Connect with us

Biden Administration

Biden Admin is Using Fraudulent Climate Dataset in Push For Green Agenda, According to Government Watchdog

Published

on

A government watchdog group has filed a complaint with the Biden administration over its use of a dataset frequently used to push its climate agenda.

Protect the Public’s Trust (PPT) filed the complaint with the Commerce Department over the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) “Billions Project” dataset, which purports to keep track of natural [and climate] disasters that have caused at least $1 billion in damages going back to 1980. The billion-dollar disasters (BDD) data — cited frequently by the Biden administration to insinuate that climate change is intensifying and justify sweeping green policies — is based on opaque data derived from questionable accounting practices, PPT alleges in the complaint.

“American families and businesses continue to struggle with persistently high inflation, which many attribute in large part to the energy policies and government spending of the current administration. The idea that blatant violations of scientific integrity could be underlying the rationale for these policies should concern every American,” Michael Chamberlain, PPT’s director, told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “Unfortunately, this is far from an isolated incident. The Biden Administration came into office pledging that its decision making would be grounded in the highest-quality science, but all too often has failed to live up to those promises.”

The complaint was filed with the Commerce Department, as NOAA operates under its auspices, Chamberlain told the DCNF.

PPT’s complaint alleges that NOAA does not adequately disclose its sources and methods for compiling the BDD dataset, adds and removes BDD events from the dataset without providing its rationale for doing so and produces cost estimates that are sometimes significantly different than those generated by more conventional accounting procedures.

While NOAA states that it develops its BDD data from more than a dozen sources, the agency does not disclose those sources for specific events or show how it calculates loss estimates from those sources, PPT’s complaint alleges.

The complaint further alleges that NOAA’s accounting methods are opaque and “produce suspect results.”

For example, when Hurric ane Idalia took aim at Florida in 2023, NOAA initially projected that the storm would cause about $2.5 billion worth of damages before insured losses ultimately came in at about $310 million, according to PPT’s complaint, which cites the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation

 for that figure. Nevertheless, NOAA subsequently marked up its estimate for how much damage the storm caused to $3.5 billion, a discrepancy for which NOAA provided no explanation, PPT alleges in its complaint.

NOAA researchers have disclosed in the past that the agency considers factors such as functions pertaining to livestock feeding costs — in addition to more conventional types of damages — in their cost calculations.

Further, the complaint alleges that BDD events are quietly added and removed from the dataset without explanation, citing Roger Pielke Jr., a former academic who believes climate change to be a real threat but opposes politicized science. In a forthcoming paper analyzing the merits of BDD statistics, Pielke compared the dataset in late 2022 to the dataset in the middle of 2023 and found that ten new BDD events were added to the list and 3 were subtracted without explanation.

Apart from the issues with methodology alleged by PPT in its complaint, the use of BDD events as a proxy for climate change’s intensity is inherently misleading because economic data does not reflect changes in meteorological conditions, as Pielke has previously explained to the DCNF.

For example, increasing concentrations of assets, especially in coastal areas, can confound the usefulness of BDD events as an indicator for the intensity of climate change, as Energy and Environment Legal Institute Senior Policy Fellow Steve Milloy has previously explained to the DCNF. Hypothetically, the same exact hurricane could hit the same exact place, decades apart, with vastly different damage totals; this would be the case because there are simply more assets sitting in the way of the storm, not because the storm was any more violent due to worsening climate change.

NOAA has acknowledged this limitation of the dataset in prior communications with the DCNF.

Additionally, NOAA will add disasters to the list retrospectively because it adjusts for inflation, meaning that a hurricane that caused $800 million in damages in 1980 dollars would be added to the list because the damages exceed $1 billion when adjusted for inflation, for example.

The Biden administration has frequently cited the BDD dataset to substantiate its massive climate agenda.

For example, Deputy Energy Secretary David Turk cited the dataset in written testimony submitted to lawmakers in February explaining the White House’s decision to pause new approvals for liquefied natural gas export terminals.

The BDD statistics are also referenced Fifth National Climate Assessment (NCA5), the Biden administration’s landmark climate report that is intended to provide the most sound scientific basis for lawmakers and officials to craft climate policy.

NOAA asserted that the increasing frequency of BDD events is a sign of intensifying climate change in a January press release and blog post summarizing 2023, and then defended the use of the dataset in subsequent communications with the DCNF.

“Sensational climate claims made without proper scientific basis and spread by government officials threaten the public’s trust in its scientific officials and undermines the government’s mission of stewarding the environment,” PPT’s complaint states. “It also poses the danger of policymakers basing consequential government policy on unscientific claims unsupported by evidence.”

Biden Administration

U.S. Announces $725 Million Military Aid Package for Ukraine

Published

on

Washington, D.C. — The United States is poised to deliver an additional $725 million in military aid to Ukraine, signaling continued support for Kyiv’s efforts to defend against Russian aggression. The latest package, confirmed by two U.S. officials speaking on condition of anonymity, includes counter-drone systems and munitions for the High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS).

Notably, the package raises questions about whether it includes the coveted Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS), a longer-range missile that Ukraine has repeatedly requested to target deeper into Russian-controlled territory. However, the officials declined to confirm whether ATACMS would be included.

In addition to munitions, the aid package features anti-personnel landmines, which Ukraine is using to counter Russian and North Korean ground forces, particularly in contested areas like Russia’s Kursk region.

President Joe Biden remains resolute in using all funds allocated by Congress for Ukraine’s military support before the end of his administration in January. Before Monday’s announcement, approximately $7.1 billion in military assistance had been provided, drawn from Pentagon stockpiles.

While the Biden administration continues to bolster Ukraine, questions loom about the incoming Trump administration’s approach to the conflict. President-elect Trump h as promised to “end the conflict,” potentially signaling a shift in U.S. policy toward Ukraine.

In a noteworthy development, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy suggested last week that NATO membership for Ukrainian-controlled territories could help end the “hot stage of the war.” This remark signals a potential softening in Ukraine’s stance as it seeks to balance territorial integrity with international support.

HIMARS munitions have been a linchpin in Ukraine’s defense strategy, enabling precision strikes on Russian targets. The possible inclusion of ATACMS in this package could extend Ukraine’s reach, putting more strategic Russian positions at risk. Meanwhile, the addition of counter-drone systems underscores the escalating drone warfare in the region, as both sides employ drones for surveillance and strikes.

The use of anti-personnel landmines reflects Ukraine’s tactical efforts to slow Russian advancements, particularly in areas where conventional defense lines have proven difficult to maintain.

The aid announcement comes amid heightened speculation about U.S. foreign policy under the incoming Trump administration. While President Biden has championed robust support for Ukraine, critics argue the ongoing assistance risks overextending U.S. resources. Trump’s pledge to “end the conflict” could signify a more isolationist approach, raising concerns among Ukraine’s allies about the continuity of U.S. support.

As the war grinds on, Ukraine remains reliant on Western military aid to sustain its defenses and reclaim lost territory. The latest U.S. package underscores Washington’s strategic commitment, even as domestic and international pressures mount.

Whether the new administration will maintain this trajectory remains uncertain, but for now, the U.S. remains a steadfast partner in Ukraine’s fight for sovereignty.

SOURCE: ASSOCIATED PRESS

Continue Reading

Biden Administration

U.S. Government Has Sent $239 Million to Taliban Since 2021 Due to State Dept’s Vetting Failures, Report Reveals

Published

on

The U.S. government has inadvertently sent at least $239 million to the Taliban in development assistance since 2021, according to a new report. The oversight occurred because the State Department failed to properly vet award recipients.

Less than a year after it was reported that the Taliban established fake nonprofits to siphon millions of dollars in U.S. aid to Afghanistan, a new investigation by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) reveals that the terrorist group has received hundreds of millions in development assistance due to inadequate vetting by the State Department. Since the 2021 U.S. military withdrawal, at least $239 million have likely filled the Taliban’s coffers.

The State Department’s divisions known as Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor (DRL) and International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL) disbursed the funds to implement development projects aimed at supporting American foreign policy and national security goals in Afghanistan.

Investigators found that the State Department failed to comply with its own counterterrorism partner vetting requirements before awarding at least 29 grants to various local entities. The agency has a system in place to identify whether prospective awardees have a record of ethical business practices and is supposed to conduct risk assessments to determine if programming funds may benefit terrorists or terrorist-affiliates before distributing American taxpayer dollars. However, in the more than two dozen cases examined, the agency neglected these procedures and failed to maintain proper records.

“Because DRL and INL could not demonstrate their compliance with State’s partner vetting requirements, there is an increased risk that terrorist and terrorist-affiliated individuals and entities may have illegally benefited from State spending in Afghanistan,” the SIGAR report states. “As State continues to spend U.S. taxpayer funds on programs intended to benefit the Afghan people, it is critical that State knows who is actually benefiting from this assistance in order to prevent the aid from being diverted to the Taliban or other sanctioned parties, and to enable policymakers and other oversight authorities to better scrutinize the risks posed by State’s spending.”

The watchdog identified issues with 29 awards distributed by DRL and INL. For instance, DRL failed to properly screen the recipients of seven awards totaling about $12 million. INL did not provide any supporting documentation for 19 of its 22 awards totaling about $295 million, making it impossible to determine if they complied with vetting requirements. The State Department acknowledged that not all its bureaus have complied with document retention requirements, complicating the assessment of the magnitude of its transgressions. INL cited “employee turnover and the dissolution of the Afghanistan-Pakistan office” as reasons for not retaining records.

Given the Taliban’s takeover of Afghanistan in August 2021, SIGAR emphasized the importance of U.S. government activities adhering to laws, regulations, and policies intended to prevent transactions with terrorists.

Besides establishing fraudulent non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to loot significant portions of the $3 billion in humanitarian aid the U.S. has provided Afghanistan since the Biden administration’s abrupt military withdrawal, the Taliban has also accrued millions by charging taxes, permit fees, and import duties. This money has flowed through the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), a State Department arm known for its corruption, which received $63.1 billion for foreign assistance and diplomatic engagement this year. Additionally, the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM), the government’s international broadcasting service, also disbursed funds.

The United Nations has received $1.6 billion in U.S. funding for Afghanistan, and a significant percentage of that money likely went to the Taliban, according to a federal audit. The U.S. government does not require the UN to report on taxes, fees, or duties incurred on American funds for activities in Afghanistan, further complicating accountability.

SOURCE: SIGAR REPORT

Continue Reading

Biden Administration

US Announces $1.7 Billion in New Security Assistance for Ukraine

Published

on

The United States announced on Monday a new tranche of military aid for Ukraine valued at approximately $1.7 billion. This package includes critical air defense munitions and artillery rounds that Ukrainian forces have urgently requested.

The assistance package comprises $200 million in equipment drawn from existing U.S. military stocks, ensuring rapid deployment to the battlefield. Additionally, it includes around $1.5 billion in new orders, which will take longer to reach Ukraine, according to a statement from the Defense Department.

Key Components of the Aid Package

The new security assistance will provide Ukraine with:

  • Various types of air defense munitions to shield against Russian strikes
  • Artillery rounds
  • Ammunition for HIMARS precision rocket launchers
  • Multiple types of anti-tank weapons
  • Other crucial capabilities

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky expressed deep gratitude in a social media post, thanking U.S. President Joe Biden, the U.S. Congress, and the American people for their continued support. Zelensky emphasized that the aid includes items “critical to strengthening Ukrainian defenders, as well as funding to sustain previously committed equipment from the United States.”

Zelensky visited special forces in the border region of Kharkiv on Monday. Moscow’s forces launched a surprise ground offensive in this region in May but failed to make significant progress. The Ukrainian leader observed firsthand how the ongoing assistance from the U.S. helps to save lives and protect citizens from Russian attacks.

The United States has been a pivotal military supporter of Ukraine, committing over $55 billion in weapons, ammunition, and other security assistance since Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022.

Before late April, Washington had announced limited new aid for Ukraine this year, with only a $300 million package made possible through Pentagon savings on other purchases. After months of intense debate, Congress finally approved large-scale funding for Kyiv in April, authorizing $95 billion in aid, including $61 billion specifically for Ukraine.

Despite the new aid, Ukrainian forces are facing significant challenges. On Monday, Russia claimed its forces had captured the village of Vovche in eastern Ukraine, marking the latest in a series of front-line advances by Moscow.

The Ukrainian military reported that it had repelled six Russian attacks on the Kharkiv front line over the past day, including at Vovchansk, a small town that Russian forces have targeted since May. As the conflict grinds through its third year, neither side has managed to gain a decisive advantage, although Moscow’s forces have made recent gains.

Continue Reading

Trending