“The U.S. deployment may have been prompted by sudden, unexpected weaknesses in the famous Iron Dome and other Israeli air defense systems. Israeli authorities have heavily censored the aftermath of Iran’s October 1 missile strike, arresting an American journalist who reported on impact sites. And the Lebanese militia Hezbollah has been increasingly able to penetrate Israeli defenses. On Sunday, shortly after the U.S. announced the THAAD deployment, a Hezbollah drone penetrated a military base deep inside of Israel, killing four Israeli troops.
But direct U.S. involvement has also been a long time in the making. After Hamas’ October 2023 attack on Israel, the Biden administration sent two aircraft carriers to the region—an implicit threat to attack anyone who joined in the war. Soon after, American troops deployed to Israel as part of an intelligence sharing mission. In May 2024, the U.S. military landed in Gaza to deliver food to Palestinians under Israeli supervision. That same month, the Biden administration drew up plans for a new Palestinian government run by an American “director-general.”
The direct Iranian-Israeli combat began in April, when Israel bombed the Iranian consulate in Syria, which the Israeli army claimed was being used for threatening military purposes. Two weeks later, Iran fired a barrage of missiles and drones at Israel, and the U.S. military shot down many of the Iranian projectiles outside Israeli airspace. Last month, Israel killed an Iranian general in Lebanon, and Iran again fired missiles at Israeli military bases on October 1. Israel is now planning a much bigger retaliation inside Iran.”
“The challenge is that permitting is an expensive, tedious, and time-consuming process, sometimes stretching decades. Developers often find there’s a lack of accountability between the local, state, and federal authorities that have a say in granting approval for things like wind energy farms or interstate power transmission lines.
The current system puts a lot of project developers in a frustrating limbo — not a “no,” not a “yes,” but a “maybe, we’ll see” that can stretch indefinitely.
This uncertainty makes it harder for companies to make a business case and often leads to proposals falling apart. The net result is that few things get built at all. In the past decade, the United States has built transmission lines at half the rate as in the 30 years prior. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law included $7.5 billion to build thousands of electric vehicle charging stations, yet only a handful are operating. The American Clean Power Association, an industry group, reports that permitting delays have cost the US economy more than $100 billion in lost investment. Earlier this year, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory surveyed wind and solar power developers and found that one-third of permit applications for placing wind turbines and solar panels in the ground were canceled over the past five years.
These false starts cost businesses a lot of money: The average sunk cost was more than $2 million on average for a canceled solar project and $7.5 million for a scrapped wind farm. The main causes cited for these axed proposals were difficulties in getting approvals from zoning boards, in connecting to the power grid, and opposition from local communities — all issues that inhibit permitting.”
…
“That brings us to permitting reform. The idea is to change the existing system of rules — smoothing out the application process, setting tighter deadlines, reducing veto points — to get a verdict on projects faster.”
“The Biden administration did pressure Meta, as well as its competitors, to crack down on Covid-19 misinformation throughout the pandemic. In 2021, Surgeon General Vivek Murthy called it “an urgent threat,” and Biden himself said that misinformation was “killing people,” a statement he later walked back. This pressure was also at the center of a recent Supreme Court case, in which justices ruled in favor of the Biden administration.
We also knew that Meta, then known simply as Facebook, pushed back at efforts to stop the spread of misinformation on its platforms. Not long after Biden’s “killing people” remark, leaked company documents revealed that Facebook knew that vaccine misinformation on its platforms was undermining its own goal of protecting the vaccine rollout and was causing harm. It even studied the broader problem and produced several internal reports on the spread of misinformation, but despite pressure from Congress, Facebook failed to share that research with lawmakers at the time.
We actually learned about the specific kind of pressure the White House put on Facebook a year ago, thanks to documents the company turned over to, you guessed it, Jim Jordan and the House Judiciary Committee.
The Biden administration issued a statement after Zuckerberg’s latest letter became public. It said, in part, “Our position has been clear and consistent: We believe tech companies and other private actors should take into account the effects their actions have on the American people, while making independent choices about the information they present.”
But the Zuckerberg letter didn’t stop with details of the well-known crackdown on Covid misinformation. It also reminds the public of the time, ahead of the 2020 election, the FBI warned social media companies that a New York Post article about Hunter Biden’s laptop could be part of a Russian disinformation campaign. Without mentioning any direct pressure from the government, Zuckerberg says in the letter that his company demoted the laptop story while it conducted a fact-check. He told podcaster Joe Rogan something similar in a 2022 interview, when he mentioned that an FBI disinformation warning contributed to the decision to suppress the story. Twitter also suppressed the laptop story, and its executives denied that there was pressure from Democrats or law enforcement to do so.
Zuckerberg also addresses some donations he made to voting access efforts in the 2020 election through his family’s philanthropic foundation. “My goal is to be neutral and not play a role one way or another — or to even appear to be playing a role,” the billionaire said. “So I don’t plan on making a similar contribution this cycle.” The House Judiciary Committee responded in a tweet, “Mark Zuckerberg also tells the Judiciary Committee that he won’t spend money this election cycle. That’s right, no more Zuck-bucks.” Neither party mentioned that Zuckerberg also declined to make a contribution in the 2022 cycle for the same reasons.
The right is taking a victory lap over this Zuckerberg letter. Others are simply wondering why on earth, on an otherwise quiet week in August, did Zuckerberg even bother to remind us of all of these familiar facts?
“this doesn’t necessarily mean the parties are back to being Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson. “There are some strengths and some weaknesses,” she said. For example, the formal rules and structures of the parties are still weak; Democrats had to rely on informal levers of power to oust Biden from the race. All the coordination in the world couldn’t have forced Biden to withdraw without his acquiescence.
And those informal levers only work when elites are united behind a singular goal.”
“House Republicans are all but officially giving up on trying to impeach Joe Biden.
GOP lawmakers on the Judiciary, Oversight and Ways and Means committees released a nearly 300-page report on Monday detailing the findings of their impeachment inquiry, accusing Biden of engaging in “impeachable conduct.” The Republicans said they’re still investigating, but even they didn’t directly call for an impeachment vote, leaving that up to the wider GOP Conference.”
…
“House Republicans have spent months on their investigation, which has largely focused on the business deals of Biden’s family members. A hefty chunk of their report on Monday delves deeply into the financial affairs of Hunter and James Biden, including their business ventures and loans the two received. While the report notes the inquiry remains open, both Comer and Jordan have said their investigations are largely over, though a handful of legal battles remain.
Republicans say they traced $27 million to the Biden family and their associates from foreign entities, and allege that they would not have received the funding had Joe Biden not been in office. They also uncovered examples of Hunter and James Biden leaning on their last name, and their connections to Joe Biden, to bolster their own influence.
But investigators struggled to find clear evidence that shows a direct link between actions Biden took as president or vice president and those business deals or that Biden committed a crime.
Some former business associates told investigators that Hunter Biden would put his father on speakerphone during meetings with potential business partners, though they said the conversation was limited to pleasantries. In other instances, witnesses recalled Joe Biden stopping by dinners or lunches — but that business wasn’t discussed at those moments. Hunter and James Biden have both denied that Joe Biden has been involved in their business deals — a denial repeatedly echoed by the White House.
In their report, GOP investigators argued they didn’t need to show evidence of a crime or a quid pro quo — but that’s exactly what some of their colleagues said they needed to see in order to approve a Biden impeachment. And Democrats quickly claimed victory on Monday, arguing that the report effectively cleared Joe Biden’s name.”
“Nancy Pelosi didn’t want President Joe Biden to step down, the former speaker told ABC News Monday morning. What she wanted, she explained, was “a campaign that would win.”
The California Democrat was instrumental in the behind-the-scenes pressure campaign within her party pushing Biden to end his campaign last month, though she has denied in recent days calling members as the list of Democratic defectors grew.”
“If you go to Tijuana, right up to the border wall, you can see a deportation in its final throes. At the edge of a Mexican freeway that runs along the border, there’s a nondescript metal door. On any given morning, a Mexican official will open the padlock on the Mexican side and an American immigration agent will open the padlock on the U.S. side. Then, dozens—sometimes hundreds — of people get pushed back into Mexico. Some wander to shelters; others end up camping just outside the door, as if staying close by might improve their chances of getting back in. That deportation door got plenty of use under Donald Trump. But perhaps no president has used it more than Joe Biden.
You wouldn’t have guessed that watching Trump’s 92-minute speech at the Republican National Convention earlier this month, where Trump brutalized the Biden-Harris administration over Biden’s immigration record, accusing the president of throwing the border open.”
…
” Most Americans don’t understand how many people the Biden-Harris administration has removed from the country, and that’s allowed Trump to repeatedly — almost gleefully — claim he’ll deport “millions” of people every year if he takes back the White House, something he says Biden is too feckless to do. It plays into his narrative that Biden is decrepit. If deportations are a gas pedal, Trump has portrayed Biden as a lethargic octogenarian, too impaired to drive over 10 mph. In reality, Biden has that gas pedal pushed almost all the way to the floor. Under Biden, migrants have been removed from the U.S. at a blistering pace, pushing the country’s deportation infrastructure to its limit. And it’s not clear how Trump could top him if he takes back the White House next year.
Biden’s migrant removals started as soon as he took office. In the spring of 2021, deep in the depths of the Covid-19 pandemic, I was in a camp in Tijuana, where some migrants were so hopeful the new president would let them in that they flew “BIDEN FOR PRESIDENT” flags outside their tents. But most of them who crossed got a slap from reality: They were quickly frog-marched by U.S. Border Patrol back through the deportation doorway, back to the squalid camps in cartel turf. Others got rapidly loaded onto ICE planes and flown back to Haiti, Guatemala, El Salvador, wherever. As the number of people crossing the border grew during Biden’s first two years in office, these expulsions reached a scorching pace. ICE charter flights bounced around the globe like Taylor Swift’s jet. According to data collected by Tom Cartwright, a researcher with the advocacy group Witness at the Border, there were more ICE flights in the air during the early Biden years than ever before.
Biden’s expulsion regime was made possible by the most radical shift in immigration policy of the last 50 years: Title 42. When Biden took office, he undid dozens of Trump’s immigration policies, but he kept in place Trump’s most consequential ban, the public health statute Title 42. Using the pandemic as pretext, Title 42 gave the president the power to rapidly expel migrants without the normal court process. During just his first two years in office, Biden used it to kick out over 2.8 million migrants. That’s a stunning number. In Trump’s entire time in the White House, his administration removed only 2 million people total.
There’s an important caveat here. Even though millions of migrants got expelled during Biden’s first years in office, the number of deportations actually shrunk. Though they’re both a form of removal, expulsion and deportations are different: Title 42 expulsions were a brand new phenomenon. They could happen rapidly, without a trial, and the subject was almost always arrested near the border. Deportations, on the other hand, only come after an immigration judge officially orders someone removed, and they often involve people arrested in the interior. During Biden’s first two years in office, Immigration and Customs Enforcement deported under 200,000 people total — less than any single year during the Trump era.
You might think that’s because Biden didn’t want to deport people. His administration may have been comfortable kicking out migrants who just arrived, but deporting immigrants who have been here a long time is, of course, a different story. That hesitation was likely part of the reason deportations shrunk during the early Biden years. But there’s another reason: ICE — along with all the country’s deportation infrastructure — had been surged to the border. To handle the huge number of new arrivals, the administration sent ICE agents to assist Border Patrol, and that took government workers away from arresting people in the interior. Meanwhile, ICE Air flights were filled to the brim with recent border crossers; they literally didn’t have room for other deportees.
As soon as Title 42 ended in May 2023, deportations immediately skyrocketed to historic numbers. According to data analysis from the Migration Policy Institute, a nonpartisan think tank, Biden “removed or returned” 775,000 unauthorized immigrants from May 2023 to May 2024. That’s more than any previous year since 2010. (For comparison, Trump’s record for removals in one year maxed out at under 612,000 — and that was with Title 42 in place.)
Maybe, if he takes office next year, Trump will be able to get a bit more juice out of the deportation system and get his numbers higher. However, there are indications that the country’s deportation system is at its redline. With the current manpower and equipment, it just might not be possible to deport that many more people.”
“Immigrants, including those living in the U.S. illegally, can get a green card if they marry an American citizen. But U.S. law generally requires those who entered the U.S. illegally to leave the country and re-enter legally to be eligible for a green card. Doing so, however, can trigger a 3- or 10-year ban from the U.S., prompting many mixed-status families not to pursue that option.
While the Biden administration has argued its initiative promotes family unity in households that include U.S. citizens, Texas and the other Republican-controlled states said in a lawsuit filed Friday that the policy rewards illegal immigration. The red states, which have challenged nearly every major Biden administration immigration move, said the policy misused the immigration parole authority.
On Monday, Barker, the federal judge in Texas appointed by former President Donald Trump, issued an administrative order prohibiting the Department of Homeland Security from granting parole to those applying for the Keeping Families Together policy.”