The Biden Administration Begins (Thread 2)

Previously, only people who earned enough money to owe income taxes could qualify for the credit. Daniel went nearly a decade without a job because her eldest son is autistic and needed her. So she got by on Social Security payments.

But the extra $1,000 a month for the next year could be a life-changer for Daniel, who now works as a community organizer for a Richmond nonprofit. It will help provide a security deposit on a new apartment.

“It’s actually coming right on time,” she said. “We have a lot going on. This definitely helps to take a load off.”

Some 15 million households will now receive the full credit. The monthly payments amount to $300 for each child who is 5 and younger and $250 for those between 5 and 17. The payments are set to lapse after a year, but Biden is pushing to extend them through at least 2025.

The president ultimately would like to make the payments permanent — and that makes this first round of payments a test as to whether the government can improve the lives of families.

A 2001 rule prohibits road construction and timber harvests with limited exceptions on nearly one-third of national forest land. The Trump administration moved to exempt the Tongass from those prohibitions, something (Republican) Alaska political leaders had sought for years.

Restoring those protections in the Tongass would return “stability and certainty to the conservation of 9.3 million acres of the world’s largest temperate old growth rainforest,” the Agriculture Department said.

Under the plans announced Thursday, large-scale, old-growth projects that were being planned for the forest will not go forward, Moore said. Smaller timber sales, including some old-growth trees, will still be offered for local and cultural uses such as totem poles, canoes and tribal artisan use, the Agriculture Department said.

Conservationists cheered the announcement.

“Old-growth forests are critical to addressing climate change, so restoring roadless protections to the Tongass is critical,” said Andy Moderow of the Alaska Wilderness League, calling the forest an “unmatched treasure.”

The Biden administration has transferred a detainee out of the Guantánamo Bay detention facility for the first time, sending a Moroccan man home years after he was recommended for discharge. The prisoner, Abdullatif Nasser, is in his mid-50s and was cleared for repatriation by a review board in July 2016. But he remained at Guantánamo for the duration of the Trump presidency...

The transfer of Nasser could suggest Joe Biden is making efforts to reduce the Guantánamo population, which now stands at 39...

On 29 February 2020 in Doha, Qatar, then US President Donald Trump signed a deal to withdraw American and other allied (including British) troops from Afghanistan by May 2021... {UK Defence Secretary Ben} Wallace described the Doha deal as a "rotten deal", and today clarified he believed the "die was cast when the deal was done by Donald Trump... President Biden inherited a momentum that had been given to the Taliban because they felt they had now won," he said.

“I started the process, all the troops are coming home, they (Biden) couldn’t stop the process. 21 years is enough. They (Biden) couldn’t stop the process, they (Biden) wanted to but couldn’t stop the process.”

- Trump, 1 month ago pic.twitter.com/9UPPbseyiI

...We all wanted to get home, but we couldn’t use public transport. The drivers would not let us in their cars because they did not want to take responsibility for transporting a woman. It was even worse for the women from the dormitory, who are from outside Kabul and were scared and confused about where they should go.

Meanwhile, the men standing around were making fun of girls and women, laughing at our terror. “Go and put on your chadari {burqa},” one called out. “It is your last days of being out on the streets,” said another. “I will marry four of you in one day,” said a third.

Two Decades of Mistakes, Misjudgments, and Collective Failure...

What is happening is a terrible tragedy, but the blame cannot be laid at any one door. The Biden administration’s short timetable for withdrawal, tied to the 20th anniversary of 9/11, and in the middle of the fighting season, was a mistake. But the situation on the ground is the result of two decades of miscalculations and failed policies pursued by three prior U.S. administrations and of the failure of Afghanistan’s leaders to govern for the good of their people. Many of the critics speaking out now were architects of those policies.

The broader questions about why Afghanistan finds itself at this juncture undermine attempts to justify the “war on terror” as it was waged in the country over two decades. During my more than three years in Kabul, between 2013 and 2016 (including as U.S. ambassador from 2014 to 2016), it became evident to me just how steep the challenges to U.S. strategy were. Although we were largely successful in eliminating al Qaeda in the country and reducing the threat of terrorist attacks in the United States, we failed in our approach to counterinsurgency, to Afghan politics, and to “nation building.” We underestimated the resiliency of the Taliban. And we misread the geopolitical realities of the region...

The fall of Kabul was inevitable. It marks the end of a post-imperial western fantasy. Yet the west’s reaction beggars belief. Call it a catastrophe, a humiliation, a calamitous mistake, if it sounds good. All retreats from empire are messy. This one took 20 years, but the end was at least swift.

The US had no need to invade Afghanistan.* The country was never a “terrorist state” like Libya or Iran. It was not at war with the US; indeed the US had aided its rise to power against the Russians in 1996. The Taliban had hosted Osama bin Laden in his mountain lair through his friendship with the Taliban leader, Mullah Omar. At an immediate post-9/11 “loya jirga” in the southern city of Kandahar, younger leaders pressed the mullah to expel Bin Laden. Pakistan would probably have forced his surrender sooner or later. After the 2001 invasion the US defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld demanded that George Bush “punish and get out”. Yet neither Bush nor Tony Blair listened. Instead they experienced a rush of blood to the head. They commandeered Nato, which had no dog in the fight, and began “nation building”, as if nations were made of Lego...

The United States has been planning for years for its eventual drawdown from Afghanistan as former Presidents Barack Obama and Donald Trump indicated they had hoped to withdraw all troops from the country. Curt Higdon, the chief of war plans and strategy for Army Materiel Command, which is responsible for the Army’s Afghan drawdown operations said those long-laid plans would help to make a quick drawdown possible. . .

We must not allow the tragedy unfolding in Afghanistan to be used to rewrite history and teach the wrong lessons...

We must not erase the U.S.’s longtime role in the creation of the humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan: The current chaos and violence have been nearly 20 years in the making. Indeed, Biden actually delayed the withdrawal for several months beyond Trump’s May deadline, making claims by the former president and his supporters that Biden had suddenly decided to “surrender” to the Taliban particularly absurd. Gerald Ford is generally not blamed for the Communist victory in Vietnam simply because he was president at the time the U.S.-backed regime in Saigon finally collapsed. Similarly, Biden should not be primarily blamed for the Taliban victory in Afghanistan...

the U.S.’s policy in Afghanistan as essentially a Ponzi scheme based on an unsustainable system utterly dependent on foreign support in which an eventual collapse was inevitable. While Biden was correct to point out the corruption and ineptitude of the Afghan government, he unfortunately failed to acknowledge how the United States was largely responsible for setting up and maintaining that decrepit system. And the costs were huge: over $1 trillion, and the deaths of 47,000 civilians, 2,500 American soldiers, 1,000 NATO soldiers, 4,000 civilian contractors, and 70,000 Afghan soldiers and police...

. . .videos that appeared Monday.

"What did you think when you first saw those pictures?" Stephanopoulos asked.

"What I thought was, we have to gain control of this. We have to move this more quickly. We have to move in a way in which we can take control of that airport. And we did," Biden said.

. . .ejects a halo of six large blades stowed inside the skin of the missile, which deploy at the last minute to shred the target of the strike, allowing military commanders to pinpoint their target and reduce the possibility for civilian casualties.

On Saturday night, an entirely false claim about President Joe Biden went viral among conservatives on Twitter. "Our heroes were returned to American soil and Dover AFB today. Nobody from the Biden White House attended," tweeted Buzz Patterson, a Republican congressional candidate in California. Patterson's tweet -- posted before 11 p.m. on Saturday -- generated thousands of retweets. And similar claims were made by other conservatives with substantial Twitter followings...

Facts First: It's completely false that nobody from the Biden administration showed up at Dover Air Force Base to greet the remains of the 13 troops killed in a terror attack on Thursday outside Kabul's airport. President Joe Biden and First Lady Jill Biden -- along with Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, and other administration officials -- attended the dignified transfer at Dover on Sunday morning. The viral tweets accusing the Biden administration of being absent at Dover were posted hours before the remains actually arrived at the base...

Republican Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa, a veteran of the war in Iraq and a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, falsely claimed on CNN on Wednesday that President Joe Biden has never expressed gratitude or empathy toward the American troops who have served overseas during the last two decades...

Facts First: Ernst's claim is not even close to true. Biden has thanked troops who have served in Afghanistan and Iraq over and over again -- explicitly saying "thank you" and explicitly saying the nation is grateful to them and indebted to them. Biden has also spoken empathetically about the sacrifices made by these service members and their families...

I have determined that ensuring the health and safety of the Federal workforce and the efficiency of the civil service requires immediate action to protect the Federal workforce and individuals interacting with the Federal workforce. It is essential that Federal employees take all available steps to protect themselves and avoid spreading COVID-19 to their co-workers and members of the public. The CDC has found that the best way to do so is to be vaccinated.
(SNIP)
. . . in light of the public health guidance regarding the most effective and necessary defenses against COVID-19, I have determined that to promote the health and safety of the Federal workforce and the efficiency of the civil service, it is necessary to require COVID-19 vaccination for all Federal employees, subject to such exceptions as required by law.

The Task Force shall issue guidance within 7 days of the date of this order on agency implementation of this requirement for all agencies covered by this order.

"If a federal employee fails to comply, then they will go through the standard HR process, which includes counseling, and face progressive disciplinary action," Psaki said. "Each agency will work with employees to make sure that they understand the benefits of vaccination and how the vaccines are free, easy and widely accessible."

But the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association announced that it opposes the order outright.

"The COVID-19 pandemic is a rapidly evolving and emotional trying situation," said president Larry Cosme. "In the face of so many uncertainties, our federal government should trust its employees to make their own medical decision under consultation with their doctor, not mandate by their employer. Vaccination should be promoted through education and encouragement – not coercion.”

Analysis: the western alliance is the main victim – and China will win out unless US can soothe Paris’s anger...

A US drone strike in Afghanistan last month killed 10 civilians – including seven children – and not an Islamic State extremist as first claimed, the Pentagon has admitted.

In a briefing on Friday, the commander of US Central Command, Gen Kenneth McKenzie, said he now believes it was unlikely that those who died were Islamic State militants or posed a direct threat to US forces at Kabul’s airport. “I am now convinced that as many as 10 civilians, including up to seven children, were tragically killed in that strike,” McKenzie, wearing military uniform, told reporters. “Moreover, we now assess that it is unlikely that the vehicle and those who died were associated with {Islamic State Khorasan} or were a direct threat to US forces. I offer my profound condolences to the family and friends of those who were killed. This strike was taken in the earnest belief that it would prevent an imminent threat to our forces and the evacuees at the airport. But it was a mistake and I offer my sincere apology.” McKenzie said it was “not a rushed strike” and efforts had been made to minimise civilian casualties but acknowledged that “a terrible mistake” had been made...

Joe Biden has promised to the United Nations that the withdrawal from Afghanistan is a turning point in history, in which “relentless war” would be supplanted by “relentless diplomacy”, pledging a renewed commitment to the UN and to his nation’s alliances...

Roughly nine months into his presidency, Joe Biden is on the verge of writing his name into the history books -- and not in a good way. The latest polling from Gallup pegs the President's approval at just 42%, the lowest of his term to date and the second lowest of any president Gallup has measured at this moment in their presidency over the last almost five decades...

* Biden 42% (272 days into his presidency)

* Donald Trump 37% (283 days)...

Here’s what you need to know:

Pelosi aims to hold votes on the social policy and climate plan and the infrastructure bill, (starting today).

Biden asks House lawmakers to vote yes on two bills making up his agenda.

Here’s what to watch for in the House on Friday.

Here’s what’s in the $1 trillion bipartisan infrastructure plan.

Democrats are using budget reconciliation to move the social policy and climate bill. Here’s how that works. Here’s what’s in the $1 trillion bipartisan infrastructure plan.

The House of Representatives on Friday voted to approve President Joe Biden’s $1.2 trillion infrastructure plan as well as rules for debate on his signature Build Back Better Act social spending bill. Nine Republicans joined the vast majority of House Democrats in approving the infrastructure package, with most of the Congressional Progressive Caucus dropping their opposition to advancing the bill...

The House passed a $555 billion infrastructure bill on Friday night, sending the legislation to President Joe Biden who is expected to quickly sign the measure into law. The funding package, which passed 228 to 206 and relied on Republican votes to get across the finish line, will ramp up government spending on roads, bridges and airports, as well as funding for public transit, water and broadband. Six Democrats voted against the measure and 13 Republicans voted in favor. The Democratic opposition was progressive members who were unhappy that the bill was being voted on before passage of a $1.75 trillion social safety net spending bill. The vote hands Biden a victory on a major bipartisan bill, but one that took months to get through Congress and revealed deep divisions in the Democratic Party. The Senate approved the bill in August before it stalled for months as House progressives clashed with Democratic centrists on a $1.75 trillion social safety net measure that could get a vote later this month...

... "The number of people killed by pro-Trump supporters at the January 6 Capitol riot is equal to the number of pro-Trump supporters who brandished guns or knives inside the Capitol. That is the same number as the total of Americans who — after a full year of a Democrat-led DOJ conducting what is heralded as “the most expansive federal law enforcement investigation in US history” — have been charged with inciting insurrection, sedition, treason or conspiracy to overthrow the government as a result of that riot one year ago. Coincidentally, it is the same number as Americans who ended up being criminally charged by the Mueller probe of conspiring with Russia over the 2016 election, and the number of wounds — grave or light — which AOC, who finally emerged at night to assure an on-edge nation that she was “okay" while waiting in an office building away from the riot at the rotunda, sustained on that solemn day.

"That number is zero. But just as these rather crucial facts do not prevent the dominant wing of the U.S. corporate media and Democratic Party leaders from continuing to insist that Donald Trump's 2016 election victory was illegitimate due to his collusion with the Kremlin, it also does not prevent January 6 from being widely described in those same circles as an Insurrection, an attempted coup, an event as traumatizing as Pearl Harbor (2,403 dead) or the 9/11 attack (2,977 dead), and as the gravest attack on American democracy since the mid-19th Century Civil War (750,000 dead). The Huffington Post's White House reporter S.V. Date said that it was wrong to compare 1/6 to 9/11, because the former — the three-hour riot at the Capitol — was '1,000 percent worse.'

"Indeed, when it comes to melodrama, histrionics, and exploitation of fear levels from the 1/6 riot, there has never been any apparent limit." ...
___________________________

GLENN GREENWALD, (writing at Substack.com)
The Histrionics and Melodrama Around 1/6 Are Laughable, but They Serve Several Key Purposes

______________________________

... "The Pressure Campaign on Spotify to Remove Joe Rogan Reveals the Religion of Liberals: Censorship"

All factions, at certain points, succumb to the impulse to censor. But for the Democratic Party's liberal adherents, silencing their adversaries has become their primary project. | by Glenn Greenwald | Jan 29, 2022
____________

American liberals are obsessed with finding ways to silence and censor their adversaries. Every week, if not every day, they have new targets they want de-platformed, banned, silenced, and otherwise prevented from speaking or being heard (by "liberals,” I mean the term of self-description used by the dominant wing of the Democratic Party).

For years, their preferred censorship tactic was to expand and distort the concept of "hate speech” to mean "views that make us uncomfortable,” and then demand that such “hateful” views be prohibited on that basis. For that reason, it is now common to hear Democrats assert, falsely, that the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech does not protect “hate speech." Their political culture has long inculcated them to believe that they can comfortably silence whatever views they arbitrarily place into this category without being guilty of censorship.

Constitutional illiteracy to the side, the “hate speech” framework for justifying censorship is now insufficient because liberals are eager to silence a much broader range of voices than those they can credibly accuse of being hateful. That is why the newest, and now most popular, censorship framework is to claim that their targets are guilty of spreading “misinformation” or “disinformation.” These terms, by design, have no clear or concise meaning. Like the term “terrorism,” it is their elasticity that makes them so useful.

When liberals’ favorite media outlets, from CNN and NBC to The New York Times and The Atlantic, spend four years disseminating one fabricated Russia story after the next — from the Kremlin hacking into Vermont's heating system and Putin's sexual blackmail over Trump to bounties on the heads of U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan, the Biden email archive being "Russian disinformation,” and a magical mystery weapon that injures American brains with cricket noises — none of that is "disinformation” that requires banishment. Nor are false claims that COVID's origin has proven to be zoonotic rather than a lab leak, the vastly overstated claim that vaccines prevent transmission of COVID, or that Julian Assange stole classified documents and caused people to die. Corporate outlets beloved by liberals are free to spout serious falsehoods without being deemed guilty of disinformation, and, because of that, do so routinely.

This "disinformation" term is reserved for those who question liberal pieties, not for those devoted to affirming them. That is the real functional definition of “disinformation” and of its little cousin, “misinformation.” It is not possible to disagree with liberals or see the world differently than they see it. The only two choices are unthinking submission to their dogma or acting as an agent of "disinformation.” Dissent does not exist to them; any deviation from their worldview is inherently dangerous — to the point that it cannot be heard....

_____________________
--

______________________________

... "We are living through an epidemic of mistrust, particularly here in the United States. Trust in social media and traditional media is at an all-time low. Trust in the U.S. federal government to handle problems is at a near-record low. Trust in the U.S.’s major institutions is within 2 percentage points of the all-time low. The consequences are profound." ...
_____________________
-- Substack editors News & Views |
"Society has a trust problem. More censorship will only make it worse." by Hamish McKenzie, Chris Best, and Jairaj Sethi
Jan 26, 2022

A 55% majority of speech watchers say Biden has had the right priorities so far as president, with 45% saying that he hasn't paid enough attention to the country's more important problems. Prior to Biden's address, just 44% said he had the right priorities, and 56% that he hadn't paid enough attention to the most important problems.

The biggest shift in perception about Biden's priorities came among the political independents who tuned in: just 30% in that group said Biden had the right priorities in pre-speech interviews, rising to 48% after his address.

(Watchers) say, 62% to 38% , that Biden's proposed policies on the economy will move the country in the right direction.

Post-speech, 62% of speech watchers say that Biden's proposed economic policies would move the country in the right direction, up from half who said that pre-speech. About three-quarters, 73%, said Biden's proposals on the coronavirus pandemic would move the US in the right direction, up from 64% prior to the address.

Keep ridin' with Biden, America!

P.S. In the TX gubernatorial race in November, Democrat Beto O'Rourke has shrunk an 11 point favorability lead held by Abbot in January to a single (7 point) digit gap in February a week before the primary, which he won. Beto O'Rourke Narrows Abbott's Lead as 49% Say (overwhelmingly Red State) Texas on Wrong Track Keep on keepin' on, Texas; you're about to turn blue!