security guarantees that Japan and South Korea, for example, have, that other countries have, including the United States.

Suppose NATO does not want to show that it is not a party to the conflict with Russia, even if it is not explicitly or indirectly. In that case, guarantees can be made with the help of several countries united in a group. I recall that once upon a time, West Berlin was protected and given security guarantees by the Americans, the British, and the French without the involvement of NATO. That is, there is a legal and political example. I could give you several more examples of this. For me, this is our main story. This is the number one priority. This is a security model for Ukraine.

Read also: Ukraine to establish special court for foreign investors’ claims

I have talked to many Western companies and potential investors. They say a straightforward thing: Until there is security, there will be no systematic investment in Ukraine. This guarantees our future – that private investors will come to us and see our potential. This is a shared story – ours and theirs.

How on Earth Can Voters Think Trump Accomplished More Than Biden?

EVERY WEEK WAS INFRASTRUCTURE WEEK

Timothy Noah

NEW REPUBLIC
Thu, September 7, 2023

The reviews are in on the president’s North American Bidenomics Tour, and it’s a flop, according to a Wall Street Journal poll of 1,500 registered voters released Monday. Fully 58 percent say the economy has gotten worse over the past two years.

That’s objectively untrue. Inflation rose to 9.1 percent in June 2022, but it fell over the past year to 3.2 percent, and by June and July, hourly wage increases exceeded inflation for the first time in two years. Unemployment is 3.8 percent, which is very low. Biden pushed through Congress a law permitting Medicare to negotiate drug prices, something Democrats (and some Republicans, including, briefly, Trump) sought, unsuccessfully, for a generation. Late last month the administration announced that the first 10 drugs had been selected for haggling. A proposed regulation from the Biden Labor Department would extend eligibility for time-and-a-half overtime pay to 3.6 million more salaried workers. The (misnamed) Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 is projected to create (according to the Bank of America) 86,000 jobs based on investments announced thus far, and the 2021 infrastructure bill is expected to create (according to Moody’s Analytics) another 660,000 jobs.

More shocking still, more voters (52 percent) agreed that former President Donald Trump “has a strong record of accomplishments” than agreed the same about Biden (40 percent).

Let’s review Trump’s accomplishments.

Trump lowered taxes on the rich through cuts in corporate and capital gains tax rates and a reduction of the top marginal tax rate for households earning in excess of half a million dollars (a threshold that has since risen to $578,100). This increased the budget deficit by somewhere between $1 trillion and $2 trillion.

At the behest of corporate lobbyists, Trump weakened or eliminated dozens of health, safety, and environmental regulations.

Trump separated children from their parents at the border, prompting an outraged public reaction that persuaded him to stop. But as of February, hundreds of children remained separated from their parents.

Trump installed an anti-abortion majority on the Supreme Court.

Trump tried (well … sort of) and failed to pass an infrastructure bill.

Trump promised to build a wall, paid for by the Mexican government, across the 1,954-mile southern border but ended up mostly just replacing existing fencing, with a net addition of 52 miles where no fencing had been before. Neither the replacement fencing nor the new fencing was paid for by the Mexican government.

Trump tried and (thankfully) failed to repeal the Affordable Care Act.

Trump tried and (thankfully) failed to enlist Ukraine’s president (“I would like you to do us a favor though”) in a partisan scheme to discredit the son of his 2020 presidential opponent, withholding U.S. aid to apply pressure.

Trump bungled management of the Covid epidemic, with the result that 400,000 people died from the disease on his watch, a much higher death rate than in other wealthy countries, none of them as wealthy as the United States. As a consequence, when Trump left office the unemployment rate was 6.3 percent (compared to the 4.8 percent rate when he entered office).

Oh, and after Trump lost the election, he tried to overturn the results, a crime for which he is now being prosecuted in two jurisdictions. Trump also encouraged rioters to block the counting of ballots in Congress by urging them to march on the Capitol and then by remaining silent, for hours, while they committed acts of violence and vandalism there. This raises some question about whether he’s eligible, under the Fourteenth Amendment, to appear on the presidential ballot in 2024.

In spite of all that, a narrow majority of voters polled by the Journal agreed that Trump had “a strong record of accomplishments” while only a minority of voters agreed that Biden had “a strong record of accomplishments.” Why the disconnect?

Because voters haven’t had time to absorb the good news, says Jim Messina, who managed President Barack Obama’s 2012 reelection. “Research shows voters’ views on the economy are baked in by June of the re-election year,” Messina writes in a new 22-slide presentation for Democrats, “meaning the White House has 9 months to change perception.” So don’t wet the bed just yet, Democrats. (“Historically, we’re fucking bedwetters,” Messina told Politico’s Playbook. True enough.)

If voters take nine months to absorb an economic trend, then they opined to the Journal’s pollsters based on the status quo as of December 2022, when inflation had just started to come down and was still driving down real wages. Myself, I was predicting in December 2022 that inflation would not be much of a problem in 2023. But I also was warning that unemployment would replace inflation as a source of concern, a prediction that, thankfully, proved wrong. But maybe voters are still bracing themselves for that recession that never came.

One knock against Messina’s “they’ll come around” advice is that tracking polls don’t provide much comfort on this point. Biden’s approval numbers, both overall and specifically on the economy, are up since May, according to the AP, but not by much. Biden’s gone from 40 percent overall approval to 42 percent; on the economy, from 33 percent approval to 36 percent. Gallup dates rising approval for Bidenomics a little earlier, from March, but the rise is a similarly poky 32 percent to 37 percent. If Biden continues at this rate, then by next June his approval rating on the economy will be 43 or 44 percent, which is still pretty anemic.

My own best guess for why voters are being stingy with Biden comes down to four factors, three of which I’ve written about before.

The first is that when you ask a voter how the economy is doing, they’re liable to translate that to “Which candidate do you prefer?” In 2016, Gallup asked voters how the economy was doing one week before the November presidential election and one week after. One week before, only 16 percent of Republicans said it was improving; one week after, 49 percent said it was improving. In the interim, Donald Trump was elected president, against all expectations, and Democratic President Barack Obama became a lame duck. It was therefore no surprise to find in July that 71 percent of Democrats approved of how Biden was handling inflation as against 5 percent of Republicans.

The second factor is that business reporters have a bias toward reporting all economic news as bad. Obvious bad news is obviously bad, but obvious good news is bad too because it risks prompting a harmful reaction by regulators (the Fed might hike interest rates) or by the market. I can’t make this point without crediting Gregg Easterbrook for writing a brilliant New Republic article on this topic 34 years ago.

The third factor is that throughout recovery from the two-month recession of 2020 (February to April), wage increases have been concentrated at the lower end. That’s a very good thing, but it leaves out a middle class whose incomes have been stagnating over the past several decades. The middle class is benefiting in other ways from the Biden economy, but not in this very tangible way.

The fourth factor is an insurance crisis brought on by climate change. Insurance companies have responded to rising claims due to proliferating hurricanes, fires, floods, and other mayhem by jacking up premiums and, when state regulators won’t allow that, withholding insurance altogether, as property insurers did recently in Florida and California. Since January 2022, no fewer than 31 states have seen double-digit increases in premiums for property insurance. It’s almost as bad with automobile insurance, the price of which is expected to rise 8.4 percent this year.

Climate-driven premium inflation is not likely to get better anytime soon. Of course, it’s self-inflicted, not only through our emission of carbon into the atmosphere but also, in the U.S., through a ridiculous governance scheme that assigns insurance regulation to individual states. Especially in a hurricane corridor like Florida’s or a wildfire-friendly landscape like much of California, leaving insurance to the states forces some of them to absorb an unreasonably large share of climate risk and its attendant costs. Unfortunately, a June report on the problem by Biden’s Treasury Department fell well short of urging that automobile and property insurance be regulated entirely by the federal government.

Even here, though, Biden outperforms Trump by a mile, merely by acknowledging that climate change is an urgent problem. “I listen to people talk about global warming, that the ocean will rise, in the next 300 years, by one-eighth of an inch—and they talk about, ‘This is our problem,’” Trump told Fox News in April. “The environmentalists talk about all this nonsense.” Even by Trump’s debauched standards, though, double-digit increases in property insurance premiums can’t be shrugged off as nonsense. Perhaps he’ll find something besides climate change (“critical race theory”?) on which to blame them, and perhaps his Republican supporters will, yet again, dream up some fanciful reason to believe him. Or perhaps they don’t need a reason. If the Journal poll tells us anything, it’s that human reason isn’t playing much of a role yet in voters’ opinions about 2024.

Trump’s Border Wall Caused Major Cultural And Environmental Harm, Watchdog Finds

Chris D'Angelo
Thu, September 7, 2023

The construction of former President Donald Trump’s wall along the U.S.-Mexico border desecrated Indigenous cultural sites, hurt wildlife, destroyed vegetation, dried up key water resources, exacerbated the risk of flooding and triggered erosion that has left mountain slopes “unstable and at risk of collapse,” according to a new report.  

The Government Accountability Office, a nonpartisan government watchdog, reviewed federal data and interviewed government officials, Native American tribes and stakeholders over the course of two years. The result is a comprehensive look at the widespread cultural and environmental harm — much of which experts had predicted — that came from Trump’s relentless pursuit of what he called a “big, beautiful wall” along the southern U.S. border.

The Trump administration spent an estimated $15 billion constructing more than 400 miles of border wall, much of which replaced smaller existing barriers. It waived numerous environmental laws along the way. Trump had insisted during his campaign that Mexico would foot the bill for the construction, but Mexico never paid a dime. 

Laiken Jordahl, a conservation advocate at the left-leaning Center for Biological Diversity who documents environmental damage in the borderlands, told HuffPost the report “confirms all our worst fears about the damage wall construction has inflicted” on wildlife, public lands and cultural resources.

Among other things, construction of the wall fragmented wildlife habitats, cut off species’ migration routes and destroyed ancient cacti and other native vegetation.

“These border walls haven’t done a thing to address immigration or smuggling, but they did drive endangered species closer to extinction, butcher thousands of iconic saguaro cacti and dynamite Indigenous sacred sites and burial grounds,” Jordahl said. “This is a clear warning that any attempt to build additional miles of border walls would be a horrifically destructive and useless folly.”

A hill at Coronado National Monument in Hereford, Arizona, was blasted for border wall construction on Sept. 22, 2022.

A hill at Coronado National Monument in Hereford, Arizona, was blasted for border wall construction on Sept. 22, 2022.

The federal audit notably follows a federal judge ordering Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) on Wednesday to remove floating buoys from the Rio Grande — a barrier that, like Trump’s wall, was meant to deter migrants from crossing the border and that has raised strikingly similar environmental and humanitarian concerns.

Citing information gathered from numerous unidentified federal and tribal officials, the GAO concluded that Trump’s wall negatively impacted cultural and natural resources alike. 

“From the start, President Trump’s border wall was nothing more than a symbolic message of hate, aimed at vilifying migrants and bolstering extreme MAGA rhetoric,” Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.), who in 2021 requested the GAO look into the wall’s environmental impacts, said in a statement responding to the report. “This racist political stunt has been an ineffective waste of billions of American taxpayers’ dollars — and now we know it has caused immeasurable, irreparable harm to our environment and cultural heritage as well.”

In Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument, a UNESCO biosphere reserve in southern Arizona that is home to numerous endangered species, contractors bulldozed and blasted land in order to expand an existing patrol road. The work damaged portions of Monument Hill, which is home to cultural and burial sites sacred to the Tohono O’odham and other Native American tribes.

At nearby Quitobaquito Springs, an oasis in the Sonoran Desert that is sacred to the Tohono O’odham people, tribal leaders told the GAO that contractors cleared a large area and destroyed a burial site that the tribal nation had hoped to protect. 

“Tribal and agency officials and four of the five stakeholders we interviewed told us that some projects caused significant damage and destruction to cultural resources, including historic sites and sites sacred to Tribes,” the report states. “Tohono O’odham Nation officials explained that damage and destruction to such sites is often irreparable because it can disrupt or end rites revered or cherished by specific cultural groups.”

Border wall construction at Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument in Lukeville, Arizona, on Jan. 7, 2020.

Border wall construction at Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument in Lukeville, Arizona, on Jan. 7, 2020.

Construction has severely affected water resources. In San Bernardino National Wildlife Refuge, an artesian well “no longer naturally flows to the surface” and “now requires mechanical pumps to maintain water pressure,” the report notes, citing information gathered from a stakeholder. “Moreover, some ponds in the refuge are now void of water, which makes it difficult to maintain water levels in other ponds that have threatened and endangered fish species,” it reads. 

Officials with the National Park Service and Bureau of Land Management highlighted the increased risk of flooding in certain areas as newly constructed roads have blocked the natural flow of water. 

Perhaps the wall’s biggest environmental impact is on animals and plants along the border. 

As the report details, barriers have restricted the movement of numerous species, including the endangered Sonoran pronghorn and Mexican gray wolf. In Texas’s Rio Grande Valley, towering border fences have “fragmented the endangered ocelot’s habitat” and “severed the animal’s travel corridors across the border” — consequences that a joint agreement between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Customs and Border Protection found to have “substantially elevated the risks of the ocelot’s extinction in the U.S.,” the GAO report notes.

One of the more dramatic scenes to play out along the border during Trump’s tenure was construction workers cutting down ancient, protected saguaro cacti — a clearing effort that the report notes allowed for invasive species to take hold. Pictures at the time showed giant, thorny cacti toppled and limbs discarded on the side of dirt roads.

The Tohono O’odham Nation viewed the destruction as a cultural assault as well as an environmental one. 

“The Tohono O’odham Nation officials explained that the saguaro is significant to O’odham culture and livelihood, as the saguaro provides an important fruit source and is a sacred plant to be given utmost respect, as a relative,” the report reads.

A dead cactus lies near the U.S.-Mexico border wall in Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument on Feb. 13, 2020.

A dead cactus lies near the U.S.-Mexico border wall in Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument on Feb. 13, 2020.

Then there’s “significant erosion” stemming from contractors slicing through remote mountains and building roads and construction staging areas. Steep slopes were left “unstable and at risk of collapse” and “incomplete erosion control measures along the barrier and patrol roads threatened the integrity of the barrier system itself,” according to the report.

In Arizona’s Pajarito Mountains in the Coronado National Forest, clearing vegetation for one staging area caused the soil to erode. A Forest Service official told the GAO the entire mountainside is now at risk of collapse. 

Jordahl called the GAO’s findings “horribly devastating.” 

“The description of damage to sacred sites and burial grounds is jarring,” he said via email. “The description of wall construction permanently damaging the artesian well system that feeds spring habitats that sustain endangered species at the San Bernardino National Wildlife [R]efuge is horrifying. This could ultimately lead to the extinction of the endemic species that live there. The parts about severe erosion concerns are also sobering.”

The report, he said, “shows the dire need for mitigation and restoration, and ultimately, the need to tear down the wall where it blocks important migration routes for endangered species like jaguars, ocelots and Sonoran pronghorn.”

In interviews with the GAO, officials at CBP and other agencies blamed some of the negative impacts on President Joe Biden’s proclamation in 2021 that halted border wall construction, which they said prevented work to install road culverts and revegetate cleared areas. 

The report notes that CBP and the Interior Department have agreed to GAO’s recommendations, including working collaboratively on a strategy for mitigating border wall impacts. 

The Interior Department declined to comment on the findings. CBP pointed HuffPost to the report, which includes the agency’s response that it concurs with the GAO’s recommendations.