REUTERS
"Exclusive: U.S. readies new $1 billion Ukraine weapons package"
By Idrees Ali and Mike Stone
August 5, 2022
WASHINGTON, Aug 5 (Reuters) - The Biden administration's next security assistance package for Ukraine is expected to be $1 billion, one of the largest so far, and include munitions for long-range weapons and armored medical transport vehicles, three sources briefed on the matter told Reuters on Friday.
The package is expected to be announced as early as Monday and would add to about $8.8 billion in aid the United States has given Ukraine since Russia's invasion on Feb. 24.
The officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said that President Joe Biden had not yet signed the next weapons package.
They cautioned that weapons packages can change in value and content before they are signed.
However, if signed in its current form, it would be valued at $1 billion and include munitions for HIMARS, NASAMS surface-to-air missile system ammunition and as many as 50 M113 armored medical transports.
The new package follows a recent Pentagon decision to allow Ukrainians to receive medical treatment at a U.S. military hospital in Germany near Ramstein air base.
Last Monday, the Pentagon announced a separate security assistance package for Ukraine valued at up to $550 million, including additional ammunition for High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS).
The White House declined to comment on the package.
The new package would be funded under the Presidential Drawdown Authority (PDA), in which the president can authorize the transfer of articles and services from U.S. stocks without congressional approval in response to an emergency.
HIMARS play a key role in the artillery duel between Ukraine and Russia has been described as "grinding" with very little movement of the front line in Ukraine's eastern Donbas region.
Since Russian troops poured over the border in February in what Putin termed a "special military operation", the conflict has settled into a war of attrition fought primarily in the east and south of Ukraine.
Moscow is trying to gain control of the largely Russian-speaking Donbas, comprised of Luhansk and Donetsk provinces, where pro-Moscow separatists seized territory after the Kremlin annexed Crimea to the south in 2014.
So far the United States has sent 16 HIMARS to Ukraine and on July 1 pledged to send two National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems (NASAMS).
It was unclear if the NASAMS launchers, made jointly by Raytheon Technologies Corp and Norway's Kongsberg, are already in Ukraine if the munitions were for launchers donated by another country, or if they were being prepositioned.
The United States previously committed 200 M113 armored personnel carriers to Ukraine.
The armored personnel carriers outfitted with medical equipment could make the fight with Russia more survivable for Ukrainian troops who could then be sent to Germany for further medical treatment.
The Kyiv government said in June that 100 to 200 Ukrainian troops were being killed per day.
Reporting by Idrees Ali and Mike Stone in Washington; Editing by Mary Milliken and Josie Kao
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ex ... 022-08-05/
THE DAILY NEWS
Re: THE DAILY NEWS
THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
"FBI director will face grilling about Hunter Biden whistleblower claims"
Jerry Dunleavy
4 AUGUST 2022
FBI Director Christopher Wray will face a Thursday grilling from Senate Republicans about whistleblower claims that the bureau improperly labeled evidence about Hunter Biden as disinformation in 2020.
Wray, who has led the FBI since 2017, is appearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, where he will face criticism about the handling of the investigation into President Joe Biden’s son, likely along with a host of questions about how the FBI is handling the Capitol riot investigation, rising crime, national security threats, and more.
“I expect him to answer on how he’s going to stop political bias at the FBI,” Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, tweeted this week, adding in a video that “I would expect Wray to come up with some concrete program where he’s going to be able to tell the 22 members of this committee what he’s going to do to take political bias out of the investigations that the FBI is doing.”
The senator sent a letter to Wray last week asking for more details about an Aug. 2020 briefing on alleged Russian influence efforts that he says were pushed on him and then leaked to the press to hurt his investigation into Joe and Hunter Biden.
Whistleblowers revealed to him recently that FBI officials were undercutting or burying facts about President Joe Biden’s son around the same time.
FBI supervisory intelligence analyst Brian Auten opened an assessment in Aug. 2020 that “was used by a FBI Headquarters team to improperly discredit negative Hunter Biden information as disinformation and caused investigative activity to cease,” according to whistleblower disclosures.
“The concurrent opening of Auten’s assessment, the efforts by the FBI HQ team, and the efforts by the FBI to provide an unnecessary briefing to me and Senator Johnson that provided our Democratic colleagues fodder to falsely accuse us of advancing foreign disinformation draws serious concern,” Grassley told Wray last month.
One of the whistleblowers claimed the FBI assistant special agent in charge of the Washington field office, Timothy Thibault, had “ordered closed” an “avenue of additional derogatory Hunter Biden reporting” in October 2020.
Grassley gave a Monday speech on the Senate floor where he called the whistleblowers “patriots” and said Wray “has personally told me that they won’t be subject to retaliation.”
He argued that Wray has: “an obligation to the country to immediately investigate these allegations and clean house.”
Senators also likely plan to question Wray about the FBI's botched handling of its investigation former USA Gymnastics team doctor Larry Nassar, and the Justice Department's decision not to charge FBI agents with lying to watchdog investigators.
Wray will also almost certainly also be asked about the FBI’s role in investigating the events surrounding Jan. 6, 2021.
The Justice Department shed light on the reasons behind the doubling of domestic terrorism cases since early 2020, with a top DOJ official saying prosecutions related to the Capitol riot make up “at least a significant portion of that jump.”
DOJ said this week that more than 850 defendants have been arrested in relation to the Capitol riot, including over 260 charged with assaulting or impeding law enforcement.
The bureau chief will also likely be asked about the rise of China.
Wray gave an early July speech alongside the head of the United Kingdom’s MI5 where he warned of the challenge.
“We consistently see that it’s the Chinese government that poses the biggest long-term threat to our economic and national security — and by ‘our’ I mean both of our nations, along with our allies in Europe and elsewhere,” Wray said.
Last month, Wray warned about the governments of China, Russia, and Iran potentially trying to meddle in or influence the midterm elections.
The FBI and the Department of Homeland Security are purchasing and using Chinese-made drones from a “Chinese Military Industrial Complex” company — DJI — with close links to the Chinese government, according to testimony from Biden administration officials last month.
Wray may be asked if the bureau will continue to use those drones.
Also, since the May leak of a draft of the Supreme Court’s opinion overturning Roe v. Wade, there have been heightened threats against Supreme Court justices and anti-abortion advocates, including attacks and vandalism targeting activist groups, pregnancy centers, and churches across the country.
Republicans have called on DOJ to do more, and Wray is sure to be asked about it.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... 408ffee2f7
"FBI director will face grilling about Hunter Biden whistleblower claims"
Jerry Dunleavy
4 AUGUST 2022
FBI Director Christopher Wray will face a Thursday grilling from Senate Republicans about whistleblower claims that the bureau improperly labeled evidence about Hunter Biden as disinformation in 2020.
Wray, who has led the FBI since 2017, is appearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, where he will face criticism about the handling of the investigation into President Joe Biden’s son, likely along with a host of questions about how the FBI is handling the Capitol riot investigation, rising crime, national security threats, and more.
“I expect him to answer on how he’s going to stop political bias at the FBI,” Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, tweeted this week, adding in a video that “I would expect Wray to come up with some concrete program where he’s going to be able to tell the 22 members of this committee what he’s going to do to take political bias out of the investigations that the FBI is doing.”
The senator sent a letter to Wray last week asking for more details about an Aug. 2020 briefing on alleged Russian influence efforts that he says were pushed on him and then leaked to the press to hurt his investigation into Joe and Hunter Biden.
Whistleblowers revealed to him recently that FBI officials were undercutting or burying facts about President Joe Biden’s son around the same time.
FBI supervisory intelligence analyst Brian Auten opened an assessment in Aug. 2020 that “was used by a FBI Headquarters team to improperly discredit negative Hunter Biden information as disinformation and caused investigative activity to cease,” according to whistleblower disclosures.
“The concurrent opening of Auten’s assessment, the efforts by the FBI HQ team, and the efforts by the FBI to provide an unnecessary briefing to me and Senator Johnson that provided our Democratic colleagues fodder to falsely accuse us of advancing foreign disinformation draws serious concern,” Grassley told Wray last month.
One of the whistleblowers claimed the FBI assistant special agent in charge of the Washington field office, Timothy Thibault, had “ordered closed” an “avenue of additional derogatory Hunter Biden reporting” in October 2020.
Grassley gave a Monday speech on the Senate floor where he called the whistleblowers “patriots” and said Wray “has personally told me that they won’t be subject to retaliation.”
He argued that Wray has: “an obligation to the country to immediately investigate these allegations and clean house.”
Senators also likely plan to question Wray about the FBI's botched handling of its investigation former USA Gymnastics team doctor Larry Nassar, and the Justice Department's decision not to charge FBI agents with lying to watchdog investigators.
Wray will also almost certainly also be asked about the FBI’s role in investigating the events surrounding Jan. 6, 2021.
The Justice Department shed light on the reasons behind the doubling of domestic terrorism cases since early 2020, with a top DOJ official saying prosecutions related to the Capitol riot make up “at least a significant portion of that jump.”
DOJ said this week that more than 850 defendants have been arrested in relation to the Capitol riot, including over 260 charged with assaulting or impeding law enforcement.
The bureau chief will also likely be asked about the rise of China.
Wray gave an early July speech alongside the head of the United Kingdom’s MI5 where he warned of the challenge.
“We consistently see that it’s the Chinese government that poses the biggest long-term threat to our economic and national security — and by ‘our’ I mean both of our nations, along with our allies in Europe and elsewhere,” Wray said.
Last month, Wray warned about the governments of China, Russia, and Iran potentially trying to meddle in or influence the midterm elections.
The FBI and the Department of Homeland Security are purchasing and using Chinese-made drones from a “Chinese Military Industrial Complex” company — DJI — with close links to the Chinese government, according to testimony from Biden administration officials last month.
Wray may be asked if the bureau will continue to use those drones.
Also, since the May leak of a draft of the Supreme Court’s opinion overturning Roe v. Wade, there have been heightened threats against Supreme Court justices and anti-abortion advocates, including attacks and vandalism targeting activist groups, pregnancy centers, and churches across the country.
Republicans have called on DOJ to do more, and Wray is sure to be asked about it.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... 408ffee2f7
Re: THE DAILY NEWS
THE GUARDIAN
"Time is running out. The Department of Justice must indict and convict Trump"
Opinion by Laurence H Tribe and Dennis Aftergut
4 AUGUST 2022
On Tuesday CNN reported that key January 6 texts have been erased by officials of Donald Trump’s defense department in addition to homeland security and the Secret Service.
Not even a clueless Hamlet could avoid smelling “something rotten in the state of Denmark”.
With the growing list of deletions, there is a whole new criminal conspiracy to investigate: one to destroy evidence of the grave federal crimes already under investigation.
Nothing so focuses the prosecutorial mind or underscores the need to accelerate a criminal investigation as evidence that the investigation’s target may have plotted to erase the proof of his wrongdoing that is needed to hold him accountable.
The attorney general, Merrick Garland, knows that the fish always rots from the head.
On 26 July, the Washington Post broke news that the justice department’s investigation is focused on Donald Trump himself.
Time is of the essence in bringing his case to indictment.
Indeed, a moving target who gives every indication that he plans to strike again must trigger a different cost-benefit calculus in the inevitable debates both within and outside the justice department about when enough proof has been gathered to indict responsibly – and when it would be a dereliction of duty to delay further.
The former president’s insistence that he has nothing to be remorseful about (other than not marching to the Capitol) makes that debate seem academic.
And the steps being taken at his behest even now in battleground states to replace 2020’s failure with 2024’s success redouble the urgency.
Shakespeare’s Brutus had it right when he said, in Julius Caesar: “We must take the current when it serves, or lose our ventures.”
In these circumstances, prudence counsels running the clock backwards to set clear benchmarks for moving forward.
Any calculation of how to proceed must start with two pessimistic premises.
First, that Trump will run in 2024 and could win.
Second, that if any of the likely Republican nominees wins, the next administration will be one that is eager to scrap any prosecution of the last.
Hence, the goal must be to secure a conviction before November 2024, and in any event, no later than 20 January 2025, when the next presidential term begins.
It is already too late for all appeals from any such conviction to be exhausted by that date, but the key to holding the chief conspirator accountable is a jury verdict of guilt.
Consider this: the trial of insurrectionist Guy Reffitt occurred 13 months after his original indictment.
That trial, and its delaying pre-trial motions, were incalculably less complex than Trump’s would be.
One can easily anticipate motions that, if denied, might go far up the appellate chain.
It is not hard to imagine a majority of supreme court justices in no great hurry to resolve motions upon which the start of trial could depend.
One can easily conceive a 20-month or longer period with the former president indicted but not yet tried.
If Trump is not formally charged until January 2023, that would imply a multi-month trial starting in September or October.
Should he run for president and win in November, we would have a president-elect in the middle of a criminal trial.
Part of why a lengthy post-indictment/pre-verdict period is foreseeable is that federal district courts are bound to protect an accused’s rights to full airing of pre-trial claims and the time needed to file and argue them.
Trump will have many pre-trial claims, setting out his serial and inexhaustible list of grievances, the imagined violation of his rights, his purported immunity from prosecution as a former president and the overriding unfairness of it all.
Some district court judges more than others will balance protections for the accused with accountability’s pragmatic need for speed.
Importantly, even the four Trump-appointed district court judges in DC have often shown little sympathy for those charged with perpetrating the events of January 6 or resisting their investigation.
On 1 August, Judge Dabney Friedrich sentenced Reffitt to more than seven years in prison, the longest sentence to date.
Judge Tim Kelly refused to dismiss indictments against Proud Boy leaders who were part of the January 6 siege.
Judge Carl Nichols brooked no nonsense in Steve Bannon’s July trial, deliberately preventing it from becoming the “political circus” Bannon sought to make it.
On the other hand, among eight judges who have considered defendants’ motions to dismiss federal charges of obstructing an official government proceeding – Congress’s January 6 election certification session – Nichols was the lone outlier who dismissed the count.
That is one of the main charges that observers believe federal prosecutors could bring against Trump.
The point is that if Trump were to be indicted, the Department of Justice cannot count on a favorable judge putting it on a jet stream to an actual trial.
So what does that mean for precisely when Trump must be formally indicted?
Thankfully, it doesn’t imply the impossible.
The Department of Justice could pull an experienced prosecutor or two from every US attorney’s office and put them together on the case.
With all stops pulled, prosecutors still have time to do what is needed before year end.
The tasks include talking to key witnesses that the January 6 House committee interviewed and deposed, which is well under way.
Cassidy Hutchinson, principal aide to Trump’s chief of staff Mark Meadow, and Vice-President Mike Pence’s top aides, Marc Short and Greg Jacobs, are now working with the Department of Justice or appearing before its grand jury.
Cooperation is already reported to have begun among the lawyer-enablers of Trump’s coup plotting.
With the investigation’s accelerating aim at Trump, every potential target’s defense counsel has surely discussed with the target the advantages of an early offer to plead guilty and cooperate.
Early birds get better worms.
On 2 August, the federal grand jury investigating the lead-up to the January 6 insurrection subpoenaed the former White House counsel Pat Cipollone.
Department of Justice prosecutors are reported to be preparing to go to court to secure his testimony about his conversations with Trump if Cipollone again declines to disclose them on grounds of executive privilege.
The task ahead is massive, but if attacked with supreme urgency, it can get done.
The building blocks for a trial of Donald Trump must be put into place with alacrity.
In no case more than this one, the perfect cannot be the enemy of the good.
The clock is ticking.
Laurence H Tribe is the Carl M Loeb University professor and professor of constitutional law emeritus at Harvard Law School
Dennis Aftergut is a former federal prosecutor, currently of counsel to Lawyers Defending American Democracy
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/ ... 408ffee2f7
"Time is running out. The Department of Justice must indict and convict Trump"
Opinion by Laurence H Tribe and Dennis Aftergut
4 AUGUST 2022
On Tuesday CNN reported that key January 6 texts have been erased by officials of Donald Trump’s defense department in addition to homeland security and the Secret Service.
Not even a clueless Hamlet could avoid smelling “something rotten in the state of Denmark”.
With the growing list of deletions, there is a whole new criminal conspiracy to investigate: one to destroy evidence of the grave federal crimes already under investigation.
Nothing so focuses the prosecutorial mind or underscores the need to accelerate a criminal investigation as evidence that the investigation’s target may have plotted to erase the proof of his wrongdoing that is needed to hold him accountable.
The attorney general, Merrick Garland, knows that the fish always rots from the head.
On 26 July, the Washington Post broke news that the justice department’s investigation is focused on Donald Trump himself.
Time is of the essence in bringing his case to indictment.
Indeed, a moving target who gives every indication that he plans to strike again must trigger a different cost-benefit calculus in the inevitable debates both within and outside the justice department about when enough proof has been gathered to indict responsibly – and when it would be a dereliction of duty to delay further.
The former president’s insistence that he has nothing to be remorseful about (other than not marching to the Capitol) makes that debate seem academic.
And the steps being taken at his behest even now in battleground states to replace 2020’s failure with 2024’s success redouble the urgency.
Shakespeare’s Brutus had it right when he said, in Julius Caesar: “We must take the current when it serves, or lose our ventures.”
In these circumstances, prudence counsels running the clock backwards to set clear benchmarks for moving forward.
Any calculation of how to proceed must start with two pessimistic premises.
First, that Trump will run in 2024 and could win.
Second, that if any of the likely Republican nominees wins, the next administration will be one that is eager to scrap any prosecution of the last.
Hence, the goal must be to secure a conviction before November 2024, and in any event, no later than 20 January 2025, when the next presidential term begins.
It is already too late for all appeals from any such conviction to be exhausted by that date, but the key to holding the chief conspirator accountable is a jury verdict of guilt.
Consider this: the trial of insurrectionist Guy Reffitt occurred 13 months after his original indictment.
That trial, and its delaying pre-trial motions, were incalculably less complex than Trump’s would be.
One can easily anticipate motions that, if denied, might go far up the appellate chain.
It is not hard to imagine a majority of supreme court justices in no great hurry to resolve motions upon which the start of trial could depend.
One can easily conceive a 20-month or longer period with the former president indicted but not yet tried.
If Trump is not formally charged until January 2023, that would imply a multi-month trial starting in September or October.
Should he run for president and win in November, we would have a president-elect in the middle of a criminal trial.
Part of why a lengthy post-indictment/pre-verdict period is foreseeable is that federal district courts are bound to protect an accused’s rights to full airing of pre-trial claims and the time needed to file and argue them.
Trump will have many pre-trial claims, setting out his serial and inexhaustible list of grievances, the imagined violation of his rights, his purported immunity from prosecution as a former president and the overriding unfairness of it all.
Some district court judges more than others will balance protections for the accused with accountability’s pragmatic need for speed.
Importantly, even the four Trump-appointed district court judges in DC have often shown little sympathy for those charged with perpetrating the events of January 6 or resisting their investigation.
On 1 August, Judge Dabney Friedrich sentenced Reffitt to more than seven years in prison, the longest sentence to date.
Judge Tim Kelly refused to dismiss indictments against Proud Boy leaders who were part of the January 6 siege.
Judge Carl Nichols brooked no nonsense in Steve Bannon’s July trial, deliberately preventing it from becoming the “political circus” Bannon sought to make it.
On the other hand, among eight judges who have considered defendants’ motions to dismiss federal charges of obstructing an official government proceeding – Congress’s January 6 election certification session – Nichols was the lone outlier who dismissed the count.
That is one of the main charges that observers believe federal prosecutors could bring against Trump.
The point is that if Trump were to be indicted, the Department of Justice cannot count on a favorable judge putting it on a jet stream to an actual trial.
So what does that mean for precisely when Trump must be formally indicted?
Thankfully, it doesn’t imply the impossible.
The Department of Justice could pull an experienced prosecutor or two from every US attorney’s office and put them together on the case.
With all stops pulled, prosecutors still have time to do what is needed before year end.
The tasks include talking to key witnesses that the January 6 House committee interviewed and deposed, which is well under way.
Cassidy Hutchinson, principal aide to Trump’s chief of staff Mark Meadow, and Vice-President Mike Pence’s top aides, Marc Short and Greg Jacobs, are now working with the Department of Justice or appearing before its grand jury.
Cooperation is already reported to have begun among the lawyer-enablers of Trump’s coup plotting.
With the investigation’s accelerating aim at Trump, every potential target’s defense counsel has surely discussed with the target the advantages of an early offer to plead guilty and cooperate.
Early birds get better worms.
On 2 August, the federal grand jury investigating the lead-up to the January 6 insurrection subpoenaed the former White House counsel Pat Cipollone.
Department of Justice prosecutors are reported to be preparing to go to court to secure his testimony about his conversations with Trump if Cipollone again declines to disclose them on grounds of executive privilege.
The task ahead is massive, but if attacked with supreme urgency, it can get done.
The building blocks for a trial of Donald Trump must be put into place with alacrity.
In no case more than this one, the perfect cannot be the enemy of the good.
The clock is ticking.
Laurence H Tribe is the Carl M Loeb University professor and professor of constitutional law emeritus at Harvard Law School
Dennis Aftergut is a former federal prosecutor, currently of counsel to Lawyers Defending American Democracy
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/ ... 408ffee2f7
Re: THE DAILY NEWS
THE HILL
"UN warns two largest US water reservoirs at ‘dangerously low levels’"
BY SHARON UDASIN
08/03/22
The United Nations warned on Tuesday that the two biggest water reservoirs in the United States have dwindled to “dangerously low levels” due to the impacts of climate change.
The situation has become so severe that these reservoirs, Lake Mead and Lake Powell, are on the verge of reaching “dead pool status” — the point at which water levels drop so low that downstream flow ceases, according to the U.N. Environment Program (UNEP).
Without such flow, hydroelectric power stations would cease to operate, jeopardizing the electricity supply for millions in the region, a statement from the agency said.
“The conditions in the American West, which we’re seeing around the Colorado River basin, have been so dry for more than 20 years that we’re no longer speaking of a drought,” said Lis Mullin Bernhardt, an ecosystems expert at UNEP.
“We refer to it as ‘aridification’ — a new very dry normal,” Bernhardt added.
The Colorado River system supplies water to more than 40 million people and irrigates about 5.7 million acres of agriculture.
The system serves seven states — Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming, Arizona, Nevada and California — as well as Mexico.
Scientists have already estimated that Lake Mead and Lake Powell, which are fed by the river, will plunge to 25 percent of their capacity by the end of this year.
Meanwhile, only about 10 percent of the Colorado River’s natural flow, which has been heavily diverted throughout history along its 1,400-mile course, now reaches Mexico.
As the western water crisis continues to deepen, water cuts will be introduced throughout the region, but experts warn that these actions may not be enough, according to UNEP.
“While regulating and managing water supply and demand are essential in both the short and long term, climate change is at the heart of this issue,” Maria Morgado, UNEP’s ecosystems officer in North America, said in a statement.
“In the long term we need to address the root causes of climate change as well as water demands,” Morgado added.
The combined impacts of climate change and overconsumption have exacerbated the crisis, as frequent droughts and temperature rises confront an expanding population, the UNEP statement said.
While the situation may be dire in the American West, the agency stressed that what is happening in the region is indicative of a wider global trend.
Across the world, hundreds of millions of people are impacted by climate change as drought and desertification become “the new normal,” according to UNEP.
“We are talking about a 20-year period of drought-like conditions with an ever-increasing demand on water,” Bernhardt said.
“These conditions are alarming, and particularly in the Lake Powell and Lake Mead region, it is the perfect storm.”
https://thehill.com/policy/3586269-un-w ... ow-levels/
"UN warns two largest US water reservoirs at ‘dangerously low levels’"
BY SHARON UDASIN
08/03/22
The United Nations warned on Tuesday that the two biggest water reservoirs in the United States have dwindled to “dangerously low levels” due to the impacts of climate change.
The situation has become so severe that these reservoirs, Lake Mead and Lake Powell, are on the verge of reaching “dead pool status” — the point at which water levels drop so low that downstream flow ceases, according to the U.N. Environment Program (UNEP).
Without such flow, hydroelectric power stations would cease to operate, jeopardizing the electricity supply for millions in the region, a statement from the agency said.
“The conditions in the American West, which we’re seeing around the Colorado River basin, have been so dry for more than 20 years that we’re no longer speaking of a drought,” said Lis Mullin Bernhardt, an ecosystems expert at UNEP.
“We refer to it as ‘aridification’ — a new very dry normal,” Bernhardt added.
The Colorado River system supplies water to more than 40 million people and irrigates about 5.7 million acres of agriculture.
The system serves seven states — Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming, Arizona, Nevada and California — as well as Mexico.
Scientists have already estimated that Lake Mead and Lake Powell, which are fed by the river, will plunge to 25 percent of their capacity by the end of this year.
Meanwhile, only about 10 percent of the Colorado River’s natural flow, which has been heavily diverted throughout history along its 1,400-mile course, now reaches Mexico.
As the western water crisis continues to deepen, water cuts will be introduced throughout the region, but experts warn that these actions may not be enough, according to UNEP.
“While regulating and managing water supply and demand are essential in both the short and long term, climate change is at the heart of this issue,” Maria Morgado, UNEP’s ecosystems officer in North America, said in a statement.
“In the long term we need to address the root causes of climate change as well as water demands,” Morgado added.
The combined impacts of climate change and overconsumption have exacerbated the crisis, as frequent droughts and temperature rises confront an expanding population, the UNEP statement said.
While the situation may be dire in the American West, the agency stressed that what is happening in the region is indicative of a wider global trend.
Across the world, hundreds of millions of people are impacted by climate change as drought and desertification become “the new normal,” according to UNEP.
“We are talking about a 20-year period of drought-like conditions with an ever-increasing demand on water,” Bernhardt said.
“These conditions are alarming, and particularly in the Lake Powell and Lake Mead region, it is the perfect storm.”
https://thehill.com/policy/3586269-un-w ... ow-levels/
Re: THE DAILY NEWS
Deutsche Welle
"Germany braces for social unrest over energy prices"
William Noah Glucroft, Deutsche Welle
7 AUGUST 2022
German officials have expressed fears that a worst-case winter of energy problems could prompt an extremist backlash.
How bad things get may depend on how well they manage the crisis – in policy and perception.
State and federal Lawmakers in Germany are exploring a sweeping set of measures to save energy, from turning off street lights to lowering building temperatures; and they are pleading with the public to cut consumption at home.
Whether those efforts spur a call to solidarity or a call to arms won't become clear until the cold sets in and bills come due.
Yet Chancellor Olaf Scholz is not in a wait-and-see mood, telling public broadcaster, ARD, last month that spiraling heating costs are a "powder keg for society."
In explicitly naming the elephant in the room, the chancellor and his government are on the hook for nipping social unrest in the bud.
"In using this 'powder keg' narrative, the chancellor is trying to make way for key decisions," Ricardo Kaufer, a professor of political sociology at the University of Greifswald, told DW.
"So all actors who could potentially stand in the way of measures are cajoled into compromise."
In other words, Scholz is signaling to his governing partners, political opposition, business leaders, and civil society that they bicker over policy responses at the country's peril.
This is a "lesson learned" from the pandemic, Kaufer said, when lawmakers often seemed unprepared to contain it, despite scientific predictions on how and when the virus would spread.
Their communication was more often reactive than proactive.
Measures and messaging
The Bundestag, the German parliament, has already passed legislation that hopes to insulate society's most vulnerable from price shocks.
At the same time, German utilities will be allowed to pass some of their increased costs onto consumers.
In crafting policy, officials are walking a fine line.
They want to help secure household finances, especially for low-wage earners, but not so much that they undermine the incentive to save energy.
More relief may follow the summer recess, however agreement on what that looks like, how much it will cost, and how it will get paid for is likely weeks away, at least.
The smallest of the parties in the governing coalition, the neoliberal Free Democrats (FDP), control the finance ministry, which gives them significant power of the purse.
Its minister, Christian Lindner, has made clear he intends to use that power sparingly, as he stands up for his party's values of low tax, low spending, and low regulation.
The FDP's bigger partners, Scholz's center-left Social Democrats and the environmentalist Greens, are pushing for a more generous helping hand.
Even if the government gets the measures right, they could still get the messaging wrong, which political scientists say can be just as important in steering public sentiment.
As the pandemic showed, money and resources are only half the battle; clear and consistent communication is the other half.
"Perceptions are decisive," Evelyn Bytzek, a professor of political communication at the University of Koblenz-Landau, told DW.
"Ultimately, we all act based more on what we perceive to be true than what is true."
Symbolism is a powerful tool in maintaining public support, Bytzek said.
She pointed to Gerhard Schröder's visit to flood-stricken parts of eastern Germany in 2002, which gave him a boost in his reelection campaign for chancellor.
He went onto win a few weeks later.
Scholz won last year's election in part due to his Merkel-like passive leadership style.
Now that could become a liability -- and stoke unrest -- if the public feels their ship of state is without a captain at the helm with an iceberg ahead.
"Crisis is not just a danger, but also an opportunity to generate more trust when crisis management is well perceived," Bytzek said.
Scholz's deputy, the Greens' Robert Habeck, seems to understand that.
As economy minister, Habeck has the lead on energy policy and has been forced to make hard choices that often contradict his own environmentalist credentials.
Polls show he has won points for regularly explaining the rationale behind those decisions.
Though there are limits to what communication can do.
Habeck was booed at townhall events last week.
However, those protests were more anti-war than anti-democratic.
Evaluating the risk
The Federal Interior Ministry told DW that protests of similar magnitude to those against pandemic restrictions are foreseeable, depending on how much the cost and supply of energy burden society.
"We can assume that populists and extremists will again try to influence protests to their liking," Britta Beylage-Haarmann, a ministry spokesperson, told DW in a statement.
"Extremist actors and groups in Germany can lead to a growth in dangers if corresponding social crisis conditions allow for it."
The Federal Police, which fall under the ministry, told DW they have "no insights" into specific threats arising from the crisis.
Perception also plays a role in how much unrest can shake a country.
Querdenker and others who have taken to the streets to challenge state authority during the pandemic are loud, but they have never represented more than a small minority of public opinion.
Still, they have received an outsized share of media and political attention.
Political sociologists like Greifswald University's Kaufer say protest movements stand out more in a country like Germany, where consensus-based political culture and federal power-sharing dissuade the instrumentalization of social discontent than elsewhere in Europe.
France, for example, has a reputation for confrontation.
Instability in Germany often has a negative connotation, he said, linked to events like bloody street battles amid hyperinflation in Weimar-era Germany, which gave rise to the Nazis.
"There has been a failure of discourse among progressive forces to recognize positive examples in German history," Kaufer added.
"There is a fear of protest, that people will take action without the legitimacy of processes like voting."
He cited East German street protests in 1953 and the peaceful revolution of 1989, and the West German anti-nuclear movement in the 1970s and 80s, as examples that deserve a stronger anchor in Germany's collective memory.
Inequality means instability
Longer-term risks to social cohesion, however, don't end with the coming of spring.
Germany was once one of Europe's most egalitarian countries, in which class and social status had less influence in determining one's success in life.
That is changing, as Germany follows a general trend towards growing income inequality.
"We're seeing that social mobility can no longer address social inequality," Susanne Pickel, a comparative politics professor at the University of Duisberg-Essen, told DW.
Inflation and energy prices will disproportionately impact the country's most vulnerable, according to economic models, as low earners have less disposable income to absorb increased costs.
That also makes them more susceptible to anti-government rhetoric than other income groups.
"Pandemic, war, and inflation endanger the lower middle class."
"If we can't manage to stabilize them, then their fears of being permanently pushed down grow," Pickel said, "then we may see more people take to the streets in Germany."
"And even more virulent, agreement with the [far-right populist] AfD and the appearance of solutions from far-right populists can change voting behavior."
Edited by: Rina Goldenberg
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/ge ... a66c2a5cf1
"Germany braces for social unrest over energy prices"
William Noah Glucroft, Deutsche Welle
7 AUGUST 2022
German officials have expressed fears that a worst-case winter of energy problems could prompt an extremist backlash.
How bad things get may depend on how well they manage the crisis – in policy and perception.
State and federal Lawmakers in Germany are exploring a sweeping set of measures to save energy, from turning off street lights to lowering building temperatures; and they are pleading with the public to cut consumption at home.
Whether those efforts spur a call to solidarity or a call to arms won't become clear until the cold sets in and bills come due.
Yet Chancellor Olaf Scholz is not in a wait-and-see mood, telling public broadcaster, ARD, last month that spiraling heating costs are a "powder keg for society."
In explicitly naming the elephant in the room, the chancellor and his government are on the hook for nipping social unrest in the bud.
"In using this 'powder keg' narrative, the chancellor is trying to make way for key decisions," Ricardo Kaufer, a professor of political sociology at the University of Greifswald, told DW.
"So all actors who could potentially stand in the way of measures are cajoled into compromise."
In other words, Scholz is signaling to his governing partners, political opposition, business leaders, and civil society that they bicker over policy responses at the country's peril.
This is a "lesson learned" from the pandemic, Kaufer said, when lawmakers often seemed unprepared to contain it, despite scientific predictions on how and when the virus would spread.
Their communication was more often reactive than proactive.
Measures and messaging
The Bundestag, the German parliament, has already passed legislation that hopes to insulate society's most vulnerable from price shocks.
At the same time, German utilities will be allowed to pass some of their increased costs onto consumers.
In crafting policy, officials are walking a fine line.
They want to help secure household finances, especially for low-wage earners, but not so much that they undermine the incentive to save energy.
More relief may follow the summer recess, however agreement on what that looks like, how much it will cost, and how it will get paid for is likely weeks away, at least.
The smallest of the parties in the governing coalition, the neoliberal Free Democrats (FDP), control the finance ministry, which gives them significant power of the purse.
Its minister, Christian Lindner, has made clear he intends to use that power sparingly, as he stands up for his party's values of low tax, low spending, and low regulation.
The FDP's bigger partners, Scholz's center-left Social Democrats and the environmentalist Greens, are pushing for a more generous helping hand.
Even if the government gets the measures right, they could still get the messaging wrong, which political scientists say can be just as important in steering public sentiment.
As the pandemic showed, money and resources are only half the battle; clear and consistent communication is the other half.
"Perceptions are decisive," Evelyn Bytzek, a professor of political communication at the University of Koblenz-Landau, told DW.
"Ultimately, we all act based more on what we perceive to be true than what is true."
Symbolism is a powerful tool in maintaining public support, Bytzek said.
She pointed to Gerhard Schröder's visit to flood-stricken parts of eastern Germany in 2002, which gave him a boost in his reelection campaign for chancellor.
He went onto win a few weeks later.
Scholz won last year's election in part due to his Merkel-like passive leadership style.
Now that could become a liability -- and stoke unrest -- if the public feels their ship of state is without a captain at the helm with an iceberg ahead.
"Crisis is not just a danger, but also an opportunity to generate more trust when crisis management is well perceived," Bytzek said.
Scholz's deputy, the Greens' Robert Habeck, seems to understand that.
As economy minister, Habeck has the lead on energy policy and has been forced to make hard choices that often contradict his own environmentalist credentials.
Polls show he has won points for regularly explaining the rationale behind those decisions.
Though there are limits to what communication can do.
Habeck was booed at townhall events last week.
However, those protests were more anti-war than anti-democratic.
Evaluating the risk
The Federal Interior Ministry told DW that protests of similar magnitude to those against pandemic restrictions are foreseeable, depending on how much the cost and supply of energy burden society.
"We can assume that populists and extremists will again try to influence protests to their liking," Britta Beylage-Haarmann, a ministry spokesperson, told DW in a statement.
"Extremist actors and groups in Germany can lead to a growth in dangers if corresponding social crisis conditions allow for it."
The Federal Police, which fall under the ministry, told DW they have "no insights" into specific threats arising from the crisis.
Perception also plays a role in how much unrest can shake a country.
Querdenker and others who have taken to the streets to challenge state authority during the pandemic are loud, but they have never represented more than a small minority of public opinion.
Still, they have received an outsized share of media and political attention.
Political sociologists like Greifswald University's Kaufer say protest movements stand out more in a country like Germany, where consensus-based political culture and federal power-sharing dissuade the instrumentalization of social discontent than elsewhere in Europe.
France, for example, has a reputation for confrontation.
Instability in Germany often has a negative connotation, he said, linked to events like bloody street battles amid hyperinflation in Weimar-era Germany, which gave rise to the Nazis.
"There has been a failure of discourse among progressive forces to recognize positive examples in German history," Kaufer added.
"There is a fear of protest, that people will take action without the legitimacy of processes like voting."
He cited East German street protests in 1953 and the peaceful revolution of 1989, and the West German anti-nuclear movement in the 1970s and 80s, as examples that deserve a stronger anchor in Germany's collective memory.
Inequality means instability
Longer-term risks to social cohesion, however, don't end with the coming of spring.
Germany was once one of Europe's most egalitarian countries, in which class and social status had less influence in determining one's success in life.
That is changing, as Germany follows a general trend towards growing income inequality.
"We're seeing that social mobility can no longer address social inequality," Susanne Pickel, a comparative politics professor at the University of Duisberg-Essen, told DW.
Inflation and energy prices will disproportionately impact the country's most vulnerable, according to economic models, as low earners have less disposable income to absorb increased costs.
That also makes them more susceptible to anti-government rhetoric than other income groups.
"Pandemic, war, and inflation endanger the lower middle class."
"If we can't manage to stabilize them, then their fears of being permanently pushed down grow," Pickel said, "then we may see more people take to the streets in Germany."
"And even more virulent, agreement with the [far-right populist] AfD and the appearance of solutions from far-right populists can change voting behavior."
Edited by: Rina Goldenberg
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/ge ... a66c2a5cf1
Re: THE DAILY NEWS
THE HILL
"Merrick Garland’s complicated Trump prosecution calculus"
Opinion by Keith Naughton, opinion contributor
7 AUGUST 2022
From Day One, Attorney General Merrick Garland has faced a dilemma: How to deal with Trump.
The pressure from within the Democratic Party to prosecute Trump has been enormous.
But a Trump acquittal would be a political catastrophe.
Navigating a Trump prosecution has become much more difficult of late.
After a year where Trump looked like he was too crippled to run, the collapse of President Biden’s approval ratings has made a Trump return to the White House a very real possibility.
At the same time, the Jan. 6 hearings have not just damaged Trump, they have turbocharged Democratic rage.
The sum and substance is that not prosecuting Trump is becoming practically impossible.
It is no secret that Democratic voters despise Trump; in fact, they disapprove of Trump much more than Republicans approve of him.
Hating Trump is the superglue that holds together the rickety, squabbling Democratic coalition.
According to a recent YouGov Benchmark, Trump has an 84 percent unfavorable rating among Democrats — 77 percent “very unfavorable.”
With liberals, the numbers are even worse: 88 percent unfavorable and 83 percent very unfavorable.
For Republicans, Trump has an 80 percent favorable, but only 55 percent very favorable.
Reuters-Ipsos puts Trump at 86 percent unfavorable (73 percent very unfavorable) with Democrats, while Republicans are at 73 percent favorable (38 percent very favorable).
The Morning Consult July 17 poll has Trump at 90 percent unfavorable with Democrats.
Democrats overwhelmingly think Trump has responsibility for the Jan. 6 riot.
According to YouGov, 44 percent of those polled think Trump engaged in illegality, but that rises to 79 percent among Democrats and 80 percent among liberals.
Reuters-Ipsos polls Democrats at 83 percent believing Trump is “fully” or “largely” responsible, as opposed to 24 percent of Republicans.
Of course, convicting an individual in a court of law is much, much more difficult than convicting someone in the court of public opinion.
Risky business
Prosecuting Trump is risky territory for Garland.
Not only is Trump going to fight any prosecution tooth and nail, he is also likely to go to any lengths to win.
Being a presidential candidate will call into question the propriety of any prosecution, although most Democratic voters are unlikely to care.
Any prosecution is going to be a circus in which any slip-up by Garland or his team would be disastrous.
Garland also needs to get Trump on a felony.
A misdemeanor or civil penalty would be viewed as a weak, anti-climactic result — Republicans would celebrate and ridicule Garland, while Democrats would rage at him.
But worst of all would be an acquittal.
If Trump were tried and acquitted, he could just coast off that victory right into the White House.
Not knowing the full extent of the evidence the Justice Department has or what else the Jan. 6 Committee will uncover, it is impossible to truly handicap a Trump trial — which leaves us with trying to consider what would be the best political strategy for Garland that recognizes there will always be uncertainty as to getting an actual conviction.
Any way you cut it, there will be a lot of risk.
Garland could just go for Trump right away, hoping that a prosecution will add to Trump fatigue among GOP voters.
If Trump thinks he will lose the Republican nomination (or a general election), he will likely make up some kind of excuse to get out.
But it is equally likely that Trump will use his “martyr” status to his advantage and cast any Republican primary opponent as being in cahoots with the Democrats.
If the national Democratic leadership really wants Trump to run, viewing him as the most vulnerable Republican, they could encourage an impulsive move to prosecution.
After all, boosting the “enemies of democracy” is the main focus of the Democratic Party these days.
But it’s one thing to help get a few far-out candidates for Congress, it’s another to risk re-electing Trump.
What seems much more likely is that Garland will start on the outside and work his way in.
By that I mean he will see if he can prosecute people in Trump’s inner circle who were part of the decision-making process leading up to Jan. 6.
A trial featuring a senior staff member or two would help satisfy Democrats braying for blood.
Trying people around Trump would have several side benefits.
For one thing, such a trial might yield evidence to use against Trump.
It would also put pressure on Trump himself and increase Republican voter concern about backing a damaged candidate.
GOP voters might well rally around a martyred Trump, but hardly any will care about a barely recognizable staffer.
Even better, a trial might lead to a plea bargain.
If there is one thing known about Trump, it’s that he rather casually throws people overboard.
Should Trump leave a loyal staffer hang out to dry, that staffer might just agree to hang Trump.
Any trial or set of trials against Trump staffers would also chew up time for Garland — which would help with a Trump prosecution.
If Garland is able to collect a strong enough case against Trump, he could well want to indict Trump into 2024.
In the collision between demands for justice/getting Trump and the risk to the integrity of the American political system, getting even is likely to win out.
If Garland were to indict in early 2024, completing an actual trial before the November election would be quite unlikely, thus allowing Garland to escape the potential nightmare of a Trump acquittal.
If Trump is not the Republican nominee — or if he loses in 2024 — a conviction or acquittal is almost immaterial.
If Trump is convicted, any Republican President would at least strongly consider a Gerald Ford-style pardon (Trump is headed to prison if a Democrat wins).
If Trump is acquitted and a Democrat is president, Trump is likely still finished as he would be way past his political expiration date at age 82 in 2028.
Even Trump would have a very hard time hanging on to relevance that far into the future.
If a Republican wins in 2024, an acquitted Trump would be boxed out until 2032.
An acquitted Trump would be a whole different kind of trouble for another Republican in the White House, but he won’t be back.
For Democrats frothing for a Trump indictment, they may have to wait.
Unless Garland has an absolutely open-and-shut case — or he is ready to play with fire — the attorney general is likely to slow-play a Trump prosecution.
But for those around Trump, I would suggest lawyering up.
Keith Naughton, Ph.D., is co-founder of Silent Majority Strategies, a public and regulatory affairs consulting firm. Naughton is a former Pennsylvania political campaign consultant. Follow him on Twitter @KNaughton711.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... a66c2a5cf1
"Merrick Garland’s complicated Trump prosecution calculus"
Opinion by Keith Naughton, opinion contributor
7 AUGUST 2022
From Day One, Attorney General Merrick Garland has faced a dilemma: How to deal with Trump.
The pressure from within the Democratic Party to prosecute Trump has been enormous.
But a Trump acquittal would be a political catastrophe.
Navigating a Trump prosecution has become much more difficult of late.
After a year where Trump looked like he was too crippled to run, the collapse of President Biden’s approval ratings has made a Trump return to the White House a very real possibility.
At the same time, the Jan. 6 hearings have not just damaged Trump, they have turbocharged Democratic rage.
The sum and substance is that not prosecuting Trump is becoming practically impossible.
It is no secret that Democratic voters despise Trump; in fact, they disapprove of Trump much more than Republicans approve of him.
Hating Trump is the superglue that holds together the rickety, squabbling Democratic coalition.
According to a recent YouGov Benchmark, Trump has an 84 percent unfavorable rating among Democrats — 77 percent “very unfavorable.”
With liberals, the numbers are even worse: 88 percent unfavorable and 83 percent very unfavorable.
For Republicans, Trump has an 80 percent favorable, but only 55 percent very favorable.
Reuters-Ipsos puts Trump at 86 percent unfavorable (73 percent very unfavorable) with Democrats, while Republicans are at 73 percent favorable (38 percent very favorable).
The Morning Consult July 17 poll has Trump at 90 percent unfavorable with Democrats.
Democrats overwhelmingly think Trump has responsibility for the Jan. 6 riot.
According to YouGov, 44 percent of those polled think Trump engaged in illegality, but that rises to 79 percent among Democrats and 80 percent among liberals.
Reuters-Ipsos polls Democrats at 83 percent believing Trump is “fully” or “largely” responsible, as opposed to 24 percent of Republicans.
Of course, convicting an individual in a court of law is much, much more difficult than convicting someone in the court of public opinion.
Risky business
Prosecuting Trump is risky territory for Garland.
Not only is Trump going to fight any prosecution tooth and nail, he is also likely to go to any lengths to win.
Being a presidential candidate will call into question the propriety of any prosecution, although most Democratic voters are unlikely to care.
Any prosecution is going to be a circus in which any slip-up by Garland or his team would be disastrous.
Garland also needs to get Trump on a felony.
A misdemeanor or civil penalty would be viewed as a weak, anti-climactic result — Republicans would celebrate and ridicule Garland, while Democrats would rage at him.
But worst of all would be an acquittal.
If Trump were tried and acquitted, he could just coast off that victory right into the White House.
Not knowing the full extent of the evidence the Justice Department has or what else the Jan. 6 Committee will uncover, it is impossible to truly handicap a Trump trial — which leaves us with trying to consider what would be the best political strategy for Garland that recognizes there will always be uncertainty as to getting an actual conviction.
Any way you cut it, there will be a lot of risk.
Garland could just go for Trump right away, hoping that a prosecution will add to Trump fatigue among GOP voters.
If Trump thinks he will lose the Republican nomination (or a general election), he will likely make up some kind of excuse to get out.
But it is equally likely that Trump will use his “martyr” status to his advantage and cast any Republican primary opponent as being in cahoots with the Democrats.
If the national Democratic leadership really wants Trump to run, viewing him as the most vulnerable Republican, they could encourage an impulsive move to prosecution.
After all, boosting the “enemies of democracy” is the main focus of the Democratic Party these days.
But it’s one thing to help get a few far-out candidates for Congress, it’s another to risk re-electing Trump.
What seems much more likely is that Garland will start on the outside and work his way in.
By that I mean he will see if he can prosecute people in Trump’s inner circle who were part of the decision-making process leading up to Jan. 6.
A trial featuring a senior staff member or two would help satisfy Democrats braying for blood.
Trying people around Trump would have several side benefits.
For one thing, such a trial might yield evidence to use against Trump.
It would also put pressure on Trump himself and increase Republican voter concern about backing a damaged candidate.
GOP voters might well rally around a martyred Trump, but hardly any will care about a barely recognizable staffer.
Even better, a trial might lead to a plea bargain.
If there is one thing known about Trump, it’s that he rather casually throws people overboard.
Should Trump leave a loyal staffer hang out to dry, that staffer might just agree to hang Trump.
Any trial or set of trials against Trump staffers would also chew up time for Garland — which would help with a Trump prosecution.
If Garland is able to collect a strong enough case against Trump, he could well want to indict Trump into 2024.
In the collision between demands for justice/getting Trump and the risk to the integrity of the American political system, getting even is likely to win out.
If Garland were to indict in early 2024, completing an actual trial before the November election would be quite unlikely, thus allowing Garland to escape the potential nightmare of a Trump acquittal.
If Trump is not the Republican nominee — or if he loses in 2024 — a conviction or acquittal is almost immaterial.
If Trump is convicted, any Republican President would at least strongly consider a Gerald Ford-style pardon (Trump is headed to prison if a Democrat wins).
If Trump is acquitted and a Democrat is president, Trump is likely still finished as he would be way past his political expiration date at age 82 in 2028.
Even Trump would have a very hard time hanging on to relevance that far into the future.
If a Republican wins in 2024, an acquitted Trump would be boxed out until 2032.
An acquitted Trump would be a whole different kind of trouble for another Republican in the White House, but he won’t be back.
For Democrats frothing for a Trump indictment, they may have to wait.
Unless Garland has an absolutely open-and-shut case — or he is ready to play with fire — the attorney general is likely to slow-play a Trump prosecution.
But for those around Trump, I would suggest lawyering up.
Keith Naughton, Ph.D., is co-founder of Silent Majority Strategies, a public and regulatory affairs consulting firm. Naughton is a former Pennsylvania political campaign consultant. Follow him on Twitter @KNaughton711.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... a66c2a5cf1
Re: THE DAILY NEWS
RIGZONE
"Oil Rose in Volatile Session Amid Iran Supply Uncertainty"
by Bloomberg | Devika Krishna Kumar and Sheela Tobben
Monday, August 08, 2022
Oil climbed the most in over a week during a volatile summer session as investors continue to weigh US-Iran nuclear deal talks and the potential hit to demand from an economic slowdown.
West Texas Intermediate futures topped $90 a barrel on Monday amid a return of bullish sentiment after a recent oil rout.
Uncertainty around Iranian supply aided crude’s drift higher in a market where shortages have been exacerbated by sanctions on Russian energy.
A draft text to revive the 2015 nuclear deal has been tabled by the European Union, and the US and Iran have a matter of weeks to now decide whether to accept it, European officials with knowledge of the negotiations said on Monday.
The talks around a possible return of Iranian supply continues to unnerve the market, said Rebecca Babin, a senior energy trader at CIBC Private Wealth Management.
At the same time, “trading volume remains pretty tepid and it does not take much to move the market at the moment,” she added.
Data released over the weekend showed China’s imports of crude rose in July from the lowest in four years as travel and transportation activity improved after Covid-19 curbs eased.
Still, the country’s year-to-date total remains about 4% lower.
Meanwhile, one of the market’s most bullish voices, Goldman Sachs Group Inc., cut its near-term price forecasts.
The bank previously expected $140 for Brent in the third quarter, but now sees $110.
It said it remains bullish, however, as stockpiles continue to decline and prices haven’t yet reached a level at which demand is being destroyed.
Oil is “down, but not out,” Goldman analysts, including Damien Courvalin, said in an Aug. 7 note.
“We continue to expect that the oil market will remain in unsustainable deficits at current prices.”
Crude has had a roller-coaster ride in 2022, soaring in the opening months of the year following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, then sinking from June as global slowdown concerns gathered pace.
Elevated inflation has prompted central banks, including the Federal Reserve, to raise interest rates, with investors wagering that more hikes remain in store this half.
Prices:
WTI for September delivery rose 2% to settle at $90.76 a barrel in New York.
Brent for October settlement climbed 1.8% to close at $96.65 a barrel.
The selloff in crude since June has been accompanied by a sustained retreat in gasoline prices, a bright spot for US President Joe Biden as his administration seeks to tackle inflation.
Average nationwide retail gasoline prices in the US have dropped for 55 straight days to slightly more than $4 a gallon, according to auto club AAA.
They peaked at a record above $5 in June.
With oil prices just above a six-month low, investors are in line for a deluge of market commentary this week.
The US Energy Information Administration is set to issue its short-term outlook Tuesday, followed by monthly snapshots from producer group OPEC and the International Energy Agency Thursday.
(with assistance from Jake Lloyd-Smith and Alex Longley)
https://www.rigzone.com/news/wire/oil_r ... 9-article/
"Oil Rose in Volatile Session Amid Iran Supply Uncertainty"
by Bloomberg | Devika Krishna Kumar and Sheela Tobben
Monday, August 08, 2022
Oil climbed the most in over a week during a volatile summer session as investors continue to weigh US-Iran nuclear deal talks and the potential hit to demand from an economic slowdown.
West Texas Intermediate futures topped $90 a barrel on Monday amid a return of bullish sentiment after a recent oil rout.
Uncertainty around Iranian supply aided crude’s drift higher in a market where shortages have been exacerbated by sanctions on Russian energy.
A draft text to revive the 2015 nuclear deal has been tabled by the European Union, and the US and Iran have a matter of weeks to now decide whether to accept it, European officials with knowledge of the negotiations said on Monday.
The talks around a possible return of Iranian supply continues to unnerve the market, said Rebecca Babin, a senior energy trader at CIBC Private Wealth Management.
At the same time, “trading volume remains pretty tepid and it does not take much to move the market at the moment,” she added.
Data released over the weekend showed China’s imports of crude rose in July from the lowest in four years as travel and transportation activity improved after Covid-19 curbs eased.
Still, the country’s year-to-date total remains about 4% lower.
Meanwhile, one of the market’s most bullish voices, Goldman Sachs Group Inc., cut its near-term price forecasts.
The bank previously expected $140 for Brent in the third quarter, but now sees $110.
It said it remains bullish, however, as stockpiles continue to decline and prices haven’t yet reached a level at which demand is being destroyed.
Oil is “down, but not out,” Goldman analysts, including Damien Courvalin, said in an Aug. 7 note.
“We continue to expect that the oil market will remain in unsustainable deficits at current prices.”
Crude has had a roller-coaster ride in 2022, soaring in the opening months of the year following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, then sinking from June as global slowdown concerns gathered pace.
Elevated inflation has prompted central banks, including the Federal Reserve, to raise interest rates, with investors wagering that more hikes remain in store this half.
Prices:
WTI for September delivery rose 2% to settle at $90.76 a barrel in New York.
Brent for October settlement climbed 1.8% to close at $96.65 a barrel.
The selloff in crude since June has been accompanied by a sustained retreat in gasoline prices, a bright spot for US President Joe Biden as his administration seeks to tackle inflation.
Average nationwide retail gasoline prices in the US have dropped for 55 straight days to slightly more than $4 a gallon, according to auto club AAA.
They peaked at a record above $5 in June.
With oil prices just above a six-month low, investors are in line for a deluge of market commentary this week.
The US Energy Information Administration is set to issue its short-term outlook Tuesday, followed by monthly snapshots from producer group OPEC and the International Energy Agency Thursday.
(with assistance from Jake Lloyd-Smith and Alex Longley)
https://www.rigzone.com/news/wire/oil_r ... 9-article/
Re: THE DAILY NEWS
CNBC
"U.S. Treasury yields fall as investors weigh Fed rate hike outlook"
Sam Meredith @SMEREDITH19
PUBLISHED MON, AUG 8 2022
U.S. long-term Treasury yields fell on Monday as a key inversion of the bond curve continued to deepen.
The yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasury note fell 9 basis points to about 2.746%, while the yield on the 30-year Treasury bond was down nearly 9 basis points to 2.976%.
Yields move inversely to prices, and a basis point is equal to 0.01%.
The 2-year Treasury yield only fell 4 basis points to 3.205%, widening its gap with the 10-year.
That relationship is broadly watched on Wall Street as a potential recession indicator.
That comes after economic data published Friday showed that U.S. job growth blew past expectations in July.
The data showed nonfarm payrolls rose 528,000 last month and surpassed Dow Jones’ expectations of 258,000.
At the same time, wage growth increased, with average earnings climbing 0.5% for the month and 5.2% over last year.
The stronger-than-expected report boosted the prospect of aggressive rate hikes by the Federal Reserve and showed that the U.S. is likely not in a recession.
Analysts expect the Fed to consider a 75-basis point rate hike at its coming meetings to bring soaring inflation down to its goal.
Market participants are likely to closely monitor inflation data due later in the week for further clues on the U.S. central bank’s rate path.
On Monday, consumer sentiment data from the New York Fed showed a decline in inflation expectations.
The U.S. Treasury on Monday held auctions for $54 billion in 13-week bills and $42 billion in 26-week bills.
— CNBC’s Carmen Reinicke and Silvia Amaro contributed to this report.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/08/08/us-bond ... -data.html
"U.S. Treasury yields fall as investors weigh Fed rate hike outlook"
Sam Meredith @SMEREDITH19
PUBLISHED MON, AUG 8 2022
U.S. long-term Treasury yields fell on Monday as a key inversion of the bond curve continued to deepen.
The yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasury note fell 9 basis points to about 2.746%, while the yield on the 30-year Treasury bond was down nearly 9 basis points to 2.976%.
Yields move inversely to prices, and a basis point is equal to 0.01%.
The 2-year Treasury yield only fell 4 basis points to 3.205%, widening its gap with the 10-year.
That relationship is broadly watched on Wall Street as a potential recession indicator.
That comes after economic data published Friday showed that U.S. job growth blew past expectations in July.
The data showed nonfarm payrolls rose 528,000 last month and surpassed Dow Jones’ expectations of 258,000.
At the same time, wage growth increased, with average earnings climbing 0.5% for the month and 5.2% over last year.
The stronger-than-expected report boosted the prospect of aggressive rate hikes by the Federal Reserve and showed that the U.S. is likely not in a recession.
Analysts expect the Fed to consider a 75-basis point rate hike at its coming meetings to bring soaring inflation down to its goal.
Market participants are likely to closely monitor inflation data due later in the week for further clues on the U.S. central bank’s rate path.
On Monday, consumer sentiment data from the New York Fed showed a decline in inflation expectations.
The U.S. Treasury on Monday held auctions for $54 billion in 13-week bills and $42 billion in 26-week bills.
— CNBC’s Carmen Reinicke and Silvia Amaro contributed to this report.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/08/08/us-bond ... -data.html
Re: THE DAILY NEWS
REUTERS
"TREASURIES-Yields dip, Wednesday’s inflation data in focus"
By Karen Brettell
AUGUST 8, 2022
NEW YORK, Aug 8 (Reuters) - U.S. Treasury yields dipped on Monday as investors continued to digest an unexpectedly strong jobs report from Friday and before highly anticipated inflation data on Wednesday, which will be scrutinized for how aggressively the Federal Reserve is likely to continue interest rates hikes.
Yields have risen off four-month lows reached last week as persistently high inflation, hawkish comments from Fed officials and a strong labor market dampen expectations that the U.S. central bank will take its foot off the pedal to dampen soaring price pressures.
Yields spiked on Friday after data showed U.S. job growth unexpectedly accelerated in July, with employers adding 528,000 in the month, while the level of employment rose above its pre-pandemic level.
“The jobs report was strong pretty much anyway you want to slice it, adding to the case for a 75 basis point hike in September,” said Benjamin Jeffery, an interest rate strategist at BMO Capital Markets in New York.
Consumer price inflation (CPI) data for July will be the next major economic release on Wednesday.
It is expected to show that prices rose at an 8.7% annual pace during the month, according to the median estimate of economists polled by Reuters.
“What is most important I think is Wednesday’s CPI data to determine how large (the Fed) will opt to go in September,” said Jeffery.
Fed funds futures traders are now pricing for a 69% chance of another 75 basis points rate increase in September, and for the fed funds rate to rise to 3.62% by March, from 2.33% now.
Fixed income analysts at JPMorgan said that they now expect a 75 bps hike in September, following the strong jobs data.
"Friday’s numbers should mollify recession fears but amplify concerns that the Fed has a lot more work to do," analysts led by Alex Roever said in a report, adding that a rise in wages will increase inflation concerns.
Average hourly earnings gained 0.5% in July after rising 0.4% in June.
That left the year-on-year increase in wages at 5.2%.
A New York Federal Reserve survey on Monday, meanwhile, showed that U.S. consumers' expectations for where inflation will be in a year and three years dropped sharply in July.
Benchmark 10-year note yields fell to 2.763% on Monday, after getting as high as 2.869% on Friday, the highest since July 22.
Two-year yields were last 3.216%, after reaching 3.331% on Friday, the highest since June 16.
The yield curve between two-year and 10-year notes was at minus 46 basis points, the deepest inversion since 2000.
Safe haven bonds also saw some demand on geopolitical concerns as China's military announced fresh drills on Monday in the seas and airspace around Taiwan, a self-governed island China claims as its own.
The drills come a day after the scheduled end of its largest ever exercises to protest last week's visit to Taipei by U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
The Treasury will sell $98 billion in new coupon-bearing supply this week, including $42 billion in three-year notes on Tuesday, $35 billion in 10-year notes on Wednesday and $21 billion in 30-year bonds on Thursday.
(Editing by David Holmes and Josie Kao)
https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-bon ... SL1N2ZK1PD
"TREASURIES-Yields dip, Wednesday’s inflation data in focus"
By Karen Brettell
AUGUST 8, 2022
NEW YORK, Aug 8 (Reuters) - U.S. Treasury yields dipped on Monday as investors continued to digest an unexpectedly strong jobs report from Friday and before highly anticipated inflation data on Wednesday, which will be scrutinized for how aggressively the Federal Reserve is likely to continue interest rates hikes.
Yields have risen off four-month lows reached last week as persistently high inflation, hawkish comments from Fed officials and a strong labor market dampen expectations that the U.S. central bank will take its foot off the pedal to dampen soaring price pressures.
Yields spiked on Friday after data showed U.S. job growth unexpectedly accelerated in July, with employers adding 528,000 in the month, while the level of employment rose above its pre-pandemic level.
“The jobs report was strong pretty much anyway you want to slice it, adding to the case for a 75 basis point hike in September,” said Benjamin Jeffery, an interest rate strategist at BMO Capital Markets in New York.
Consumer price inflation (CPI) data for July will be the next major economic release on Wednesday.
It is expected to show that prices rose at an 8.7% annual pace during the month, according to the median estimate of economists polled by Reuters.
“What is most important I think is Wednesday’s CPI data to determine how large (the Fed) will opt to go in September,” said Jeffery.
Fed funds futures traders are now pricing for a 69% chance of another 75 basis points rate increase in September, and for the fed funds rate to rise to 3.62% by March, from 2.33% now.
Fixed income analysts at JPMorgan said that they now expect a 75 bps hike in September, following the strong jobs data.
"Friday’s numbers should mollify recession fears but amplify concerns that the Fed has a lot more work to do," analysts led by Alex Roever said in a report, adding that a rise in wages will increase inflation concerns.
Average hourly earnings gained 0.5% in July after rising 0.4% in June.
That left the year-on-year increase in wages at 5.2%.
A New York Federal Reserve survey on Monday, meanwhile, showed that U.S. consumers' expectations for where inflation will be in a year and three years dropped sharply in July.
Benchmark 10-year note yields fell to 2.763% on Monday, after getting as high as 2.869% on Friday, the highest since July 22.
Two-year yields were last 3.216%, after reaching 3.331% on Friday, the highest since June 16.
The yield curve between two-year and 10-year notes was at minus 46 basis points, the deepest inversion since 2000.
Safe haven bonds also saw some demand on geopolitical concerns as China's military announced fresh drills on Monday in the seas and airspace around Taiwan, a self-governed island China claims as its own.
The drills come a day after the scheduled end of its largest ever exercises to protest last week's visit to Taipei by U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
The Treasury will sell $98 billion in new coupon-bearing supply this week, including $42 billion in three-year notes on Tuesday, $35 billion in 10-year notes on Wednesday and $21 billion in 30-year bonds on Thursday.
(Editing by David Holmes and Josie Kao)
https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-bon ... SL1N2ZK1PD
Re: THE DAILY NEWS
REUTERS
"Wall Street muted on mixed inflation messages"
By Lawrence Delevingne
August 8, 2022
Summary
* U.S. stocks flat following Friday sell-off
* Treasury yields tick down
* Oil up nearly 2%, off multi-month lows
Aug 8 (Reuters) - Wall Street stocks were mostly flat on Monday, the dollar weakened and U.S. government bond yields fell as investors weighed mixed messages on inflation and how aggressive the Federal Reserve might be in combating it.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose just 0.09% on the day, while the S&P 500 lost 0.12% and the Nasdaq Composite dropped 0.1%.
Of note was Nvidia Corp, whose stock declined around 6% after the chip designer warned on Monday that its second-quarter revenue would drop by 19% from the prior quarter on weakness in its gaming business.
The broad Euro STOXX 600 finished up around 0.75% on Monday, led by cyclical and growth stocks, helping it recover losses from Friday.
But the MSCI world equity index, which tracks shares in 47 countries, added just 0.15%.
"With labor market strength, the threat of a recession seems remote, but concerns over how aggressive the Federal Reserve could be hovers over the market," Quincy Krosby, chief global strategist for LPL Financial, said in an email.
Indeed, higher interest rates remained in focus for investors.
Unexpectedly strong U.S. jobs data last week raised the stakes for the July U.S. consumer prices report due on Wednesday, which could see a further acceleration in inflation -- and more aggressive Federal Reserve interest rate hikes.
Business investment appeared to be an early victim of rising prices and rates, according to new U.S. government data.
At the same time, U.S. consumers' expectations for where inflation will be in a year and three years dropped sharply in July, a New York Federal Reserve survey showed on Monday, a win for policy makers.
On Monday, benchmark 10-year note yields fell to 2.751%, after getting as high as 2.869% on Friday, the highest since July 22.
Two-year yields were last at 3.211%, after reaching 3.331% on Friday, the highest since June 16.
'OTHER SIDE OF THAT MOUNTAIN'
"The rise in inflation and the Fed's reaction to it has been a real headwind for valuations this year," Morgan Stanley strategists wrote in a note on Monday.
"However, it's also been a tailwind for earnings."
"Now, we are on the other side of that mountain, and operating leverage is rolling over likely more than the consensus expects."
Fed funds futures traders are now pricing for a 67.5% chance of another 75 basis point rate increase in September, and for the Fed funds rate to rise to 3.65% by March, from 2.33% now.
"We see inflation staying above the Fed’s 2% target through next year," BlackRock Investment Institute strategists wrote in a note on Monday.
"We think the Fed will keep responding to calls to tame inflation until it acknowledges how that would stall growth."
In foreign exchange markets, the U.S. dollar dipped around 0.2% versus a basket of six major currencies to 106.4 , giving up some gains after strengthening on the jobs boom and the jump in yields.
Analysts remained bullish on the U.S. currency's prospects.
"Data like this will further any thoughts about 'U.S. exceptionalism' and is very positive for the USD against all currencies," said Alan Ruskin, global head of G10 FX strategy at Deutsche Bank, referring to the U.S. jobs statistics.
The euro declined slightly to $1.019 .
Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, which tend to act as a barometer for risk appetite, gained.
Bitcoin was last up 3.25% at $23,942.
Gold broke higher on Monday as the dollar and Treasury yields retreated.
Spot gold rose 0.8% to $1,788 per ounce, after dropping 1% in the previous session.
U.S. gold futures were 0.76% higher at $1,786.
Oil prices rebounded some on Monday but were still near their lowest levels in months in volatile trading as positive economic data from China and the United States spurred hopes for demand growth despite recession fears.
U.S. crude recently rose 1.79% to $90.59 per barrel and Brent was at $96.40, up 1.59% on the day.
Reporting by Lawrence Delevingne in Boston, Tom Wilson in London and Wayne Cole in Sydney; Editing by Jane Merriman, Peter Graff and Lisa Shumaker
https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/ ... 022-08-08/
"Wall Street muted on mixed inflation messages"
By Lawrence Delevingne
August 8, 2022
Summary
* U.S. stocks flat following Friday sell-off
* Treasury yields tick down
* Oil up nearly 2%, off multi-month lows
Aug 8 (Reuters) - Wall Street stocks were mostly flat on Monday, the dollar weakened and U.S. government bond yields fell as investors weighed mixed messages on inflation and how aggressive the Federal Reserve might be in combating it.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose just 0.09% on the day, while the S&P 500 lost 0.12% and the Nasdaq Composite dropped 0.1%.
Of note was Nvidia Corp, whose stock declined around 6% after the chip designer warned on Monday that its second-quarter revenue would drop by 19% from the prior quarter on weakness in its gaming business.
The broad Euro STOXX 600 finished up around 0.75% on Monday, led by cyclical and growth stocks, helping it recover losses from Friday.
But the MSCI world equity index, which tracks shares in 47 countries, added just 0.15%.
"With labor market strength, the threat of a recession seems remote, but concerns over how aggressive the Federal Reserve could be hovers over the market," Quincy Krosby, chief global strategist for LPL Financial, said in an email.
Indeed, higher interest rates remained in focus for investors.
Unexpectedly strong U.S. jobs data last week raised the stakes for the July U.S. consumer prices report due on Wednesday, which could see a further acceleration in inflation -- and more aggressive Federal Reserve interest rate hikes.
Business investment appeared to be an early victim of rising prices and rates, according to new U.S. government data.
At the same time, U.S. consumers' expectations for where inflation will be in a year and three years dropped sharply in July, a New York Federal Reserve survey showed on Monday, a win for policy makers.
On Monday, benchmark 10-year note yields fell to 2.751%, after getting as high as 2.869% on Friday, the highest since July 22.
Two-year yields were last at 3.211%, after reaching 3.331% on Friday, the highest since June 16.
'OTHER SIDE OF THAT MOUNTAIN'
"The rise in inflation and the Fed's reaction to it has been a real headwind for valuations this year," Morgan Stanley strategists wrote in a note on Monday.
"However, it's also been a tailwind for earnings."
"Now, we are on the other side of that mountain, and operating leverage is rolling over likely more than the consensus expects."
Fed funds futures traders are now pricing for a 67.5% chance of another 75 basis point rate increase in September, and for the Fed funds rate to rise to 3.65% by March, from 2.33% now.
"We see inflation staying above the Fed’s 2% target through next year," BlackRock Investment Institute strategists wrote in a note on Monday.
"We think the Fed will keep responding to calls to tame inflation until it acknowledges how that would stall growth."
In foreign exchange markets, the U.S. dollar dipped around 0.2% versus a basket of six major currencies to 106.4 , giving up some gains after strengthening on the jobs boom and the jump in yields.
Analysts remained bullish on the U.S. currency's prospects.
"Data like this will further any thoughts about 'U.S. exceptionalism' and is very positive for the USD against all currencies," said Alan Ruskin, global head of G10 FX strategy at Deutsche Bank, referring to the U.S. jobs statistics.
The euro declined slightly to $1.019 .
Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, which tend to act as a barometer for risk appetite, gained.
Bitcoin was last up 3.25% at $23,942.
Gold broke higher on Monday as the dollar and Treasury yields retreated.
Spot gold rose 0.8% to $1,788 per ounce, after dropping 1% in the previous session.
U.S. gold futures were 0.76% higher at $1,786.
Oil prices rebounded some on Monday but were still near their lowest levels in months in volatile trading as positive economic data from China and the United States spurred hopes for demand growth despite recession fears.
U.S. crude recently rose 1.79% to $90.59 per barrel and Brent was at $96.40, up 1.59% on the day.
Reporting by Lawrence Delevingne in Boston, Tom Wilson in London and Wayne Cole in Sydney; Editing by Jane Merriman, Peter Graff and Lisa Shumaker
https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/ ... 022-08-08/