Daily review 03/02/2022

10 comments on “Daily review 03/02/2022 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Dennis Frank 1

   3 February 2022 at 5:55 pm

   A retired US Army lieutenant-colonel who was a pivotal witness in the first impeachment case against Donald Trump has sued the oldest son of the former president and other Trump allies, accusing them of participating in an "intentional, concerted campaign of unlawful intimidation and retaliation" over his decision to testify.

   The lawsuit from Alexander Vindman, who testified during 2019 impeachment proceedings about a phone call in which Trump pressed his Ukraine counterpart to investigate Democratic rival Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, was filed today in US federal court in Washington. The suit names as defendants Donald Trump Jr; Rudy Giuliani, a long-time Trump adviser who has served as Trump's lawyer; and former White House communications officials Dan Scavino and Julia Hahn.

   It alleges that after Vindman was summoned by House lawmakers to testify, the defendants and others co-ordinated and advanced "false narratives" about him, including that he was a spy for Ukraine and had spoken pejoratively about the US to foreign officials; leaked classified information about him; falsely accused him of lying under oath; and worked to derail his expected promotion to colonel.

   https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/donald-trump-jr-and-allies-sued-by-witness-from-first-impeachment-case/VPXVPSRSQUTHYJUZIZUN6QEFM4/

   This guy was born in Ukraine & arrived as a 3-yr old immigrant to the US with his parents & twin brother late 1979. He's a veteran of the Iraq War and graduated from Harvard with an MA, specialising in Russian/Asian relations, then had a career in the US Army. Subsequently

   he was then a politico-military affairs officer focused on Russia for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Vindman was on the Joint Staff at the Pentagon from September 2015 to July 2018. In July 2018, Vindman accepted an assignment with the National Security Council.

   In his role on the NSC, Vindman became part of the U.S. delegation at the inauguration of Ukraine's newly elected President, Volodymyr Zelensky. The five-member delegation, led by Rick Perry, United States Secretary of Energy, also included Kurt Volker, then U.S. Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations, Gordon Sondland, United States Ambassador to the European Union, and Joseph Pennington, then acting chargé d'affaires.

   Vindman was subpoenaed to testify before Congressional investigators on October 29, 2019, as part of the U.S. House of Representatives' impeachment inquiry against Donald Trump. He is the first White House official to testify who was actually on a July 25, 2019, telephone call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, in which Trump asked Zelensky to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden, who was campaigning for President. Based on his opening statement, obtained in advance by The New York Times, Vindman's testimony corroborates previous testimony from Fiona Hill, his former manager, and William B. Taylor Jr., acting Ambassador to Ukraine.

   On October 28, 2019, Vindman's opening statement to a closed session of the House Intelligence Committee, House Foreign Affairs Committee, and House Oversight Committee was released, ahead of his testimony the following day. Vindman testified that: "In Spring of 2019, I became aware of outside influencers promoting a false and alternative narrative of Ukraine inconsistent with the consensus views of the interagency," which was "harmful to U.S. national security" and also "undermined U.S. Government efforts to expand cooperation with Ukraine."

   Vindman states that, additionally, he was concerned by two events, both of which he objected to with senior officials in real time, and which he reported to the National Security Council's lead attorney. The first event occurred at a July 10 meeting between Ukraine's then Secretary of National Security and Defense Council Oleksandr Danylyuk, and then US National Security Advisor John Bolton, at which Ambassadors Volker and Sondland, and Energy Secretary Rick Perry were in attendance, and at which Sondland asked Ukraine to launch investigations into the Bidens in order to get a meeting with President Trump. Vindman states that Bolton cut the meeting short, and that both Vindman and Hill told Ambassador Sondland that his comments were inappropriate and reported their concerns to the NSC's lead counsel.

   The second event occurred on a July 25 phone call between Presidents Trump and Zelensky. Vindman states, "I was concerned by the call. I did not think it was proper to demand that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen, and I was worried about the implications for the U.S. Government's support of Ukraine. I realized that if Ukraine pursued an investigation into the Bidens and Burisma, it would likely be interpreted as a partisan play which would undoubtedly result in Ukraine losing the bipartisan support it has thus far maintained. This would all undermine U.S. national security." Vindman also stated that he reported his concern to the NSC's lead counsel, John Eisenberg.

   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Vindman

   He seems clearly to be a straight-shooter doing his duty. He will be a serious test of the credibility of the US justice system. Nuances in law may dictate the outcome but he ought to win even if the battle goes all the way to the Supreme Court.
2. Dennis Frank 2

   3 February 2022 at 8:19 pm

   Law prof Andrew Geddes has this verdict:

   MIQ in its current form simply cannot survive. Epidemiologically, even those committed to keeping Covid’s spread as flat as possible will find it difficult to argue that MIQ’s abolition significantly increases health risks.

   Legally, the justification for imposing limits on the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act guarantee of a citizen’s right to return home becomes harder and harder to sustain. And politically, the balance between avoiding blame for Covid’s spread and facing heat for an ongoing enforced isolation from the world shifts markedly.

   Hence, today’s heralded farewell to MIQ. Whether it was the right policy applied in the right way, or the right policy misapplied in its details, will be something that the High Court will be asked to review on February 14.

   https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/03-02-2022/rip-miq-an-early-eulogy-for-a-border-system-thats-run-its-course
   • Muttonbird 2.1

     3 February 2022 at 8:27 pm

     Andrew Geddes, not a doctor.
     • Dennis Frank 2.1.1

       3 February 2022 at 8:45 pm

       Gosh, who knew??
   • UncookedSelachimorpha 2.2

     3 February 2022 at 8:45 pm

     Iwi members egged as anti-vaxxers force caution in vaccine rollout for tamariki

     This stupidity and arrogance is the last thing we need
3. Dennis Frank 3

   3 February 2022 at 9:00 pm

   Unbelievable how some commentators here defend the status quo:

   Despite multiple failures – including untreated sewage polluting a popular swimming beach – the company running Wellington's four wastewater treatment plants is keeping its multi-million dollar contract for now.

   An independent report released today has found the French-owned multinational Veolia failed to carry out basic asset management, including regular maintenance.

   Wellington Water – which is jointly owned by the region's councils – commissioned the review in October 2021 after issuing 10 warnings, infringement, and abatement notices to the company Veolia over the previous 18 months.

   It was a member of the public who alerted Wellington Water to a contaminated sludge spill in Porirua's Titahi Bay last August after Veolia failed to notify it.

   The independent review found the breaches and non-compliances were "avoidable". "These were due to one or more of: human error; lack of resources; poor judgement; inadequate procedures; insufficient management oversight; or absence of planning." The problems were not due to a lack of money, the review stated.

   "There were no issues raised in relation to insufficient funds, or that the tenders had been bid at a price that was proving difficult for Veolia to sustain." The French-owned company, which has operated Moa Point and Western wastewater treatments plants since 2004, was awarded a 10-year contract to run all four plants in 2019.

   Veolia's performance had "adversely affected the trust and confidence of Client Councils, iwi, stakeholders and community groups in Wellington Water". There was now a lack of trust between key personnel from both sides, they wrote.

   For Veolia's part, its staff "viewed their treatment by Wellington Water as that of a 'master-slave relationship' and felt that client power dynamics may have impacted adversely on Veolia's performance".

   Veolia staff felt there have been too many reviews, taking them away from their operational delivery functions. "Wellington Water has at times exhibited a blame approach rather than jointly problem-solving."

   However, the reviewers concluded that terminating the contract and finding a replacement – either by going back to the market or bringing the contract in-house – would take too long, with no guarantee it would "run any better than the poor implementation of the current contract".

   https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/460842/company-running-wellington-wastewater-treatment-plants-failed-basic-asset-management-report

   What I like about this status quo is the habitual review feature. We could call this the review addiction syndrome – a Wellington sociopathy. "We need to keep the consultancy gravy train rolling along." However I must admit that the master-slave relationship is also an extremely impressive feature of Wellington governance.
   • Cricklewood 3.1

     3 February 2022 at 10:18 pm

     Can sit alot of the blame with our rush to bundle up and give key infrastructure maintenance contracts to massive multinationals who dont actually give a fuck outside of extracting profit typically by doing as little actual work as possible in the knowledge that we're too chickenshit to boot them.

     Same shitty scenario in Auckland.

     We need to either bring it back in house or break contracts back down so they can be at least undertaken by NZ based companies.
     • Hongi Ika 3.1.1

       3 February 2022 at 11:18 pm

       Just lazy bureaucrats taking the easy way out and shelling the contracts out to Multi Nationals.
   • Tony Veitch (not etc.) 3.2

     4 February 2022 at 4:30 am

     It's an essential part of the neoliberal mantra – private business working for profit can do it better than government/local government working for the public.

     There just may be a tiny atom of truth in this assertion – if the private business is local or NZ based and can be dealt with for failure to deliver – but loses all credibility when a large multi-national is involved.

     We need to admit (and we're getting there) that the last 30, 35 years have been a ghastly mistake and return to being a social democracy once again.

     Bring back the M.O.W.
     • Dennis Frank 3.2.1

       4 February 2022 at 6:52 am

       Bring back the M.O.W.

       And subtract the shovel-leaning ethos. I agree, Tony (with this proviso incorporated into the design). The downsides of socialism discredited that system, and the downsides of neoliberalism have done likewise.

       There's no reason in principle why the public service can't be made to work properly. All that's required is to eliminate the disincentives that induce members and managers to evade responsibility and accountability to the public. First step is to admit that neo-colonialism is built into the ethos. Primarily evident in the privileged-caste dimension of the system.

       The thing needs a total strip-down & rebuild. Treat it like the WWI motorbike my English grandad rode as a courier during the Irish rebellion – a venerable antique which can be repurposed.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS