US Senate unveils $118 billion bill on border security, aid for Ukraine, Israel

Reuters

US Senate unveils $118 billion bill on border security, aid for Ukraine, Israel

Richard Cowan and Costas Pitas – February 4, 2024

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. Senate on Sunday unveiled a $118 billion bipartisan border security bill that would also provide aid to Ukraine and Israel, but it promptly slammed into opposition from the House of Representatives.

“I urge Congress to come together and swiftly pass this bipartisan agreement,” President Joe Biden said, also praising the migration measures in the bill, which took months to negotiate.

However, House of Representatives Speaker Mike Johnson declared it “dead on arrival” if it reaches his chamber.

“This bill is even worse than we expected, and won’t come close to ending the border catastrophe the president has created,” he said in a statement on X, formerly called Twitter.

The Democratic and Republican Senate backers of the wide-ranging U.S. border security and foreign military aid bill pledged to push ahead, despite opposition by Donald Trump as well.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said he would take steps to hold an initial vote on the bill on Wednesday.

If the bill were to become law, it would mark the most significant changes in U.S. immigration and border security in decades.

Some progressive Democrats are angry the measure does nothing to provide a pathway to citizenship for the 11 million undocumented people who have lived in the U.S. for many years, including “Dreamer” immigrants who were brought in as children.

Independent Senator Kyrsten Sinema told reporters the legislation would secure the U.S. southern border, including by requiring the Department of Homeland Security to temporarily “shut down” the frontier to most migrants if there are an average of more than 5,000 crossing attempts per day over seven days.

Republican Senator James Lankford, one of the negotiators on the bill, said that the border likely would remain closed for at least three weeks as the numbers of arriving immigrants drop significantly.

In addition to $20.23 billion for border security, the bill included $60.06 billion to support Ukraine in its war with Russia, $14.1 billion in security assistance for Israel, $2.44 billion to U.S. Central Command and the conflict in the Red Sea, and $4.83 billion to support U.S. partners in the Indo-Pacific facing aggression from China, according to figures from Senator Patty Murray, who chairs the Senate’s Appropriation Committee.

An additional $10 billion would provide humanitarian assistance for civilians in conflict zones including in Ukraine, Gaza and the West Bank, although the bill includes a provision barring its funds from going to the U.N. agency for Palestinians, UNRWA. The Biden administration and other nations have paused funding to the agency over allegations that some of its staff were involved in Hamas’ Oct. 7 attacks in southern Israel.

“The priorities in this bill are too important to ignore and too vital to allow politics to get in the way,” Schumer said in a statement. “The United States and our allies are facing multiple, complex and, in places, coordinated challenges from adversaries who seek to disrupt democracy and expand authoritarian influence around the globe.”

The key overseas security provisions of the bill largely match what Biden requested from Congress in October, when he asked for additional funds for aid for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan.

That request has been stalled by House Republicans’ insistence that it be tied to a shift in immigration policy.

With House Republicans divided over how to address the huge number of immigrant arrivals and whether to provide Ukraine with any more aid, Johnson on Saturday said he plans to hold a vote this week on a new bill providing $17.6 billion in military assistance to Israel. That measure has no new funding for Ukraine or for U.S. border security.

Meantime, Lankford said he would engage with Johnson in hopes of more House support for the Senate bill.

Schumer said the agreement would provide more frontline personnel and asylum officers and provide “faster and fair” immigration decisions. Lankford told reporters it would fund as many as 50,000 immigrant detention beds, up from the current 34,000.

The bill’s proponents said it would end the controversial “catch-and-release” practice that critics said contribute to high numbers of illegal immigrants arriving at the southern border. It would do so by speeding up the adjudication of asylum cases instead of quickly releasing apprehended migrants and allowing them to stay in the United States for years while they await hearings.

Mitch McConnell, the top Senate Republican, has supported the negotiations, saying Republicans would not get a better deal under a Republican White House.

“The Senate must carefully consider the opportunity in front of us and prepare to act,” McConnell said in a statement.

Schumer said in a news conference that he had never worked so closely with long-term Senate colleague McConnell as on the bill.

“At many occasions we thought the negotiations had fallen apart,” Schumer said.

RIGHT-WING OPPOSITION

Nonetheless, right-wing Republicans are skeptical of the new Senate bill.

“Here’s what the people pushing this ‘deal’ aren’t telling you: It accepts 5,000 illegal immigrants a day and gives automatic work permits to asylum recipients — a magnet for more illegal immigration,” House Majority Leader Steve Scalise said on X.

Other congressional Republicans have said Biden can enact many of the changes they want to immigration policy through executive action, though they had previously called for legislative action.

Immigration is the second largest concern for Americans, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll published on Wednesday, and is a top issue for Republicans specifically. The U.S. Border Patrol arrested about 2 million migrants at the border in fiscal year 2023.

Trump, the frontrunner for the Republican nomination to challenge Biden in the November election, has campaigned heavily on opposition to immigration. House Republicans are also pushing ahead with an effort to impeach Biden’s top border official, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.

(Reporting by Richard Cowan and Costas Pitas; Additional reporting by Patricia Zengerle and Makini Brice; Writing by Simon Lewis; Editing by Scott Malone, Rosalba O’Brien, Lisa Shumaker and Himani Sarkar and Miral Fahmy)

Trump suggests he would consider a tariff upward of 60% on all Chinese imports if reelected

CNN

Trump suggests he would consider a tariff upward of 60% on all Chinese imports if reelected

Kate Sullivan, CNN – February 4, 2024

Elizabeth Frantz/Reuters

Former President Donald Trump said Sunday he would consider imposing a tariff upward of 60% on all Chinese imports if he regains the presidency. His remarks come at a time of high economic and other tensions between the US and China.

“No, I would say maybe it’s going to be more than that,” Trump said when asked by Fox News’ Maria Bartiromo on “Sunday Morning Futures” whether he would consider imposing a 60% tariff, as The Washington Post has reported.

As president, Trump slapped tariffs of 25% on $50 billion of Chinese goods in June 2018. Beijing countered with its own tariffs, and the spiral continued until the two countries arrived at an agreement in 2020. The Biden administration has largely kept the Trump-era tariffs in place.

The former president also said he thought China would try to interfere in the 2024 presidential election.

“I think they will, and they won’t be interfering on my behalf. We should go same-day voting, paper ballots, voter ID and no mail-in ballots,” Trump said.

Chinese leader Xi Jinping told President Joe Biden that China would not interfere in the 2024 US presidential election when the two men met in November, CNN has reported. But FBI Director Christopher Wray warned Wednesday that Chinese hackers are preparing to “wreak havoc and cause real-world harm” to the US.

Trump also praised Xi, whom he described as “a very good friend of mine during my term,” and said, “I want China to do great, I do.”

Trump would not say whether he would intervene if China tried taking over Taiwan, arguing that doing so would “jeopardize my negotiating ability with China.”

China’s ruling Communist Party views Taiwan as part of its territory, despite never having controlled it, and leader Xi has not ruled out the use of military force to “reunify” the island with the mainland.

The US, meanwhile, is obligated under the Taiwan Relations Act to provide Taiwan with the military means to defend itself, something Beijing regards as interference in its internal affairs.

CNN’s Jack Forrest and Brad Lendon contributed to this report.

MAGA would like Putin’s wannabe running America: Russia’s New Threats to Exiles: Seized Assets and Forced Returns

The New York Times

Russia’s New Threats to Exiles: Seized Assets and Forced Returns

Anton Troianovski – February 1, 2024

Fans watch as Bi-2, one of Russia’s most popular rock bands, performs at Chalet Berezka, a Russian restaurant and nightclub in Dubai, United Arab Emirates on March 1, 2023. (Andrea DiCenzo/The New York Times)
Fans watch as Bi-2, one of Russia’s most popular rock bands, performs at Chalet Berezka, a Russian restaurant and nightclub in Dubai, United Arab Emirates on March 1, 2023. (Andrea DiCenzo/The New York Times)

In Bangkok this week, members of an anti-war Russian-language rock group were fighting deportation to Russia, detained in what supporters described as a cramped, hot, 80-person immigration holding cell.

On Wednesday in Moscow, the lower house of Parliament passed a law that will allow the Russian government to seize the property of Russians living abroad who, in the words of the legislature’s chair, “besmirch our country.”

The two developments, though thousands of miles apart, reflected the same grim calculus by the Kremlin: Using new legislation and apparent diplomatic pressure on other countries, it is turning the screws on Russia’s sprawling anti-war diaspora.

“Historic Russia has risen up,” President Vladimir Putin said at a meeting with backers of his presidential campaign on Wednesday, reprising his contention that the time has come to cleanse Russian society of pro-Western elements. “All this scum that’s always present in any society is being slowly, slowly washed away.”

Under the law, any Russian, even those in exile, found to be engaged in “crimes against national security” — including criticizing the invasion of Ukraine — could have their assets confiscated. Putin is expected to sign the law, though it is not yet clear how widely or aggressively the Kremlin plans to use it.

But the law’s quick passage — it sailed through the rubber-stamp State Duma unanimously — is another signal that the Kremlin, having stamped out dissent at home, is increasingly turning its attention to criticism from abroad. Hundreds of thousands of Russians fled after the war began, including many celebrities who can still reach their fans through platforms like YouTube, which remains accessible inside Russia.

Among the first to feel this increasing pressure are popular performers who have drawn large audiences in places popular with Russian émigrés like Dubai, United Arab Emirates, and Southeast Asia. In recent weeks, Russian anti-war celebrities have accused Thailand and Indonesia of bending to Russian pressure to cancel their shows, while an anti-war rapper found himself banned from reentering the United Arab Emirates, his adopted home.

The most dramatic case unfolded after members of the rock group Bi-2, originally from Belarus and one of Russia’s most popular bands, were arrested in Thailand last week for an immigration violation. Their supporters said Russian officials spent days pushing Thailand to deport some of them to Russia, where the musicians could have faced prosecution for criticizing the war.

By Wednesday, the rockers had escaped that fate thanks to the intervention of Israeli and Australian diplomats, who arranged for all seven band members to be deported to Israel, according to the group’s lawyer, who requested anonymity for security reasons. (Four are citizens of Israel, and one of Australia.)

The extent of the Kremlin’s efforts to get the rockers sent to Russia was not clear, but on Tuesday, the group said in a statement that Thai authorities had canceled an earlier plan to deport some of them to Israel after Russian diplomats visited the immigration center where they were being held.

Analysts and human rights advocates consider the case a stark demonstration of the Kremlin’s increasingly aggressive efforts to punish Russians speaking out against Putin abroad — especially when they do so in non-Western countries that are interested in maintaining good relations with Moscow.

“This is a special operation,” said Dmitry Gudkov, an exiled Russian opposition politician who is close to Bi-2, referring to what he described as Russia’s efforts to get the band members sent to Russia. “Their task is to grab someone big outside the country to show that they can grab anyone, anywhere.”

The rock group’s brooding hits are part of the soundtrack of the early Putin era, and in later years the group was rubbing shoulders with the Russian elite at marquee events — performing, for example, at Putin’s annual economic conference in St. Petersburg in 2019. But by last year, Bi-2’s lead singer, Igor Bortnik, was writing that Putin’s Russia evoked “only disgust and squeamishness.”

Russia’s Foreign Ministry denied interfering in the Bi-2 case in Thailand, but it referred to the band members soon after their detention as “sponsors of terrorism.” A Russian lawmaker, Andrei Lugovoi, said the country was awaiting Bi-2’s deportation “with open arms” and predicted: “Soon they’ll be playing and singing on spoons and metal plates, tap dancing in front of their cellmates.”

(Lugovoi is no stranger to Russian intervention abroad, having been charged by Britain in 2007 with poisoning a Putin critic in London.)

Thailand, which has stuck to a largely neutral stance on the war in Ukraine and is a prime destination for Russian tourists, said it was following established procedure. Asked by a reporter on Wednesday about the potential deportation to Russia of Bi-2 band members, the country’s foreign minister, Parnpree Bahiddha-Nukara, said that if they are found to have “committed illegal acts,” then Thailand “has to follow the process.”

The band released a statement from its concert organizer, VPI Event, acknowledging that it had failed to obtain the right visas for the band’s Jan. 24 show on the Thai island of Phuket. But VPI asserted that Thai authorities’ decision to arrest the performers — rather than sanction the concert organizers — was unusually harsh.

“We are making every effort to free the performers, but we are facing unprecedented pressure at every stage,” the company’s statement said while the musicians were still behind bars, adding that shows in Thailand by two other Russian anti-war performers had been canceled in recent weeks. “The campaign to cancel concerts under pressure from the Russian Consulate began in December.”

Some pro-Kremlin figures have started praising Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs for getting more aggressive in putting pressure on anti-war Russians abroad.

“The MFA has really gotten to work in this regard,” Sergei Markov, a pro-Kremlin political analyst who appears frequently on Russian state television, said in a phone interview. Russian diplomats, he added, have been “actively informing” foreign governments in recent months about Russians who have “gone over to the enemy’s side.”

Alisher Morgenshtern, a rapper who had criticized the war and moved to Dubai, said last Friday that the United Arab Emirates had banned him from reentering the country. Ruslan Bely, an anti-war comedian, had two shows in Thailand canceled in January.

Another Russian comedian who opposes the war, Maksim Galkin, last week announced a show in Bali, Indonesia, days after Russian state media reported that his two planned shows in Thailand had been canceled.

But last weekend, Galkin told his 9 million Instagram followers that the Bali show, too, was canceled. Indonesian authorities, he wrote, had turned him away at the border and told him they were doing so at the request of the Russian government.

“It’s funny,” Galkin wrote, that the Russian state was expending so much effort on “the maniacal persecution of dissenting artists abroad.”

The head of the Bali regional office of Indonesia’s Ministry of Law and Human Rights, Romi Yudianto, said he was not familiar with Galkin’s case but that Indonesia “has its own sovereignty” and the right to reject unwanted visitors.

But Markov described the pressure on anti-war performers, as well as the new law allowing the confiscation of the property of Russians criticizing the war, as part and parcel of the same government effort.

“This is a message to those who are against Putin,” but aren’t sure how loudly to voice their disapproval, Markov said. It is a reminder to them, he said, that if they do speak up, even outside Russia, “don’t think that you’ll be fine.”

Putin’s official financial disclosure claims he earns just $175K a year and owns a couple of apartments and a parking spot

Business Insider

Putin’s official financial disclosure claims he earns just $175K a year and owns a couple of apartments and a parking spot

Mia Jankowicz – January 31, 2024

Why the Putin-Kim meeting has world leaders worried

  • Putin’s official financial disclosure is out, and it’s almost comically modest.
  • It says his assets include a couple of apartments, some old cars, a camping trailer, and a parking spot.
  • It makes no mention of the vast palaces and superyachts widely reported to be under his control.

President Vladimir Putin’s latest financial disclosure has been released, declaring a modest set of assets that almost certainly does not reflect his true financial position.

The disclosure is one of the formalities associated with registering as a presidential candidate, which Putin did on Monday, ahead of Russia’s March 17 elections.

According to the document, detailed by The Moscow Times, Putin’s assets are largely unchanged compared to his last disclosure in 2018, and include:

  • $753,000, representing six years of his official salary, pension, and other earnings;
  • $607,000 in savings across several bank accounts;
  • A 1,650-square-foot government-leased apartment in Moscow;
  • An 828-square-foot apartment in St Petersburg, with a 193-square-foot garage attached;
  • A St Petersburg parking space;
  • Two classic cars from the 1960s;
  • A 1987 camping trailer;
  • And a 2009 Lada Niva.

That’s far from the riches Putin is widely believed to command.

Putting a true figure on those is close to impossibleeven for wealth experts like those at Forbes.

Investigative reporting by groups such as the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, independent Russian outlet Proekt, and opposition campaigner Alexei Navalny have over the years pointed to vast sums and property portfolios whose likely ultimate controller is the Russian president.

Footage shows the main building of the Lake Valdai palace.
A photo shows the main building of the Lake Valdai palace.Navalny.com

The most widely-cited estimate is credited to financier and Kremlin critic Bill Browder, who suggested that Putin was worth about $200 billion — which in 2024 would place him as the third-richest person in the world, a few billion ahead of Jeff Bezos.

The latest financial disclosure makes no reference to the multiple palaces and superyachts said to be owned or controlled by Putin.

Secret Putin palace
Drone footage by the Dossier Center showing what is allegedly a luxurious home belonging to Russian President Vladimir Putin in Karelia, northern Russia.Dossier Center

There’s no mention of the secret bunker at his Black Sea palace, nor the highly-protected woodland palace on Lake Valdai, where his rumored girlfriend Alina Kabayeva is said to live.

As recently as this month, investigative outlet the Dossier Center also reported on a complex on Lake Karelia, near Finland’s border, said to belong to Putin.

It described the property as comprising “three modern-style houses, two helicopter pads, several yacht piers, a trout farm, and a farm with cows for the production of marble beef, as well as a personal waterfall.”

CIA chief says Russia’s failures in the Ukraine war have sealed its fate as ‘China’s economic vassal’

Business Insider

CIA chief says Russia’s failures in the Ukraine war have sealed its fate as ‘China’s economic vassal’

Kwan Wei Kevin Tan – January 31, 2024

CIA chief says Russia’s failures in the Ukraine war have sealed its fate as ‘China’s economic vassal’
  • The Russia-Ukraine war has dealt multiple setbacks to Vladimir Putin, the director of the CIA says.
  • William J. Burns said in an op-ed that the war had “proved foolish and illusory” for Putin.
  • The invasion, Burns said, had weakened Russia’s military and economy.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has crippled its economy and left it beholden to China, says William J. Burns, the director of the CIA.

“Russia’s economy is suffering long-term setbacks, and the country is sealing its fate as China’s economic vassal,” Burns wrote in an opinion article for Foreign Affairs on Tuesday.

Russia has been struggling under the West’s crippling economic sanctions ever since it invaded Ukraine in February 2022. But the ties between Russia and China have only deepened, with bilateral trade reaching a record $240 billion in 2023, Chinese customs data showed.

“Putin’s war has already been a failure for Russia on many levels,” Burns wrote in his article. “His original goal of seizing Kyiv and subjugating Ukraine proved foolish and illusory.”

The Ukraine war, he said, had dealt “immense damage” to Russia’s military.

“At least 315,000 Russian soldiers have been killed or wounded, two-thirds of Russia’s prewar tank inventory has been destroyed, and Putin’s vaunted decadeslong military modernization program has been hollowed out,” Burns wrote.

Russia’s military and economic setbacks have also seen it turn to countries such as North Korea and Iran for munitions.

“Putin’s overblown ambitions have backfired in another way, too: they have prompted NATO to grow larger and stronger,” Burns wrote.

The military alliance has seen its ranks grow in the past year, with Finland joining in April. Sweden’s application for NATO membership has received the endorsement of all members except Hungary.

Burns’ withering assessment of Putin and Russia was echoed by the UK defense secretary, Grant Shapps, earlier this month.

“The world has turned its back on Russia, forcing Putin into the humiliation of going cap in hand to North Korea to keep his illegal invasion going,” Grant Shapps wrote in an X post on January 5.

Representatives for Burns didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider sent outside regular business hours.

Abandoning Ukraine would be an ‘own goal’ for the US as the war hollows out the army Putin spent decades building, CIA chief says

Business Insider

Abandoning Ukraine would be an ‘own goal’ for the US as the war hollows out the army Putin spent decades building, CIA chief says

Chris Panella – January 31, 2024

Abandoning Ukraine would be an ‘own goal’ for the US as the war hollows out the army Putin spent decades building, CIA chief says. Ukrainian servicemen driving a T-72 tank on the frontline in eastern Ukraine in July 2022.MIGUEL MEDINA/AFP via Getty Images
  • If the US abandoned Ukraine and cut off crucial aid, it’d be an “own goal,” the CIA director said.
  • William J. Burns said the US supporting Ukraine was a modest investment with significant returns.
  • With aid tied up in Congress, the US and Ukraine’s next steps have critical implications.

Should the US walk away from the war in Ukraine and abandon it as it attempts to fend off the Russians, it would be an “own goal of historic proportions,” the CIA director said.

The warning comes as new, crucial aid is held up by Republicans in Congress. It’s a critical time for the US, which has contributed a significant amount of aid to Ukraine, to question its vested interests in seeing a stronger Ukraine and a weaker Russia.

In an opinion article published Tuesday in Foreign Affairs, William J. Burns, the director of the CIA, wrote that Putin‘s war had already severely impacted Russia in a variety of ways, such as isolating it globally and damaging its military and economy. He added that Putin’s efforts to modernize the Russian military had suffered as a result of this devastating, high-casualty conflict.

“At least 315,000 Russian soldiers have been killed or wounded, two-thirds of Russia’s prewar tank inventory has been destroyed, and Putin’s vaunted decades-long military modernization program has been hollowed out,” Burns wrote. “All this is a direct result of Ukrainian soldiers’ valor and skill, backed up by Western support.”

The war isn’t over, though. Russia is launching offensives on multiple fronts, and despite losses, the operations continue. Russia’s defense industry is on a war footing, and support from pariah states such as North Korea and Iran is fueling its war efforts. Ukraine is holding the line, but its defense is strained by shortages in ammunition and other supplies. Putin appears to be gearing up for a longer war that will require Ukraine to receive committed and stable support from the West if it’s going to survive the fight.

Burns said there were many benefits for the US to continue supporting Ukraine, a “relatively modest investment with significant geopolitical returns.”

Among other benefits, he said that with more ammunition and weapons aid, which translates to a greater ability to resist, Ukraine would be in a stronger position should it opt to negotiate a deal with Russia.

“It offers a chance to ensure a long-term win for Ukraine and a strategic loss for Russia; Ukraine could safeguard its sovereignty and rebuild, while Russia would be left to deal with the enduring costs of Putin’s folly,” Burns wrote.

A handout image shows President Vladimir Putin, sitting and gesturing with one hand and sitting in front of a blue stylised world map as he takies part in an annual televised phone-in with the country's citizens dubbed "Direct Line with Vladimir Putin"  on June 30, 2021.
Russian President Vladimir Putin.Anadolu/handout via Getty Images

A weakened Russia licking its wounds for years to come may offer some sense of peace to NATO members and other nations concerned about an increasingly aggressive Putin invading them. And the US would be able to shift its focus to tensions elsewhere, such as the Taiwan Strait.

There’s no guarantee, but Burns presented a bleaker alternative.

“For the United States to walk away from the conflict at this crucial moment and cut off support to Ukraine would be an own goal of historic proportions,” Burns wrote; effectively, it would allow Russia to achieve its goal of conquering Ukraine or forcing it into an unfavorable peace deal, leaving Putin emboldened and more aggressive.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has warned about that exact scenario previously, including to US lawmakers back in December. During a visit to Washington, DC, the Ukrainian leader pleaded for more US aid and explained that if Russia took Ukraine, Putin wouldn’t stop there.

Such aggression would draw the US into a much larger, costlier war than the one it’s supporting in Ukraine right now, experts and analysts have argued. But aid is still held up in Congress.

The latest aid package to Ukraine has been on hold since October, when Republicans blocked it, along with assistance to Israel.

Since December, Republicans and Democrats have been working on a bipartisan bill that includes the $111 billion aid package for both nations, as well as stricter border security and immigration measures. But it remains unclear whether such a deal will have enough support, particularly from former President Donald Trump’s allies, to pass.

Why Republicans are trying to impeach Biden’s top immigration official

The Washington Post

By Amber Phillips – January 31, 2024 

Instead of passing a law with President Biden to crack down on illegal crossings of the U.S.-Mexico border, Republicans in Congress are moving quickly to impeach the Cabinet official who oversees it.

This is a highly political act that won’t help the border crisis, and even some conservative legal scholars and Republican senators are skeptical of doing this. Here’s what’s going on and how it’s tied to the broader immigration battle that is dominating U.S. politics right now.

Why so many migrants are coming: More than 6 million migrants have come to the border under the Biden administration; 2.3 million have been released into the country. There’s a debate about whether it’s in reaction to economic forces outside of politicians’ control, or whether migrants are reacting to having a more lenient president in office.

As the U.S. economy recovers more quickly than most nations after the pandemic, there’s a huge labor demand in the United States right now.

But fairly or not, migrants across the globe have also perceived Biden as more willing to let people in than President Donald Trump was.
Those who are desperate enough to leave their homes probably won’t be deterred by policy changes in Washington, argues Cris Ramón, a senior adviser on immigration for UnidosUS, a Hispanic civil rights group.
“Once someone makes it across the border, if they’re not expelled … there is a pretty good chance they will be able to stay in the United States at least for several years,” immigration analyst Jessica Bolter said in an interview last year.

What Biden has done at the border: In many significant ways, the president has softened Trump’s immigration and border policies. His administration has cut way back on deporting people who are already in the country illegally, and created more legal pathways for them. Biden also stopped building the wall Trump started, stopped detaining families at the border and stopped deporting minors.

But Biden has also been somewhat Trump-like recently in his approach to migrants. He said the border is not secure, and he is being sued by immigration rights groups for making it harder for people to apply for asylum.

Why Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas is on his way to getting impeached: Republicans say he lied to Congress or has mishandled the border crisis. But the reality is that they disagree with the president’s border policies, and Mayorkas is the guy carrying them out.
Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas in November on Capitol Hill. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)
Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas in November on Capitol Hill. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)
Congress has the power to impeach presidents, judges and Cabinet officials. But Cabinet officials are rarely impeached because they are often just implementing the president’s policies. “I think it’s the first time an impeachment drive over policy disagreements has gotten this far,” said Josh Chafetz, a constitutional law expert at Georgetown University.

Having committed “high crimes and misdemeanors” is the bar for impeachment of a federal official. By the assessment of even top conservative legal experts, Republicans have not met that threshold. “Bad policy is not a high crime,” writes conservative legal scholar Jonathan Turley.

Politics is playing a huge role: It’s good politics right now for any politician to sound tough about the border. Really tough. Trump is on his way to winning the Republican nomination by demonizing immigrants, saying they are “poisoning the blood of our country.”Biden campaigned four years ago on a more humane approach to the border. But as border crossings surge to record highs, he says the government should be able to block migrants from entering if the border becomes “overwhelmed” — which is what a bipartisan bill being negotiated in the Senate right now would do.“If given that authority, I would use it the day I sign the bill into law,” Biden said last week.

Why Biden says the border is a problem: Biden and Republicans say the huge rush of migrants has opened up the border to dangerous people sneaking through — although Trump takes much more liberty by categorizing all border crossers as dangerous. Most are people escaping danger and economic hardship back home. And the vast majority of convicted fentanyl traffickers have been U.S. citizens, said Alex Nowrasteh, an immigration analyst with the libertarian-leaning Cato Institute.

The real-world impact of impeaching Mayorkas is minimal: House Republicans will vote next week to impeach him. But he’ll still get to keep his job. The Democratic-controlled Senate is highly unlikely to convict him.But through all of this, Republicans are weaponizing immigration to break the norms of democracy. They are voting to impeach Mayorkas over policy disagreements rather than actual “high crimes and misdemeanors.”It raises the question of what’s to come next in this increasingly heated election-year battle over immigration.

Ukraine Needs American Weapons, Not More GOP Drama

The Atlantic Daily

Ukraine Needs American Weapons, Not More GOP Drama

The GOP’s moral collapse threatens global security.

By Tom Nichols – January 31, 2024 

A Ukrainian soldier stands in a doorway
Anadolu / Getty

Republicans need to recover their senses about the dire moral and strategic tests Ukraine and the West face in Europe.


A Test of Will and Commitment

Wars test people and weapons on a battlefield, but eventual victory rests on much more than combat. Wars also stress-test political institutions, ideas, and the courage of entire societies. At this moment, the United States is on the verge of failing a challenge of will and commitment, much to the delight of the neo-fascist Russian regime that has turned Ukraine’s fields and homes into an immense abattoir. President Joe Biden, most of NATO, and many other nations recognize the crisis, but the world could face a Russian victory—and an eventual escalation of Russian aggression against Europe—solely because of the ongoing drama and inane bickering within the Republican Party.

The GOP, the party of Dwight Eisenhower and Ronald Reagan, once supported the bipartisan American understanding that U.S. leadership in the world was both a strategic and a moral imperative, especially in the great struggle with the Soviet Union. Reagan, however, supercharged the idea of the Cold War as a moral crusade. When he talked about the need for the West to oppose an “evil empire,” he meant it—and as we found out years later, his words stung Soviet leaders. As one adviser to Mikhail Gorbachev later admitted, Reagan’s rhetorical attack did not change much at the very top in the Kremlin, but for many of the people who worked in Soviet foreign-policy circles, “this term and this propaganda was perceived as punishment for what we did in Afghanistan. In other words, we felt that we deserved it.”

Soviet leaders deserved it then and Russian leaders deserve it now. Reagan’s detractors will point to his policies in Central America and elsewhere as examples of what can happen when righteous fixation on noble ends leads to the justification of bloody and repulsive means. But Reagan—like Jimmy Carter before him—was right to view opposition to the Kremlin as both strategically necessary and morally justas it is again today. Biden’s policy of steadfast support for Ukraine wisely continues that tradition.

(One of Carter’s speechwriters told me years ago that, as you might expect, Carter never liked being compared to Reagan. But Carter’s national security adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, was as much a Cold War hawk as almost anyone in the Reagan administration, and Carter infuriated the Soviets so badly that by 1980 the Kremlin, according to the former Soviet Ambassador Anatoly Dobrynin, was rooting for Reagan to win because it thought Carter and Brzezinski were so dangerously bellicose.)

Reagan understood the Cold War as a moral issue, but today’s GOP is incapable of understanding anything as a moral issue. Indeed, the Republican Party is defined now almost entirely by its dedication to a cult of personality, the relentless quest for raw power, and the ongoing effort to institutionalize minority rule. It functions not as a political party but as an amoral claque whose members are dedicated only to their mutual protection.

Ukraine, of course, is an object of special hostility for Republicans because that besieged nation is inextricably bound up in Trump’s first impeachment. Some in the GOP also admire Russian President Vladimir Putin; Trump speaks of the Kremlin dictator in terms that would have made Reagan furious and disgusted. But nothing, it seems, can get through the Republican deflector shields powered by two of the strongest forces in the world: resentment and self-interest.

Money to help Ukraine is, for now, still tied to legislation regarding the situation on the U.S. southern border, but Biden has already surrendered on that issue: He said on Saturday that, if Congress sent him the bill that Republicans have been working on, “I’d shut down the border right now and fix it quickly.” (He is also cleverly using his legal authority to send surplus American weapons to allies—in this case, Greece—who can use these surplus U.S. arms to replenish their stocks while they send their older weapons to Ukraine.) But Republicans aren’t interested in fixing the border or helping Ukraine—not if any of it helps Joe Biden, a detestable position that abandons millions of people to slaughter under Russian guns simply for the sake of good press from the GOP’s infotainment system.

To their credit, some Republicans are trying to do the right thing. I was critical of Oklahoma Senator James Lankford on Monday for answering a question about Trump’s fitness to be president with a mouthful of mush that was, if I may paraphrase a Bible verse I’m sure the senator knows well, neither hot nor cold but lukewarm. But when it comes to the border and Ukraine, Lankford (along with some of his Senate GOP colleagues) is on the right side of both policy and history.

What, however, does a GOP senator gain by being on the right side of anything? In Lankford’s case, it earned him censure from his own state’s Republican Party. For others, it means facing an electorate that is now being flooded with news about Deep State Agent Taylor Swift instead of whether America and Europe can hold back a savage—and nuclear-armed—enemy.

The Republicans now wallowing in conspiracy weirdness and jumping at Trump’s commands are risking a mistake, in the words of CIA Director William Burns, “of historic proportions.” As the GOP plays games, the Russians continue blowing apart homes and shredding human beings, including their own hapless conscripts. The killing goes on every day, driven by a cruel and petty paranoid in Moscow and supported by a coterie of cowards who issue unhinged threats from behind the safety of the Kremlin’s walls.

Changes are afoot in the Ukrainian high command; The Washington Post reported today that the top Ukrainian commander, General Valery Zaluzhny, is about to be replaced because of his ongoing disagreements with President Volodymyr Zelensky about strategy, mobilization, and other issues. Such moments, as retired Australian Major General Mick Ryan explained in a cogent thread on X yesterday, are a normal part of the civil-military tensions that inevitably arise in wartime.

Some Republicans, driven by their hatred of Zelensky, will no doubt seize on any news from Kyiv as an excuse to hold back aid, but the Ukrainians don’t need more drama from the self-absorbed GOP. They need brave and clear-eyed friends in the West who understand what is at stake, both for the security of the world and the defense of freedom. They need more than our good wishes: They need ammunition, and they need it now.

Related:

CIA director: Not passing Ukraine aid would be a mistake ‘of historic proportions’

Politico

CIA director: Not passing Ukraine aid would be a mistake ‘of historic proportions’

Matt Berg – January 30, 2024

Amanda Andrade-Rhoades/AP

Western allies must continue providing assistance to Ukraine in its war with Russia this year, or risk a mistake “of historic proportions,” CIA Director William Burns wrote in a column published Tuesday.

Burns laid out his case in a Foreign Affairs column, noting that less than 5 percent of the U.S. defense budget — “a relatively modest investment with significant geopolitical returns” — is all that Washington sends to Kyiv.

If an opportunity for serious negotiations to end the war emerges, he wrote, providing arms to Ukraine will put it in a stronger bargaining position. Ukraine’s military would also be able to continue fending off Russian troops while rebuilding its infrastructure, while Moscow spends massive amounts of money to keep the war going, Burns added.

“For the United States to walk away from the conflict at this crucial moment and cut off support to Ukraine would be an own goal of historic proportions,” Burns wrote, referencing a soccer term for scoring a goal for the rival team by putting the ball into a player’s own net.

Burns is the latest top U.S. official to publicly make the case for greenlighting assistance to Ukraine, as lawmakers battle over a southern border deal that’s holding up $60 billion in aid to Ukraine. The Biden administration has been urging lawmakers to push a deal through, but there’s no clear indication when lawmakers might strike a deal.

The director’s column also comes after he secretly visited Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Kyiv earlier this month, briefing him on his expectations for what Russia is planning in the near future, The Washington Post reported.

Waterfall, trout and marble beef farms: Media reveals Putin’s luxurious residence in Karelia – Video

The New Voice of Ukraine

Waterfall, trout and marble beef farms: Media reveals Putin’s luxurious residence in Karelia – Video

The New Voice of Ukraine – January 29, 2024

During Putin's visits, the object is covered by air defense equipment
During Putin’s visits, the object is covered by air defense equipment

Highlighting the hypocrisy of Russian dictator Vladimir Putin, who urges Russian citizens to “fight” to avoid poverty, journalists have released a video showing his luxurious residence near Lake Ladoga in Karelia.

Read also: Utility crisis being key concern for Putin ahead of presidential election

The media learned about the existence of the complex back in 2016, but few people had ever seen it up close.

<span class="copyright">Screenshot of the Dossier Center video</span>
Screenshot of the Dossier Center video

The most detailed video of Putin’s “possessions” near Maryalakhta Bay was released by the Dossier Center, which is linked to an exiled Russian businessman and opposition activist Mikhail Khodorkovsky.

It shows that the head of the Kremlin regime, whom Russian propaganda portrays as “ascetic” and “silver-less,” ordered the construction of three modern-style mansions on the shore, two helicopter landing pads, several yacht docks, and even a special elevation for the air defense system.

<span class="copyright">Screenshot of the Dossier Center video</span>
Screenshot of the Dossier Center video
<span class="copyright">Screenshot of the Dossier Center video</span>
Screenshot of the Dossier Center video
<span class="copyright">Screenshot of the Dossier Center video</span>
Screenshot of the Dossier Center video

“The Barn looks more like a reception house. Inside there is a living room and its own brewery. On the second floor there is a tea room… The interior is decorated with precious stones. Nearby, there is a water bath and a secluded gazebo with a breathtaking view of the lake,” the investigators said.

The residence also has a trout farm and a farm with cows for the production of marble beef.

Another feature of the property is a four-meter waterfall.

<span class="copyright">Screenshot of the Dossier Center video</span>
Screenshot of the Dossier Center video

“It is supposed to be part of the national park, but access to it is restricted. There is a fence, barbed wire and round-the-clock security. And in front of it is a gazebo for the only person who can steal the waterfall. For the president of Russia,” the Dossier Center journalists wrote.