Former Ambassador to Afghanistan says Trump is responsible for ‘demoralizing’ Afghan forces

Former Ambassador to Afghanistan says Trump is responsible for ‘demoralizing’ Afghan forces

On Anderson Cooper 360 Thursday, former U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan, Ryan Crocker, blamed former President Trump for the current situation in Afghanistan. The Taliban has been surging through the country, capturing cities with seemingly little to no resistance from Afghan forces as the U.S. pulls troops out. Crocker believes Afghan forces were demoralized when a U.S. representative met with Taliban leaders in early 2020 without representation from the Afghan government.

“In my view, we bear a major responsibility for this. Began under President Trump when he authorized negotiations between the U.S. and the Taliban without the Afghan government in the room. That was a key Taliban demand. We acceded to it, and it was a huge demoralizing factor for the Afghan government and its security forces,” Crocker said. “We pressed them to release 5,000 Taliban prisoners. Eventually they did it, and watched them go back into the fight against the people who released them. So this is a year and a half worth of demoralization.”

Donald’s Plot Against America

Donald’s Plot Against America

Now, he and his GOP enablers are peddling the Second Big Lie: that January 6 was just legitimate protest. It’s the crucial ingredient in convincing America to return them—and him—to power.

Win McNamee / Getty Images

I felt as though I had stumbled across a crime scene so violent that I couldn’t process it, let alone synthesize the images in front of me. The parts remained stubbornly separate, and there was no way to grasp the meaning of the whole.

In the early afternoon of January 6, while the mob was still swarming the stairs of the Capitol, I was asked in an interview what I thought of the unfolding situation. I watched the crowd that had been stoked that morning by my uncle, and by Republicans like Ted Cruz, Josh Hawley, and Mo Brooks, with their Confederate flags, their MAGA hats, and their Camp Auschwitz shirts; I watched the smoke (the origin of which I couldn’t yet discern) drift through the air, and I heard their shouts of grievance and anger. It looked like a scene from a failed country whose government had just been toppled, a banana republic; but it was the United States of America, my country, our country, and, knowing who was responsible for the chaos here, the first word that came to my mind was “tawdry.”

Of course, it was so much more than that—so much more dangerous and serious than that, as we would eventually find out. At around 2:15, while Republicans Cruz and Paul Gosar were objecting to the legitimate results of the election, the insurrectionists breached the Capitol, Congress was adjourned, and frantic attempts were made to get the vice president and all of the senators and representatives to safety.

Two hours later, the Georgia Senate race was called for Jon Ossoff. It mattered, certainly; it meant that the Democrats would control the Senate. But there was no room for celebration. After four years of Donald’s incessant attacks and ineptitude, we were already exhausted. Joe Biden’s victory was supposed to have offered us some reprieve, but having given Donald room to promote his Big Lie, elected Republicans had now granted him the opportunity to incite an insurrection. So there would be no respite from the madness, from Donald’s particular blend of mendacity, cruelty, and destructiveness. There would be no celebrating.

Mary Trump

PHOTOGRAPH BY DINA LITOVSKY/REDUX FOR THE NEW REPUBLIC

That horrific day—which we now know General Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, referred to as a “Reichstag moment”—was bracketed by Donald’s incendiary speech given just before noon and a video released two hours after the Capitol had been breached that added more fuel to the fire. The speech itself was full of grievances—lies about the “landslide election” that had been stolen from him, threats to Mike Pence, whom he led the crowd to believe had the power to overturn the results of the election, fabulations about people voting as Santa Claus and Democrats’ taking down statues of Jefferson and Lincoln, and calls to action demanding that the crowd force Congress to “do the right thing.” In the 62 second video, Donald says the word peace three times, presumably because somebody convinced him he had to distance himself from the role he played in stoking the mob’s violence; but, because he can never help himself in these instances, he kept hammering away at what was supposedly stolen from them. The video sickened me just as the “apology” video he recorded after the Access Hollywood tape was released had sickened me. I feared the same result—that there would be no consequences.

That night, after I was finally able to turn off the news, the only two things I knew with absolute certainty were: one, that for the first time in our nation’s history there had not been a peaceful transfer of power, because my uncle, who could not accept his resounding defeat and the humiliation that came with it, had attempted to inspire a coup; and two, the next two weeks before Joe Biden’s inauguration would be the most dangerous this country had ever lived through.

On November 7, after Joe Biden was declared the winner, Donald began peddling the Big Lie—massive voter fraud and cheating by Democrats had turned Donald’s landslide victory into a loss. The phrase “the Big Lie,” coined by Adolf Hitler, describes the technique of saying something so outrageously false that people will believe it simply because they think nobody would have the audacity to lie so brazenly. This has been a specialty of Donald’s since, as a teenager, he had to convince his father everything he did was always the biggest, the greatest, and the best. Back then, his lies protected him from his father’s wrath. The Big Lie about the election protected him from having to face the deep narcissistic wound he’d suffered after losing to Biden. In addition, it kept his base riled up—keeping them afraid of what a Biden administration planned to take away from them (or force upon them) and enraged by what he claimed had been stolen from them.

In Donald’s January 6 video, the Second Big Lie was born. By telling them that they are loved and special, he transformed the violent anti-American mob into patriots who had merely been trying to save their country from the Democratic Party’s treasonous attempt to steal the election from him—and therefore from them. We’ve seen how this has become a strategy for almost every single Republican politician as well. Despite the testimony given by D.C. police officers Daniel Hodges and Michael Fanone, Capitol Police Officer Harry Dunn, and Capitol Police Sgt. Aquilino Gonell in front of the House select committee on July 27, which was impossible for any empathetic human being to watch without feeling a visceral rage and profound sadness, this will continue to be the Republican strategy. They know that if midterm voters still remember the truth about January 6, they’re in trouble. The insurrection of January 6 should have been a wake-up call. It looks, instead, to have been a dress rehearsal.

In the mind-bogglingly long and destabilizing year since the publication of my first book, Too Much and Never Enough, America’s weaknesses and structural deficiencies have been laid bare because one man, Donald John Trump, did something none of his predecessors would have dreamed of doing—through his destruction of norms, he actively set out to undermine and dismantle the very institutions that were designed, in part, to protect us from leaders like him. Keeping him in check required a functioning legislative branch and Cabinet secretaries, like the attorney general or the head of health and human services—who were willing to act with some independence—to put country over party. But having shown himself incapable of building anything, Donald has always been expert at tearing things down. In this endeavor, he has had plenty of sycophants, enablers, and users, just as he has throughout his life. And Republicans saw a way to make the most of it.

As a politician, Donald has benefited greatly from his rabid base of supporters. He embodies their fear and gives expression to their grievance. He doesn’t just give them permission to indulge in their white supremacy; he champions it. He makes them feel good about their prejudices. Following him by denying the virus or claiming immunity from it is another way for them to feel superior. It’s bizarre, because in the process they are putting themselves and those they love at risk, but it is similar to the function lynching has historically served for white people. Lynchings are not only about showing the power of the aggressor but also about demonstrating the other person’s weakness and total subservience. That makes sense in the context of what white supremacists and white supremacy were trying to accomplish, because, in an incurably racist society, the power so clearly belonged to the one race, and the vulnerabilities so clearly belonged to the other. The response to Covid—the denialism and disdain for science—functions the same way, but in this case, whether they acknowledge the reality and the risk or not, the denialists are victims, too. These are devout (for lack of a better word) Republicans. If the people they’ve voted for, at every level of government, equate mask-wearing with being liberal or claim that worrying about catching a deadly virus somehow makes you weak, you will follow their lead. Donald took it a step further. In order to demonstrate their allegiance and support, it was no longer enough for them to attend a rally. They had to do so in the middle of a deadly pandemic without social distancing or wearing a mask

That’s the part that is confounding. But it demonstrates how deeply it matters to them that they, at least in their own minds, maintain a position of superiority over those they consider less-than—particularly Black Americans and immigrants—and stay connected to a man who, through a mesmerizing dance of his followers’ micro-concessions and his own micro-aggressions against them, keeps them in thrall. That their children are dying or their parents and friends are dying isn’t beside the point—it is the point.

It’s impossible to understand the appeal Donald has for his followers if we try to do so from the perspective of people who value honor, decency, empathy, and kindness in their leaders. It isn’t that they see things in Donald that aren’t there. They identify with what is—the brazenness of his lies, his ability to commit crimes with impunity, his bottomless sense of grievance, his monumental insecurity, his bullying, and, perhaps most intriguing, the fact that he is an inveterate failure who keeps being allowed to succeed. Donald is their proxy and their representative. And their ardor has only seemed to grow since his loss. We need only look at data from North Carolina Senate candidate Ted Budd’s campaign to see how complete this identification is. When Republican primary voters were told that Budd had been endorsed by Donald, there was a 45-point net swing in his favor, skyrocketing him to a 19-point lead over his primary opponent. The idea that any other one-term president (George H.W. Bush or Jimmy Carter) would have had the same kind of influence is laughable. On the other hand, though, neither one of them would have tried.

By the same token, elected Republicans, Donald’s chief enablers, see Donald as a means of perpetuating their own power. But they aren’t just putting up with the worst of him simply because they see him as a means to an end. He is them. They value his mendacity and his name-calling and his autocracy because these work for them as well.

Republicans counter truth with absurdity, rendering the truth inoperable. Now a party of fascists, they call Democrats socialist communist Marxists, which is effective in part because it is so nonsensical and in part because they are never asked to define the terms. They cover up their massive (and successful) efforts at voter suppression with wild claims of widespread voter fraud, which essentially doesn’t exist—31 incidents in over a billion votes cast, a number so vanishingly small as to have no meaning.

The main mechanism by which they can successfully carry out these sleights of hand is fear. Whether it’s drug dealers from Mexico or caravans from Central America or Democratic presidents coming for your guns, abolishing religion, or letting gay people get married, they need to keep their voters afraid.

Mr. Lockwood, the frame-narrator of Wuthering Heights, describes a feverish nightmare in which, during a blizzard, he sees a child outside his window begging to be let in. He is so undone by the appearance of this wraith that he drags its wrist across the broken pane of glass, until its blood soaks his bedsheets. “Terror made me cruel,” he says. Fear is a deeply unpleasant emotion, and Republicans have become expert at stoking it, on the one hand, and transforming it into anger on the other. This state of affairs makes it much easier for their followers to become comfortable with the cruelty of their leaders—whether of policy or of action—as long as it is directed at groups they’ve been told they should fear. It also makes it easier for the Republican rank and file to be comfortable with their own cruelty—it feels better than fear, and it allows them to delude themselves into thinking they have some measure of control, because they have been granted permission by the powers that be to express their cruelty with impunity.

Elected Republicans have become Donald’s greatest enablers since his father, Fred. For all of their professed reluctance and half-hearted attempts to keep Donald at arm’s length, almost every single elected Republican at every level of government, either tacitly or enthusiastically, very quickly came to support his breaches—against decency, the rule of law, and the Constitution. Kevin McCarthy went from being one of Donald’s critics in the immediate aftermath of January 6 to pretending that creating a commission to find out what happened on that day was somehow a partisan witch hunt. Elise Stefanik intuited that going all in with Donald would be her best chance for advancement. The number three Republican in Congress, Liz Cheney, had the audacity to stand up against the Big Lie, for which she was removed from her leadership position and replaced by Stefanik.

The most dangerous Republican enabler by far is, of course, Mitch McConnell, who saw an opportunity that even he probably never dared hope for: The guy in the Oval Office wouldn’t just sign off on every aspect of the Republicans’ agenda, he would push the envelope—of decorum, of autocracy—so far that the system itself could be used to create permanent minority rule. Donald showed his party (and yes, it is his party) the limits of pretending to care about good governance or play by the rules. He also showed them the utility of not just stoking racism and hatred of the Other—in the form of immigrants, Democrats, and even epidemiologists—but championing those who espoused them.

McConnell is the greatest traitor to this country since Robert E. Lee (with the difference that McConnell has been trying to take our country down from within). He has always been expert at using existing rules and procedures in ways they weren’t intended to be used, and yet—whether it was denying Merrick Garland a hearing, pushing through Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation, or ending the filibuster as it applied to Supreme Court nominees but employing it to block legislation that would expand voting rights—his anti-democratic maneuvers have been performed within the bounds of the system. The fact that he’s misusing the system outlined in the Constitution isn’t an exoneration of him, however; it’s a condemnation of the Constitution’s limitations. The definition of treason in the Constitution is so narrow (levying war against the country or giving aid and comfort to the enemy) that a case could never be made against him. It would be difficult, however, to find anybody in modern times who has so undermined our democracy.

This destruction of norms by Donald and other Republicans in the executive and legislative branches has happened so quickly, and has been so thorough, that it’s clear the seeds of it must have been planted a long time ago. It was possible for Donald, the weakest man I have ever known, to exploit the weaknesses in the system not because he introduced them, but because they were there for him to exploit in the first place.

These situations are not the result of four years or even four decades of poor governance—although the worsening of the problem has certainly accelerated since Ronald Reagan’s disastrous presidency. The combination of “trickle-down” economics, his devastating handling of the AIDS crisis, and the intensification of the “War on Drugs,” with all of its racist implications, accelerated the divide between Americans along economic, cultural, and racial dimensions. But we really need to go back to this country’s inception to understand how we got here and to assess how we can possibly repair the extensive damage. With Joe Biden’s election, we did indeed snatch democracy from the jaws of autocracy—a rarity in human history. But as the insurrection of January 6 made clear, we are not out of the woods yet—far from it.

I contend that we have arrived at this fraught political moment in which it feels that everything is at stake because of our long history of, on the one hand, failing to hold powerful white men accountable and, on the other, the normalization of white supremacy. How else do we grapple with the fact that we Americans appear so spectacularly vulnerable to corrupt and incompetent leaders? How else do we understand the breathtaking extent to which the federal government, because of the cynicism, selfishness, and opportunism of one man, proved incapable of managing the crises of Covid and the ensuing economic fallout? How else do we explain the effectiveness of Donald’s strategy of race-based division? And how do we avoid acknowledging that supporting him or even accepting him meant that institutionalized racism was not only not a deal breaker, it was an effective political strategy?

American terrorists, January 6, 2021

ASHLEY GILBERTSON/VII/REDU​X

The initial response of Donald’s administration to the pandemic was driven by his inability to take it seriously. Once the virus had undeniably taken hold here, Donald hung on to the fact that it had originated in China, which allowed him to make it about the Other from the outset. In spring of 2020, when Covid was spreading almost exclusively in blue states, and later, when it became clear that Black Americans were being disproportionately affected, it was easier for him to dismiss the danger. Even when it became clear that no one was safe, he made the case that Americans had to choose between combating the virus and saving the economy, squandering what could have been an extraordinarily unifying moment for this country. But Donald has no interest in unity. He thrives on division and chaos—much of it racially driven. We saw this in the way he exploited the backlash against Barack Obama’s presidency, thereby giving his base permission to express their racism even more openly and proudly.

The Republicans haven’t lost their way. They have, instead, found it. And it has led them straight toward unabashed white supremacy and fascism. This is nothing new. We saw what happened after the Civil War. The traitors of the Confederacy were given a pass by the North, and the promise to grant freedmen and women their 40 acres was largely reneged in the interest of reestablishing “national unity.” Because of the enormity of the North’s postbellum failures and the terrorist tactics employed by the re-empowered Southern Redeemers—those believers in the Lost Cause, who are the direct ancestors of those who sullied the Capitol Rotunda with their Confederate flags—the Black vote in the South was all but eliminated. The large majority of the electorate of the Southern slave states remained racist and reactionary, allowing the South to continue as a closed, fascist state for another century.

Only the Democrats and the media can save democracy from fascism. But the Democrats are split between the activists who understand the stakes, and the institutionalists who keep following a rule book the Republicans lit on fire a long time ago. On the one side, the progressives and pragmatists, senators like Elizabeth Warren, Chris Murphy, and Amy Klobuchar, seem to understand the urgency of the problem—American democracy can’t survive if we fail to realize that the United States Senate is currently operating under the tyranny of the minority. On the other side, institutionalists like Joe Manchin and Dianne Feinstein cling to the idea that maintaining long-standing mechanisms like the filibuster, which is not in the Constitution and impedes the Senate’s ability to act democratically, is more important than enacting legislation that would, on the one hand, help the American people in substantive ways while bolstering Biden’s presidency and, on the other, prevent the Republican Party from turning this country into an apartheid state. It remains to be seen whether President Biden himself, who understands the workings of the body in which he served for almost 40 years, will be able to transcend his own institutionalist leanings. His July 13 speech on voting rights was a powerful repudiation of Republican voter suppression—but he didn’t mention the filibuster once.

 

What happens next also depends on how the media portray what’s currently going on. In 2016, the media lent Donald’s run a gravitas and seriousness it hadn’t earned. The Senate’s failure to convict him of impeachment the first time around was a crucial moment, as it allowed Donald to campaign for the 2020 election as if he were a legitimate candidate—but this time with all of the attendant powers of incumbency, including the massive bullhorn. By asking him questions they would ask any other candidate, the media didn’t just confer upon him legitimacy, they erased the fact that he was a traitor to his country who had been impeached for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress after seeking the help of a foreign power (for the second time) in undermining his political opponent. Anybody who was paying attention knew the trial Republicans put on was a sham, a shabby bit of political theater, the outcome of which was a foregone conclusion. “I am trying to give a pretty clear signal I have made up my mind,” said Senator Lindsey Graham before the trial even began. “I’m not trying to pretend to be a fair juror here.”

Since the election was called for Joe Biden, the media have done reasonably well calling the Big Lie what it is, and yet Republicans who lie about the Big Lie continue to be given a platform. There are propaganda outlets, led by Fox News, that amplify the lies of the Republican Party while distorting (or ignoring) facts. Many in the mainstream media, however, act as if journalistic neutrality means giving both sides equal time no matter the content of their message.

The Republicans continue to think that Donald is somebody whom they need. While it’s true that Trumpism, so-called, doesn’t scale, and that only Donald can carry the mantle of Trumpism, the fact that it’s not a winning formula (after all, Republicans, largely thanks to Donald, lost the House, the Senate, and the White House) is completely irrelevant. They continue to embrace Donald because they need him to keep the Big Lie alive in order to maintain the support of the base, so they can advance their voter-suppression legislation while continuing to cast doubt on the last election by pushing for audits in states, like Arizona, where the popular voter margin was narrow.

Every undemocratic facet of our system—from the filibuster to the Electoral College to voter suppression to failing to make the District of Columbia a state—favors Republicans. They have no incentive to change anything. Tens of millions of voters may be effectively disenfranchised by their legislation and faux-audits, but their voters are not. The endgame is to make it impossible for people who would vote against them to vote at all. In a country of changing demographics and increasing openness to diversity, at a time when elected Republicans are on the wrong side of almost every issue—gun safety, taxes, voting rights—they know the only way for them to cling to power is to cheat, and if there is one skill the de facto leader of their party has, it’s his ability to cheat his way out of—or into—just about anything.

Trumpism doesn’t need to scale. Republicans just need to keep that 35 percent so riled up that the base seems bigger than it is while they quietly make sure the rest of us don’t have a voice.

The stakes are incredibly high in every election going forward. The 2020 election was more important than 2016, and 2022 will be more important than 2020. We can’t discount the pernicious influence of white supremacy, which is not just an extremist movement. It’s not just the KKK, the Proud Boys, the Oath Keepers. It is the mainstream of the Republican Party, and we don’t need to qualify it.

Not only can’t Republicans give up their white supremacy, it turns out they don’t have to. It has been and continues to be a winning strategy. Donald got 62 million votes in 2016 and 74 million votes in 2020. Though Biden’s win was decisive, Republicans overall beat expectations, picking up seats in the House and becoming a minority in the Senate that, because of the filibuster, functionally leaves them with an enormous amount of leverage. We desperately needed a total repudiation of Donald and his Republican enablers. We did not get one.

It’s a tragedy, but it comes from having for decades convinced their electorate to vote against its own economic self-interest in the name of racial superiority. Their attitudes in this matter are positional. The question for them isn’t just “Am I doing well?” but “Am I doing better than?” And we all know who it is they need to be outperforming. As long as that is what matters to them, they will double down on white supremacy and hatred of the other side while maintaining their ability to do so through gerrymandering and voter suppression. That’s all they’ve got.

On July 6, President Biden tweeted, “Six months ago today, insurrectionists carried out a violent and deadly assault on our Capitol. It was a test of whether our democracy could survive. Half a year later we can declare unequivocally that democracy did prevail. Now, it falls on all of us to protect and preserve it.”

This well-intentioned statement misses the mark. The danger hasn’t passed—in fact, as Republicans continue their almost universal support for the first Big Lie, while using it to promote hundreds of sweeping voter-suppression laws in almost every state, they are now lining up behind the Second Big Lie, which is that the insurrection of January 6 was an inside job perpetrated by the FBI, or that the violent attempt to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power with the intention of hunting down the speaker of the House and hanging the vice president was a fun-filled protest carried out by wonderful real Americans like Ashli Babbitt, the latest martyr to their cause. Now, those who participated (and their supporters) are being told that it is they who have been wronged, it is they who are the patriots, and only they whose voices deserve to be heard.

Republicans have made it clear that going forward they will embrace whichever version of the Second Big Lie is most useful in the moment—causing the kind of cognitive dissonance they have become quite comfortable with. It’s absurd—but it’s also effective with enough of their voters that we can’t dismiss it, just as we can’t dismiss Donald. It’s exhausting. And it’s infuriating. But we look away at our peril. Democrats need to accept that there is no longer anything to hope for from their Republican colleagues. For all intents and purposes, we currently live in a country with only one functioning political party that is working to make the lives of all Americans better, only one party that believes in democracy.

Democrats must stop squandering their advantage as they waste time waiting for Republicans to feel shame. They have none. Over the four years Donald was in the Oval Office, there were any number of opportunities for Republicans to break with a man who, at every turn, undermined everything they claimed to have stood for—law and order, the military, moral conservatism, fiscal responsibility, and small government. And yet they never did.

January 6 should have been a wake-up call for all of us, Republicans in particular. Initially at least, some of them had been scared enough by a mob intent on committing violence against any member of Congress they came across to recognize that the monster they’d deluded themselves into thinking they controlled could not, after all, be tamed. Instead, they have followed Donald’s lead. Less than six months after the fact, Georgia Representative Andrew Clyde claimed the insurrection was a “bold-faced lie” and nothing more than “a normal tourist visit,” despite the fact that there is a photo of him rushing to help barricade the door against the mob. Donald continues to double down on his claim that these were peaceful people and actually said “there was such love at that rally.” There has been no pushback from Republican leadership. There can’t be. They know that any investigation into what happened that day is a losing proposition for them—either because they’ve been covering it over or because they’re guilty of sedition. They also know that the 2022 election will turn in part on how many Americans they can convince of the Second Big Lie: that the insurrection never happened.

And as far as the 2024 presidential election is concerned, I initially thought Donald wouldn’t run. Even if he managed to convince himself that he had won but the Democrats had somehow stolen the victory from him, his defeat was so resounding, I believed that, although he might pretend to run as a way to raise money and keep the spotlight on himself, he would never put himself in that position again. Now I’m not so sure. As has been the case since my grandfather discovered that his second son could be of use to him, everything has broken his way. In this case, almost the entire Republican Party has backed not one but two Big Lies that benefit him. If enough people buy into the Second Big Lie, if enough of those voter-suppression laws pass and Republicans make significant gains in Congress and state legislatures in 2022, Donald might begin to think that a win in 2024 would be a sure thing for him, and he might make the decision to run after all. And if he were to win … there would be no coming back from that.

Debt in a warm climate: coronavirus and carbon set scene for default

Debt in a warm climate: coronavirus and carbon set scene for default

Villagers attempt to put out a wildfire, in Achallam village

 

LONDON (Reuters) -Where COVID-19 has precipitated unprecedented debts, climate change could trigger defaults across a planet which a United Nations panel says is dangerously close to runaway warming.

To avert disaster, countries are committing to carbon cutting steps. But these will be costly and likely to add to a global debt pile which asset manager Janus Henderson estimates ballooned to $62.5 trillion by the end of last year.

With floods and wildfires devastating the world, estimates vary on how much damage warming will inflict on its economy.

But a report earlier this year by BofA put it at $54-69 trillion by 2100, which compares to a valuation of the entire global economy of around $80 trillion.

The financial repercussions could manifest themselves in under a decade, a study by index provider FTSE Russell warns.

The first climate-linked credit rating downgrades are set to hit countries soon, the report’s co-author and FTSE Russell’s senior sustainable investment manager, Julien Moussavi, added.

In a worst-case “hot house world” scenario developing countries including Malaysia, South Africa, Mexico and even wealthier economies such as Italy may default on debt by 2050.

In another, where governments are initially slow to react, states including Australia, Poland, Japan and Israel, will be at risk of default and ratings downgrades too, the study concluded.

While developing countries are inherently more vulnerable to rising sea levels and drought, richer ones will not escape the climate change fallout, such studies show.

“You can talk about climate change and its impact and it won’t be long before someone talks about Barbados, Fiji, or the Maldives,” Moritz Kraemer, chief economist at Countryrisk.io and former head of sovereign ratings at S&P Global.

“What was a surprise to me is the impact on higher-rated, richer countries,” Kraemer added.

Another study by a group of universities including Cambridge concluded that 63 countries – roughly half the number rated by S&P Global, Moody’s and Fitch – could see credit ratings cut by 2030 because of climate change.

China, Chile, Malaysia, and Mexico would be the hardest hit with six notches of downgrades by the end of the century, it said, while the United States, Germany, Canada, Australia, India, and Peru could see around four.

The corresponding increase in borrowing costs would add $137–$205 billion to countries’ combined annual debt service payments by 2100, this study estimated.

Ratings downgrades typically raise borrowing costs, especially if they cause countries to be ejected from bond indexes tracked by funds managing trillions of dollars.

WARNING LIGHT

Developed countries are ramping up spending to temper climate damage, with Germany creating a 30 billion euro recovery fund after recent floods, while Singapore is budgeting the equivalent of $72 billion to protect against rising sea levels in the next century.

For emerging economies, already scarred by COVID-19, the climate crisis will heap on more pressure.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) warns that a 10 percentage-point rise in climate change vulnerability, as measured by the Notre Dame Global Adaptation Initiative index, is associated with an increase of over 150 basis points in long-term government bond spreads for developing nations.

The average rise across all countries was 30 bps.

The U.N. environment programme estimates that in developing countries, annual adaptation costs will be as much as $300 billion in 2030, rising to $500 billion in 2050.

As a percentage of gross domestic product, sovereign debt is still about 60% in emerging economies, data from the Institute of International Finance (IIF) shows, versus 100% or so in the United States and Britain, and 200% in Japan,.

The rise from pre-pandemic levels of around 52% is a particular concern. European, U.S. and Japanese central banks are essentially underwriting state borrowing, but this is not possible in poor countries, who must ultimately repay debt.

“How do you enable the sort of funding that is required given the high debt levels and the importance of the ratings frameworks?” Sonja Gibbs, director for global capital markets at the IIF said.

(Reporting by Dhara Ranasinghe and Karin Strohecker; Editing by Sujata Rao and Alexander Smith)

Put Rob Reiner in Charge of January 6th Investigation: Nails the Single MOST Important Evidence Needed

Political Flare – Politics – News

Put Rob Reiner in Charge of January 6th Investigation: Nails the Single MOST Important Evidence Needed

 

Put Rob Reiner in Charge of January 6th Investigation: Nails the Single MOST Important Evidence Needed

Highway hypnosis? Trump hypnosis? Similar things, you get so used to the same damn things coming at you for long periods, yellow or white dashes, old traditions were broken, rules never applied, you get so used to it that you damn near crash into the menu at McDonald’s.

Or your country crashes as a democratic republic. You got distracted and missed all the signs.

The fact that this country has yet to even convince half its citizens that January 6th was an extremely sophisticated and organized plot to overthrow the incoming proper government just goes to show that society is screwed. Everyone’s too into their social media, their online life (however risque one wants to be), and their sports teams, no one even really cares. There may be legitimate UFO objects breaking all known laws of physics flying around our country. The NYT cares, the Pentagon cares, citizens don’t. Our government was almost overthrown. The more we learn about what happened behind the scenes, the more we realize that we were almost “lucky” to get through that day with Biden still scheduled to be president. “Lucky,” on a day that’s supposed to be ceremonial.

But here’s where we get back to highway hypnosis, or Trump White House hypnosis again. We got so used to not seeing or hearing the evidence, we figure now it’s just impossible to get. We’re hypnotized.

But as Jeffery Rosen showed on Friday and Saturday, through his own testimony, Trump was personally (Dick Durbin’s words) building the fraud movement which led to the coup attempt, personal involvement, is the type of evidence we’re not used to getting. Trump’s first “Impeachment Trial” didn’t have a “witness.” Some of us STILL believe C.J. Roberts needed to actually pound the gavel and say, “It says here that I preside over a trial. Trials have witnesses. Would the prosecution please call its first witness.” But we didn’t, we’re used to Trump getting whatever he wanted, Putin-Like.

And here’s another thing we didn’t get much out of either impeachment, something normally assumed, documents. Governments are big on documents because no one would ever know who did what when and with what money without documents. Additionally, people make memorandums to keep memories fresh and to protect themselves. We didn’t get many documents in Trump’s first impeachment, some texts, and Trump’s “perfect phone call.” (He used the word “perfect” so many times one wondered if they doctored it. Probably not). But we did not get a lot of documents about communication back and forth among the staff wanting to send the aid.

Documents are more reliable than eyewitness testimony precisely because they’re nearly always made right as it happened. Studies have proven that eyewitness testimony is actually some of the least reliable evidence, rather than the gold standard. Documents, however….

Rob Reiner wants some documents, the ones that would tell a big part of the story:

Oh, it’s “arguable.” The “argument” would be that shit like that doesn’t come from the Trump White House. They were not constrained by laws, which is how we got here in the first place. Who here wonders whether they’ve already been destroyed? Maybe. But yes, documents are obviously needed, and we’ll go a little further.

We want documents from the 4-6th. Who visited the White House? Who called? Want to know what else we want? We want to look at the call logs to Josh Hawley and Ted Cruz the day or two before both – almost on the same day, maybe a day or two apart – said that they would be objecting to the votes.

Trump needed two things to win: Objections, getting electoral votes back to the states. And he needed Pence out of the Capitol for 12 hours. Pence wouldn’t get in the SUV under the Capitol – didn’t trust them. The call logs would cover that portion. We want Hawley and Cruz.

The Trump-highway hypnosis lifted, a lot, this last weekend. We have direct testimony about what Trump said and did with respect to telling his acting attorney general to sign a letter saying there was fraud in the election. Now, if we could just get over a few more elements, we would be able to tell the whole story, undeniably – for history’s sake, at least.

Get the damned documents.

Heffernan: Biden’s ‘build back better’ just beat Trump all over again

Heffernan: Biden’s ‘build back better’ just beat Trump all over again

  • WASHINGTON, DC - AUGUST 10: President Joe Biden delivers remarks on the Senate approving H.R. 3684 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, in the East Room of the White House on Tuesday, Aug. 10, 2021 in Washington, DC. The Senate has approved a $1 trillion bill to rebuild aging roads and bridges, with $8.1 billion targeted to projects in the West. (Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times)President Biden said Senate approval of his infrastructure bill “proved that democracy can still work.” (Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times)

It’s hard to find an element of daily life that doesn’t lend itself to politicization. There are the obvious ones: media, guns, lattes. But there’s more. Convertibles are evidently a Republican ride. Vegetables, in general, are Democratic.

But infrastructure knows no party. What ideology favors a broken bridge over one in good repair?

This is why Donald Trump ran on infrastructure in 2016, promising to invest $1 trillion and revive manufacturing jobs in the Rust Belt. It was also why his staff tried mightily to steer him toward the crowd-pleaser of “infrastructure week” whenever his antics turned too unstructured and too crowd-displeasing.

All to no avail for the former president. Nothing panned out.

During Trump’s term, federal investment in roads and bridges stagnated. Roads, ports and airports never got fixed. Any hope that Trump’s autocratic proclivities could be channeled into mega-projects to astonish his base fizzled. He couldn’t even add more than 80 miles to his promised big, beautiful wall.

At the same time, national consensus about the urgency of an infrastructure upgrade has never wavered.

Finally, in November, 28% of white working-class men — the very demographic that put infrastructure high on their priority list — voted Democratic, up from 23% in 2020. These voters helped deliver Biden’s key victories in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania.

So far, President Biden hasn’t forgotten them. And no one in any state has forgotten the stomach-sinking truths about America’s infrastructure.

Forty-three percent of public roadways are in poor or mediocre condition. A water main breaks every two minutes. More than one-third of public schools use portable buildings, including trailers, because the regular buildings are too crowded.

An AP/NORC poll in July showed that 59% of Americans, of both parties, supported the infrastructure bill’s key aspects.

All of this may be why Biden has been able to get more harmony on this part of his “Build Back Better” agenda than Washington has seen in a long, long time. On Tuesday, the Senate passed the 2,700-page Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, 69 to 30, with 19 Senate Republicans voting in favor of it, including Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).

“The president deserves a lot of credit,” said McConnell of the bipartisan miracle. “If you’re going to find an area of potential agreement, I can’t think of a better one than infrastructure, which is desperately needed.”

The bill still must pass the House, which will no doubt ask for changes, before it’s signed into law. But this is big. And it’s sure to be galling to ex-President Trump, whose party decisively defied his command to vote against the bill and bust Biden’s agenda.

In addition to McConnell, other Republicans in the party leadership — South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham and Iowa Sen. Charles E. Grassley — voted for the bill. Evidently, the Monarch of Mar-a-Lago holds less sway over the party than he once did.

And the bill, which its proponents say requires no tax hike and is mostly paid for with unspent coronavirus relief money, is a thing of beauty.

According to Mark Zandi, the chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, it could create some 660,000 jobs by 2025, partly because it includes funding for job training and provisions for more women to get into construction and trucking.

In the bill’s current form, the big money goes to marquee items, especially roads and bridges. Appalachian and Alaskan highways will get a special boost, evidence (perhaps) of the contributions to the bill by Sens. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska).

But the package also funds Puerto Rico’s highways, projects to relieve congestion in cities, and academic research on transportation.

Railroads will also get substantial federal investment, especially Biden’s beloved Northeast Corridor, the well-worn route from Boston to D.C. Among other things, the bill provides for more refreshments on Amtrak routes.

(If that refreshment clause makes it all the way into law, I’m lobbying for this earmark: more delicious Wee Brie, which used to class up Amtrak’s plastic-wrapped cheese plates.)

There’s funding to fortify the power grid against hacks and attacks, help protect communities against drought, flooding, wildfire and poisonous lead water pipes. Electric vehicle charging stations and electric school buses will — if this thing passes intact — proliferate.

Yes, some of this is “green” and some of this is “blue-collar,” and those color concepts can always trip partisan wires. But the explosion didn’t happen this time; it got muffled by days, weeks and months of what various media called “grueling,” “painstaking,” “fierce” debate and compromise.

And of course one person styled it as test of loyalty — to himself.

“This [bill] will be a victory for the Biden Administration and Democrats, and will be heavily used in the 2022 election,” Trump shouted two weeks ago. “It is a loser for the USA, a terrible deal, and makes the Republicans look weak, foolish, and dumb.”

He threatened any in his party who might support the bill, saying “lots of primaries will be coming your way!” But this time, 19 shrugged.

As for the Democrats, the progressive wing has its own objections to the bill and its compromises, but no one defected on Tuesday in the Senate.

It seems that one of the ways to repair political bridges is to repair literal bridges.

Republicans’ New Safe Space Is Letting People Die To Fight ‘Democrat Overreach’

Republicans’ New Safe Space Is Letting People Die To Fight ‘Democrat Overreach’

Photo Illustration by Kristen Hazzard/The Daily Beast/Photos Getty
Photo Illustration by Kristen Hazzard/The Daily Beast/Photos Getty

The party of Trump has a big problem, they have found themselves on a sticky wicket: They have radicalized their base to believe that public health measures are “Democrat overreach.”

In order to get the base excited, they have to rail against certain things, many of them public health-related (vaccine passports, masks, lockdowns, social distancing). But railing against public health means endangering the health of their base.

For a little while, this delicate balance seemed like it might hold, as Republican governors spent months sowing doubts about vaccines and complaining about masking and other supposedly freedom-harming public health basics. The right-wing press took a premature victory lap, with the National Review’s Rich Lowry asking, “Where Does Ron DeSantis Go To Get His Apology?”

Florida’s Death Toll Now Exceeds DeSantis’ Margin of Victory

But the Delta variant made it clear that DeSantis should be giving an apology, not asking for one, as red states have predictably been hit hardest. An Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll from July showed that “Republicans are far more likely than Democrats to say they have not been vaccinated and definitely or probably won’t be, 43% to 10%.”

And, dontcha know, COVID cases in Texas are up 125 percent over the last two weeks. In Florida, they’re up 162 percent. On Monday, as Gov. Greg Abbott asked hospitals in his state to cancel elective surgeries, Sen. Ted Cruz went on Sean Hannity and pronounced “No mask mandates. No vaccine mandates. No vaccine passports. No COVID mandates!” Indeed, Texas and Florida have similar laws prohibiting localities from making their own public health rules, although both Dallis and Austin are suing to allow masking.

It took at a lot of stupid to get Florida and Texas to this dark place, which is why the MAGA propagandists are trying to suggest, without much evidence, that this is about an unvaccinated wave at the border—when it appears to be about unvaccinated Americans, in a country with enough vaccine doses to go around, harming their own health and spreading the virus and helping it continue to mutate in the process.

Texas Governor Admits Dangers of Reopening State on Private Call With Lawmakers

In Florida, DeSantis has taken what can only be called a pro-COVID stance, suing cruise lines to try and stop them from using vaccine passports. That’s cutting off your nose to spite your face given the industry’s importance to the state, but the trolling was always the point. That’s why a defiant, some might say sadistic, DeSantis announced that “the Florida Board of Education could withhold the salaries of superintendents and school board members who defy the governor’s executive order prohibiting mask mandates” in a state that reported 134,506 new cases last week.

No wonder Dr. Jonathan Reiner told CNN this weekend, “The viral load in Florida is so high right now… that I think that if Florida were another country, we would have to consider banning travel from Florida to the United States.” Bloomberg’s Steven Dennis tweeted that, “Per NYT, ~1 out of every 945 people in Duval County, Florida (Jacksonville) is in a hospital bed tonight w/COVID. #1 highest in the USA.”

With COVID numbers way up, DeSantis’ numbers are down as he looks toward re-election and then, he hopes, a 2024 presidential run. It’s a game of chicken: Can he troll the libs without killing so many of his constituents that they turn on him?

Republicans often fume about how Democrats supposedly don’t treat them with respect. But how should we treat voters who refuse to connect their anti-public health rhetoric with all the deaths from a preventable disease?

The reality is that the GOP decided to target anti-vaxxers because they’re easy marks who don’t trust the lamestream press but rely on Facebook memes and Joe Rogan—the guy who used to tell people to eat bugs on Fear Factor.

What DeSantis and the other governors are doing is deadly wrong, but that doesn’t mean that it’s necessarily a bad political bet given the sick state of the base, in pretty much every sense.

‘We will find you’: Tennessee parents protest school mask mandate; people in masks heckled

‘We will find you’: Tennessee parents protest school mask mandate; people in masks heckled

'We will find you': Tennessee parents protest school mask mandate; people in masks heckled

Angry protests erupted in Franklin, Tennessee, after a school district reinstated a mask mandate for elementary school students, with some people yelling at and heckling those wearing masks in the parking lot at a meeting about the measure.

The Williamson County Board of Education approved the mandate Tuesday night in a special session. It will begin Thursday and run until at least Sept. 12, according to the district. People opposed to the mandate gathered outside the meeting, chanting, “We will not comply.”

In one video, a man screamed at a person wearing a mask on the way to a car, saying, “We know who you are.” The same man said later, “You’ll never be allowed in public again.”

Another man said, “You can leave freely, but we will find you.”

Carol Birdsong, executive director of communications for the school district, said in a statement Wednesday that while parents are passionate about their children’s education, “there’s no excuse for incivility.”

“Our families and staff represent a wide variety of thoughts and beliefs, and it is important in our district that all families and staff have the opportunity to be represented and respected,” the statement said.

Children have shown more symptoms with the delta variant of the coronavirus than with previous strains, and they have increasingly been hospitalized in recent weeks. Children’s hospitals in states that have high transmission rates have begun to battle bed shortages, NBC News reported Monday.

The Food and Drug Administration has issued emergency use authorizations for Covid-19 vaccines for adults and children over age 12, leaving younger children more vulnerable to infection. The FDA said last month that it hopes to offer authorization for children under 12 by early to midwinter.

The American Academy of Pediatrics and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended that all children wear masks when they return to school this year.

Community members were were given a minute apiece to speak during a public comment section at the beginning of Tuesday’s meeting in Franklin. Comments split between those who pushed for the mandate and others who opposed it.

Some parents, arguing that there is no legal authority for the district to implement masks, said it was a “parents’ rights” issue and threatened to sue.

“Parents should be allowed to choose what they want and how their children go to school,” said David Grimmett, who identified himself as a lawyer. “At the end of the day, I see these people with the masks. They believe it is best for their children. I believe it is not. I should be given the choice.”

Leigh-Allyn Baker, an actor who starred in the Disney Channel’s “Good Luck Charlie,” was at the meeting and advocated against the mask mandate. She said that her children would not be able to be vaccinated because of medical exceptions but that she still would not have them wear masks.

“Anyway, the real part of the clown show is that you all think that you actually have the authority to mandate this,” Baker said. “Because there are these books that I have, and I have them as a gift for you: the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights and the Federalist Papers. Also, the Bible. And these guarantee my freedom and yours and our children’s to breathe oxygen.”

Multiple medical professionals who are parents of school-age children advocated for the mandate and debunked several comments that masks were ineffective.

Britt Maxwell, who identified himself as a doctor at a local hospital, said he was fearful for his two children, who are too young to be vaccinated.

“I’m afraid for the choice that they can’t make, because the facts are clear. Kids are getting sick,” he said. “It’s happening now. Pediatric ICU and ERs across the country, across the South, are being stretched to capacity in Texas, Arkansas, Louisiana, Missouri. And it will happen here eventually. It’s a myth that kids can’t pass to other kids, because they can.”

Jennifer King, who identified herself as a pediatrician with two children who attend school in the county, implored the district to reimplement the mask mandate.

“As a pediatric ICU physician, we are seeing more younger, previously healthy children admitted with respiratory failure and acute respiratory distress syndrome,” King said. “This trend will only worsen if we don’t act now.”

Trump Attempted a Coup. Here’s Why That Still Matters

Trump Attempted a Coup. Here’s Why That Still Matters

 

The last couple of weeks have yielded a flood of insights about what, exactly, happened in the lead-up to the January 6 insurrection, and they paint a picture of a president who would do anything—*anything—*to stay in office. A lot of people had long suspected that Trump would use dubious means to remain in power, but there was no concrete proof of an attempted coup until now. This was not a coup like the one in Myanmar where the military seized the government, nor was this coup successful, because our democratic institutions held. But just because Trump’s attempt didn’t work this time doesn’t mean that it won’t work the next.

 

The story itself—like so many things in Trump world—is comically bad, like something out of VeepThe New York Times reported in January that Trump had tapped Jeffery Clark, the assistant attorney general for the environment and natural resources division of the Department of Justice (and acting head of the DOJ’s civil division), in the weeks prior to help him undermine the election results when then acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen wouldn’t.

A little background about Clark: He’s most famous for being one of the lawyers who defended BP after the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, an event that many have called the largest environmental catastrophe in American history. He’s also famous for saying that efforts to curb greenhouse gas emissions were “reminiscent of a Leninist program from the 1920s to seize control of the commanding heights of the economy.” Anyway, that guy was basically the engine of Trump’s attempts to overturn the election.

According to The New York Times, all of this started after Trump announced the resignation of Attorney General Bill Barr on December 14. The next day Trump called acting A.G. Rosen to the Oval Office, hoping to pressure the DOJ to back his supporters’ lawsuits to overturn his loss and “urged Mr. Rosen to appoint special counsels to investigate not only unfounded accusations of widespread voter fraud but also Dominion, the voting-machines firm.” Rosen wouldn’t do it, however, nor would Richard Donoghue, the deputy attorney general.

Yet Trump had a believer in Clark. In December, Clark gave Rosen and Donoghue the rather Trumpy line that he had “spent a lot of time reading on the internet—a comment that alarmed them because they inferred that he believed the unfounded conspiracy theory that Mr. Trump had won the election,” according to the Times.

Shortly after New Year’s, according to the Times, Clark told Rosen that “the president intended to replace him with Mr. Clark, who could then try to stop Congress from certifying the Electoral College results.” But that didn’t happen; according to Donoghue’s notes, Trump told Rosen to just “say that the election was corrupt + leave the rest to me and the R. Congressmen,” later adding, “You guys may not be following the internet the way I do.”

And then The New York Times reported last weekend that Rosen on Friday told the Justice Department watchdog and congressional investigators that Clark and Trump had “unauthorized conversations” about getting the DOJ to cast doubt publicly on Biden’s victory. The goal was to undermine the count in the battleground states—Trump’s obsession, the red-to-blue state of Georgia, among them. Clark drafted a letter that he wanted acting A.G. Rosen to send to Georgia state legislators, contending that they should void Biden’s victory because the DOJ was investigating voter fraud in the state (though they were not). But that plot didn’t work, either—Clark wasn’t able to get his way, Rosen and Donoghue stayed on, and Congress certified the election on the morning of January 7, despite the best efforts of Trump and many of his supporters in the Republican Party.

The coup didn’t happen, but now that we are learning the details, I’m a little surprised that there isn’t more outrage. Perhaps the problem is that a human being can only contain so much of it or that—from the vantage of the Biden era—it all seems like it happened such a long time ago. Either way, you should care that a coup almost happened in this country because democracy isn’t a given; much of the world struggles under leaders who don’t care about the will of the people. As Ben Franklin once famously said to a lady at the constitutional convention in 1787, America is only a republic “if you can keep it.”

Why should this failed coup matter to you? Because next time it may work. Because the Republican Party is already behaving like the election was stolen from Trump, when what actually happened is that Trump tried to steal the election. You should care about this failed coup because each and every attempt to undermine an election frays the fabric of democracy. (Maybe this one didn’t work, but coups aren’t generally a sign of a healthy, functioning state.) We need a narrative to fight the backslide into authoritarianism. We need reporting and clarity on just what happened between the election and January 6. Trump’s first attempted coup failed—but history is filled with failed coups that led to successful ones.

Evicted, Despite a Federal Moratorium: ‘I Do Not Know What I am Going to Do’

Evicted, Despite a Federal Moratorium: ‘I Do Not Know What I am Going to Do’

Vanessa Merryman stands for a portrait outside of the Las Vegas Justice Court in Las Vegas on Aug. 4, 2021, after finding out she would be evicted from her home. (Joe Buglewicz/The New York Times)
Vanessa Merryman stands for a portrait outside of the Las Vegas Justice Court in Las Vegas on Aug. 4, 2021, after finding out she would be evicted from her home. (Joe Buglewicz/The New York Times)

 

LAS VEGAS — Inside Courtroom 8A of Las Vegas Justice Court last week, the benches were packed with renters and landlords battling over evictions that continued at a brisk pace despite a last minute, two-month extension of the federal protections meant to keep people in their homes.

Vanessa Merryman, 41, was among the tenants ordered to leave her apartment.

“I have never been homeless in my life,” she said through tears, slouched on a metal bench outside the courtroom as the scorching Las Vegas sun beat through the windows. She was shell-shocked that the court session that upended her life lasted all of 15 minutes. “I do not know what I am going to do,” she said. “It is really scary.”

The federal moratorium on evictions — combined with billions of dollars in rent subsidies — was supposed to avert the scenario of millions of Americans being turned out of their homes after they lost their jobs during the pandemic and were unable to afford their rent.

Yet despite these efforts, many local governments and courts were not sure how to apply the extension, and desperate tenants continued to flood local government websites seeking rental assistance that was usually slow in coming.

“The lay of the land has been confusing at every level, not just to tenants, but also to landlords, court personnel and judges,” said Dana Karni, manager of the Eviction Right to Counsel Project in Houston. “While the extension of CDC protections is much needed, the confusion that surrounds its existence waters down its impact.”

In extending the moratorium last week, the Biden administration hinged it to high local coronavirus infection rates — the idea being that protection was warranted in areas where the virus was surging. Clark County, including Las Vegas, was among hundreds of counties that meet the criterion for high infection rates, but the guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention gave some leeway to judges to instead apply state laws, which at times allowed for evictions.

For many tenants, it was too late anyway. With state moratoriums expiring and the expectation that the federal guidelines would be gone soon, court dockets like those in Las Vegas overflowed with eviction cases. Tenants had to actively file for protection under the CDC measures, but many of them were unaware of that. And as eviction proceedings rolled forward, some landlords won, citing reasons other than nonpayment of rent for seeking to remove tenants.

More than 1.4 million Americans expect to be evicted in the next two months, according to a survey completed by the U.S. Census Bureau in early July. For another 2.2 million people, the prospect is “somewhat likely.”

The areas bracing for the hardest hits are in high-population, high-rent states such as California, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania and Texas, along with other states across the South including Florida, Georgia and South Carolina.

Organizations that advise low-income tenants from Atlanta to Houston to Las Vegas all said that they feared the fallout.

“The volume is unlike anything we have ever seen before,” said Bailey Bortolin, the statewide policy director for the Nevada Coalition of Legal Service Providers.

The moratorium is intended to help states buy time to distribute the aid. Congress allocated some $47 billion in rental assistance, but just $3 billion had been distributed by June, according to the Treasury Department. Many county governments, the branch usually designated to process applications, are straining to build systems from scratch to distribute the money even while the tempo of evictions increases.

Georgia has paid out just over $16 million from $989 million in federal rental assistance funds. Florida got $871 million, but has only disbursed $23.2 million.

In Clark County, home to most of Nevada’s population, the CARES Housing Assistance Program has distributed more than $162 million in rent, utilities and mortgage payments to more than 29,500 households since July 2020, but that is still less than half the state’s full allocation.

Around 50,000 people are behind on rent and could face eviction in Clark County, where the state moratorium expired on June 1, said Justin Jones, a county commissioner.

“It would be devastating if we have that number of people evicted from their homes in the near future,” he said. “The reality is that we do not have anywhere for them to go.”

Thousands of homeless people already crowd downtown Las Vegas and elsewhere in the county.

After the state moratorium expired, Nevada implemented a new law pausing evictions so long as the tenant had an application for rental assistance pending.

At the Las Vegas Justice Court, the largest of some 40 courts hearing eviction cases in Nevada, Hearing Master David F. Brown did not allow for much wriggle room. If tenants showed proof that they had applied for rental assistance, they could stay in their homes. If not, or if they had more than a year of late payments, the maximum amount covered by the assistance program, they were usually forced out. Nevada judges tended to emphasize state laws rather than the CDC guidelines.

Dejonae King, 33, held back tears after she lost her eviction appeal. King was laid off from Walgreens and has been without a job for most of the pandemic. She had not paid the $253 weekly rent on her one-bedroom apartment since July 2020.

“I thought the rules would protect me,” she said.

Merryman had managed to pay $10,000 in rent from government subsidies last year, but she lost her business and her boyfriend’s lengthy struggle with COVID interrupted her efforts to apply for more. It took her four months to reset her lost password for the website to apply for government payments.

Meanwhile, many landlords are caught in a vicious cycle, constantly in court but never quite made whole, said Susy Vasquez, executive director of the Nevada State Apartment Association, the largest organization for landlords.

Ron Scapellato, 54, a landlord in Clark County with 50 units and an air-conditioning business, said he soured on the moratorium after he watched some tenants spend their stimulus checks on new televisions rather than paying back rent. His mortgage and other bills continued to pile up, he said, so he went to court.

“I understand that they do not want to throw people out, but I also want my rent,” he said.

The extension still might face legal challenges. In June, the U.S. Supreme Court questioned whether the CDC had the authority to issue such a sweeping national mandate.

Because the federal moratorium technically lapsed for a few days, some landlords went ahead with evictions.

Hours before the reprieve from the White House, sheriff’s deputies arrived outside Hope Brasseaux’s house in Columbus, Georgia, to implement an eviction order issued a month earlier. Brasseaux, an unemployed waitress, received just 12 hour’s notice. She applied for assistance toward her $700 monthly rent in the spring, but the government portal shows her request as still under review.

“I wish it would have happened a day sooner,” she said of the two-month extension by the Biden administration.

In Nevada, evictions are designed to move faster than in most states, with renters in debt typically given seven days to pay what they owe or move out. Unique to the state, the onus is on the renter to initiate a court challenge, which can pause the process, but many residents do not know that.

Most evictions do not make it to court, Bortolin said. “When people hear the word moratorium they think they don’t have to act,” she said. “Thousands of people in Nevada alone were evicted because they thought they could not be.”

The strain of the pandemic has been especially hard on hourly workers in Las Vegas. Unemployment in Clark County hit a high of almost 370,000 in April 2020, more than 33%. It remains at almost 10%, according to state labor statistics.

After the casinos shuttered last year, Stephanie Pirrone, 52, said her husband’s Lyft customers disappeared, while she lost her job at an Amazon returns center.

She and her husband, angered that their landlord chipped away at their $15,000 government rental assistance with late fees and other fines, decided to fight their eviction, but many of their neighbors did not, she said. “People are scared so they just move out.”

Tawana Smith, who in April 2020 lost her $45,000-a-year job managing a convenience store, has returned to Las Vegas Justice Court three times since November to fight eight attempts at eviction.

The moratorium had blocked the first few attempted evictions, said Smith, whose five children range in age from 2 to 12.

But when the most recent notice appeared last week, she decided to relinquish the low, brown stucco house that her family has called home for almost two years, paying $1,400 in monthly rent.

The family tried unsuccessfully to raise the $5,000 needed to rent a different house by selling crafts and through a crowdfunding campaign. They now dread the next step, living in one hotel room, she said. Smith said she wanted to avoid getting the children settled in school and then pulling them out when one eviction notice or another eventually succeeded.

“We don’t want to fight anymore to stay here,” she said. “We want to put this madness behind us.”

Criminal Justice Prof Set Blazes Across NorCal as Dixie Fire Raged: Cops

Criminal Justice Prof Set Blazes Across NorCal as Dixie Fire Raged: Cops

Sonoma State University/Getty
Sonoma State University/Getty

 

A criminal justice professor allegedly went on an arson spree in Northern California along the edges of the gargantuan Dixie Fire in late July.

Gary Maynard, age 47, set a series of fires in Lassen National Forest and Shasta Trinity National Forest, an area in rural Northern California near where the Dixie Fire, the second-largest in state history, still burns, federal prosecutors allege. California Forestry Department agents arrested him Saturday. He is charged with intentionally setting fire to public land and is being held without bail in the Sacramento County Main Jail.

“There are simply no conditions that could be fashioned that could ensure the safety of the public with respect to this defendant,” a federal prosecutor told the presiding judge Tuesday, according to the Sacramento Bee.

Police described Maynard’s temperament as highly flammable.

He has denied the allegations against him. According to court filings, he screamed at police in the Lassen County Jail, “I’m going to kill you, f—king pig! I told those f—kers I didn’t start any of those fires!”

Maynard appears to have taught at Sonoma State and Santa Clara Universities, according to faculty pages at both colleges, which list a Dr. Gary Maynard as a lecturer in criminology. His research covers “criminal justice, social science research methods, cults and deviant behavior.” Maynard’s Sonoma State faculty page describes him as having three master’s degrees and a Ph.D. in sociology.

A spokesperson for Sonoma State told the Bee was a part-time lecturer in the Criminal Justice Department filling in for a faculty member on leave.

“He was employed with Sonoma State University in Fall 2020, but did not have an appointment for Spring 2021. He taught two seminars in Criminology and Criminal Justice Studies in Fall 2020,” she said.

Forest Service agents began looking into him on July 20, when an agent discovered him on Mount Shasta beneath his Kia Soul, the wheels of which were stuck in a ditch. The investigator had come to the area after mountain bikers reported a burgeoning fire. When the agent asked Maynard to come out from under the car and identify himself, the professor refused, only murmuring words the agent could not hear.

The agent eventually coaxed Maynard out from under the car and asked him about the fire, to which the professor said he did not know anything about any fires. Maynard asked for assistance towing his vehicle, and when the agent said he could not help, Maynard became “uncooperative and agitated” and crawled back underneath. A witness said they later saw Maynard brandishing a large knife.

Forest Service investigators said they found tracks similar to Maynard’s Kia near a fire that began overnight at a different location on Mount Shasta.

In the course of their investigation of Maynard, Forest Service investigators placed a tracker on the Kia. The tracker allegedly showed them that the academic traveled to the areas within Lassen National Forest where both the Ranch and Conard fires sparked Saturday night. Forest Service agents arrested Maynard later that day.

Court filings describe the professor’s behavior in blunt terms: “It appeared that Maynard was in the midst of an arson-setting spree.”

Maynard even allegedly attempted to trap firefighters between the fires he was setting and the boundaries of the Dixie Fire.

“He entered the evacuation zone and began setting fires behind the first responders fighting the Dixie Fire,” court filings read. “In addition to the danger of enlarging the Dixie fire and threatening more lives and property, this increased the danger to the first responders.”