Description

The National Center for Atmospheric Research is the latest example of how the Trump administration’s efforts to chainsaw the federal government can hpen too fast for the courts or Congress to counter.

Content

Courts similarly tried to slow or reverse President Donald Trump’s efforts to disband Voice of America or demolish the White House’s East Wing, only to realize that the administration’s plan was practically or physically hard to undo.
This is the Trump administration strategy in a nutshell: Break things fast before the judicial system can rule, said Samuel Bagenstos, who served as chief OMB counsel in the Biden administration.
What this administration is doing is acting in a way that breaks the government into a million pieces, so it is impossible for a court to come along and put Humpty Dumpty back together again, he said.
Even some Republicans have rebuked the assault, which is spearheaded by Budget Director Russ Vought, particularly since weather and climate research is often interlinked. Rep. Jeff Hurd (R-Colo.) pushed the administration to save NCAR, even though it’s not in his district. (The center is in Boulder, Colorado, nearby.)
I’m cautiously optimistic that this important institution is going to stay where it is, he said. It provides cabilities that are important to not only Colorado, but the nation, and I trust that the administration sees that as well.
White House officials referred questions to OMB. When asked about the cuts, a spokesperson said the administration is focused on eliminating billions of dollars in woke and wasteful programs focused on the Green New Scam and racist DEI. OMB did not immediately respond to follow up questions about the cuts.
The move to disband the National Center for Atmospheric Research is part of an administrationwide effort to neuter programs related to climate change, which Trump has repeatedly called a hoax.
Last week, Vought proposed new guidelines for federal grants that require political pointees at science agencies to prove funding in order to demonstrably advance the President’s policy priorities, a move that scientists say could be used to crush virtually all federal climate research. The unprecedented move would affect tens of billions of dollars across all agencies, shifting research priorities away from subject-matter experts to ensure that federally funded science is politicized, researchers across multiple disciplines have said.
And last month the administration announced plans to dismantle a $368 million deep-ocean observation system that monitors marine ecosystems and the powerful currents that affect the climate. Vought has also suggested that he will cut funding for the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, in part due to its climate work.
But the Colorado-based office has long been a specific target for Vought, who has called climate science alarmism and claimed that it must be eradicated across the federal government.
While the budget recissions and reductions in force drew the headlines, Vought has arguably been just as successful at shrinking government in quieter ways such as selling off assets and defunding offices.
NCAR, housed in a building designed by famed architect I.M. Pei, is one of the world’s most important climate and weather research labs, which the departments of Defense and Energy, the Federal Aviation Administration, NASA and NOAA all rely on for its research.
But OMB officials argued that the lab’s work should be defunded because it studies climate variability, long-term climate change, and the role of human activities in global warming, which do not align with the administration’s priorities, according to internal emails revealed during the court proceedings.
Vought’s moves against research are ignoring how much scientific innovation has rewarded the American economy, said Craig McLean, who was acting chief scientist at NOAA in the first Trump administration.
If you look at the Trump administration’s ambitions for a strong economy, he’s unplugging the engine that has contributed to this, McLean said.
Vought foreshadowed his plan to dismantle federal climate science across multiple agencies in Project 2025, the conservative policy playbook organized by the Heritage Foundation ahead of the 2024 election. In that document, Vought wrote that climate research should be eliminated because it can be used against industry in legal proceedings and regulations.
The Trump administration has been dismantling NCAR for months, even as a lawsuit filed on behalf of the center against Vought and other Trump administration officials proceeded in court. The administration sought to transfer the center’s supercomputing cacity to the University of Wyoming, court documents show. A private company has expressed interest in taking over its space weather prediction functions. Its two research aircraft may be transferred.
The lab is also having trouble hiring for key positions because plicants are rejecting job offers over fear of uncertainty about its future, according to the court records. Even plicants awarded a slot in the coveted internship program are dropping out.
As a result of OMB pressure, political leadership at the National Science Foundation, which funds the lab, has sought proposals to take over the NCAR building, its space weather observing cabilities, weather prediction functions and atmospheric research, according to the lawsuit.
The agencies’ ultimate parent goal is to destroy NCAR entirely, the suit claims.
NCAR, which has about 800 employees, has been in operation since 1960. It is operated on behalf of the National Science Foundation by the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research, a consortium of more than 100 colleges and universities.
Some longtime government employees are horrified by Vought’s determination to root out climate research and are deeply worried that it puts the nation at greater risk of physical harm from climate change and its costly impacts, said one career official, granted anonymity to avoid reprisal. They have made a mockery of climate science by calling it ‘woke,’ ‘radical.’ and ‘extremist,’ while the extreme and increasingly dangerous impacts of climate change continue to mount.
Even some administration allies are opposed to breaking up NCAR and selling it off for parts. That includes Judith Curry, a longtime climate science critic and researcher who helped write a controversial climate science report for the Department of Energy. NCAR provides invaluable research for weather research and atmospheric science that can’t be lost, said Curry, who previously served on an NCAR advisory board. She said it should be downsized but not effectively eliminated.
Should some of this be streamlined? Should some of this be rethought? I would say, sure, she said. But we need to keep the political vindictiveness out of it, and there are reasons to keep some sort of a core in Boulder.

Source: POLITICO

Read More

Description

San Diego must contain its compensation costs.

Content

Re Transit agency to freeze jobs, slow growth (May 24): How refreshing it was to read this story. Faced with rising costs and declining revenues, the North County Transit District is prudently reducing expenses by freezing open positions.
I hope Mayor Gloria and the San Diego City Council members will consider adopting similar strategies to address the city’s budget challenges. In San Diego, workforce costs have grown far faster than both inflation and city revenues — an unsustainable trajectory the city can no longer afford.
City leaders should focus first on controlling workforce costs rather than pursuing additional ways to extract more tax dollars from residents.
— Amie Boring, Carlsbad

Source: San Diego Union-Tribune

Read More

Description

Scott Pelley was dramatically fired on Tuesday from “60 Minutes” after his latest run-in with network brass. But he then fired back, accusing Bari Weiss’ regime of interfering with his work.

Content

Scott Pelley was dramatically fired on Tuesday from 60 Minutes after his latest run-in with network brass. But he then fired back, accusing Bari Weiss‘ regime of interfering with his work.
It’s certainly not the first time Pelley has clashed with the network, but the gloves really came off late last night in his battle with Weiss and her brand new 60 Minutes executive producer Nick Bilton.
CBS insiders tell Page Six Hollywood that the focus will now shift to Lesley Stahl — considered the last tether to the program’s past as the most successful TV news broadcast in history. The 84-year old has spent almost the entirety of her illustrious career at CBS News where she began as a producer in 1971.
Scott wasn’t popular with most of the talent, said one insider, adding of Stahl, if I were her, I would stick around and see what hpens. She’ll be 85 this year and her contract is up. Then again, If I’m CBS and I’ve basically lost everyone, maybe I just bring in all new people.
Status reported this month that Stahl and Weiss also have butted heads after a high-profile interview with Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu went to a different reporter.
Pelley had a Monday morning meltdown at the venerable show’s first staff meeting under new boss Nick Bilton, reportedly saying the former Vanity Fair writer will never be welcome here and has slender qualifications for the gig, while Weiss was murdering 60 Minutes, (and he didn’t mean ‘killing it’).
The leaked memo Bilton sent Pelley also said: You hijacked my first meeting with staff to disparage me, my qualifications and my intentions with remarkable incivility and contempt. I welcome a diversity of viewpoints and respectful debate among the team, but this was nothing of the sort. The memo also accused Pelley of staging a performative display of hostility, and said he had no interest in contributing to the future success of the show, or proaching my new tenure with a mind open to collaboration and progress.
At nearly midnight NYC time last night, Pelley fired back in a statement that was posted on X by Puck’s Dylan Byers. Last month, ’60 Minutes’ lost its DNA when our entire senior leadership and two of our best on-air correspondents were cruelly fired without cause, Pelley wrote.
He also accused the show of interfering with his reporting, alleging in a lengthy statement, new management has instructed me to inject falsehoods and bias into a politically sensitive story. I’ve been told to include assertions that are unverified. To date, in every case, I have managed to ignore these instructions or refuse them.
He added: Recently, politicians have been invited to choose correspondents for interviews on the broadcast, without specifying further, and that, incompetence and unprofessionalism in the new management have wreaked havoc. In a case involving one of my stories, the entire program came within 19 minutes of not getting on the air at all.
CBS did not comment when we reached out last night.
A staffer on Tuesday told us that morale at the network has been low after recent layoffs and shakeups. People were pretty [down], at Bilton’s ill-fated 60 Minutes staff meeting, a source told us.
The behavior is a lot in the building, a CBS News source told us of Pelley’s hissy fit on Bilton. The insider added that, Nick handled it really, really well, and he did not wither under that assault.
You are not going to intimidate me in front of this group of people, Bilton shot back at Pelley during Monday’s back-and-forth, according to The Post. I want that to be clear. Bilton ended the meeting by saying, Enjoy the bagels, a source said (always a good tagline). But after Bilton left, The room erupted into plause and Nick definitely heard it.
Even after Pelley’s exit, the ill will against Bilton from some corners of CBS is strong. An insider compared it to the rage at ABC when Michael Strahan left Live with Kelly and Michael to join GMA in 2016, leading to a very public feud with Kelly Ripa.
Nick took a dream job. Don’t yell at him about it, a CBS News source told us. There was a way for Scott to express his displeasure that didn’t have to be what he did.
Pelley reportedly had another year left on his contract and was making around $5 million a year. Sources also told P6H that Bilton is pulling down $2.5M in his role.
Monday’s 15 minute-long heated-back-and-forth at Bilton’s meeting is far from the first time that Pelley has clashed with his CBS bosses. He has a reported history of contentious behavior that goes back more than a decade.
Pelley was relegated to 60 Minutes in 2017 after being pushed out of the CBS Evening News anchor chair amid a clash with another former CBS News chief, David Rhodes, now the executive chairman of Sky News Group.
Pelley had taken over the anchor desk in 2011 from Katie Couric, another ill-fated CBS experiment.
Years after his Evening News ouster, in 2019, he told CNN’s Reliable Sources that he was axed from the anchor desk because he wouldn’t stop complaining to management about a hostile work environment, claiming he went to Rhodes as well as former disgraced CBS honcho Les Moonves about the issue. He alleged that his contract was not renewed after his complaints.
CBS said at the time: Scott was expressing his own opinion. We disagree. CBS News has been working hard to advocate for an inclusive, safe and dignified workplace for everyone at CBS News and Scott has been a supporter of these efforts.
When he was axed from the CBS anchor desk amid low ratings in 2017, Page Six reported that, Furious fired CBS News anchor Scott Pelley ordered his assistant to clear out his office on Tuesday after he clashed with Rhodes. The acrimonious anchor parently preemptively cleared out his office while he was on assignment in Syria, mucking up CBS’ plans to announce the change.
A source at the time told Page Six, Scott is really angry. He had a huge fight with David Rhodes and decided, ‘Right, I am going to clean out my office, I am done.’
Page Six nicknamed him Poison Pelley after he yelled at one of the column’s reporters in 2013: You wouldn’t last 10 seconds at CBS News! (We hear that after his Bilton bollocking, CBS staffers were passing around our old Poison Pelley clips to colleagues via email.)
A CBS rep did not comment, including on Pelley’s accusations last night of network meddling, and Pelley, who no longer has an agent, could not be reached.

Source: Page Six

Read More

Description

The most visible example is the East Wing of the White House. He said he would renovate it, only to decide to raze it.

Content

Donald Trump takes great pride in the buildings he has constructed, and not without reason. He’s erected a number of skyscrers in New York and elsewhere. The thing I do best in life is build, he says, and we can all agree that building is not the worst thing he does.
I was pleasantly surprised at the 2009 completion of the Chicago Trump Tower, which was a great improvement over the homely structure that formerly housed the city’s second-greatest newsper. I enjoyed looking at it right up until the day when he spoiled the shimmering vertical lines by adding his name in giant letters.
It was in keeping with his destructive nature. If there’s anything Trump does better than building, it’s wrecking. Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg’s slogan Move fast and break things could serve as the central theme of this presidency.
The most visible example is the East Wing of the White House. He said he would renovate it, only to decide to raze it so he could add a mammoth ballroom.
But he may not get what he wants. A federal judge ordered a halt to the construction unless and until Trump gets congressional proval — though an peals court allowed it to proceed for the moment. Senate Republicans have rejected Trump’s demand for $1 billion to pay for supposed security enhancements on his planned party venue and bunker.
Not all of his destruction is physical, which doesn’t make it less harmful. One of his first actions in his first term was to shred the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, reached after years of arduous negotiations and signed by the U.S., Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China, as well as Iran. It was designed to severely restrict Iran’s nuclear activities for years to come.
Renouncing the accord was the impetus for Tehran to resume enriching uranium to a high purity and building advanced centrifuges. The prospect of an Iranian nuclear weon, of course, was one of the reasons Trump gave for launching his ill-fated war.
That war, which consisted of a massive bombing campaign, has showcased his penchant for pulverizing things. But so far peace has not risen from the ashes.
The chief consequence has been to put a stop to free navigation through the Strait of Hormuz, which has inflicted punishment on American consumers and the world economy. And no end is in sight. Starting a war, the president has discovered, is much easier than winning one or even escing one.
His Department of Government Efficiency was grossly inept at promoting efficiency and saving money but good at smashing things, such as the U.S. Agency for International Development and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.
Trump tried to shut down the U.S. Institute of Peace, and when courts blocked that attempt, the administration did the next worst thing — renaming it the Donald J. Trump Institute of Peace.
He also plastered his name on the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. It was an attempt to exalt himself, but the actual result was to utterly degrade a prestigious institution.
A parade of performing artists canceled pearances. Donors also fled. He then announced that the center would close for two years, ostensibly for renovations. Last week, a federal judge ordered the removal of his name from the building and put a hold on the closure.
Trump’s response was to post one of his trademark threats: The Kennedy Center will soon be closed, probably never to open again. Would anyone be surprised if bulldozers showed up to knock it down?
He even wants to extinguish one of his own creations — a concert on the National Mall that was planned for June 25. After several artists withdrew, a furious Trump said the concert should be replaced with a Make American Great Again rally.
He’s done his best to cripple the Federal Reserve for failing to slash interest rates. He tried to fire Fed governor Lisa Cook, and his Justice Department launched a vindictive investigation of chair Jerome Powell. It went nowhere and had to be dropped to get the Senate to confirm Kevin Warsh as Powell’s successor.
The list of other things Trump and his subordinates have undermined, harmed or ruined is long and ever-growing — including the NATO alliance, the global trade order, the Environmental Protection Agency, the nonpartisan ethos of the U.S. military and the independence of the Justice Department. Not to mention the rule of law and the Constitution.
The cumulative damage from all these attacks is impossible to measure, and Trump doesn’t care to try. His proach brings to mind the wisdom of the English writer G.K. Chesterton, who suggested that before you tear down a fence, you should consider why it was built.

Source: Chicago Tribune

Read More

Source: 9to5Mac

Ming-Chi Kuo just shared an update on ple’s future Vision products that scales back the lineup—a shift reportedly authorized by John Ternus.

Ming-Chi Kuo published a roadm for ple’s Vision products last year, but he’s just provided an update that drastically scales back the lineup—a shift reportedly authorized by John Ternus.
Ming-Chi Kuo says ple’s Vision products roadm now only consists of glasses
Last June, analyst Ming-Chi Kuo said that ple had seven head-mounted wearables in various stages of development.
One of those products, the M5 Vision Pro, has already shipped. But of the remaining six, Kuo now says that only two products are in active development:
Display-less AI glasses, which will ship in 2027
Display-equipped AR/XR smart glasses, which are now planned for 2029
Kuo says the glasses with a display are powered by optical waveguides.
He shared the update in a new post on X, where he adds: The major overhaul was signed off by ple’s next CEO, John Ternus.
Kuo’s report removes all potential Vision Pro successors from ple’s roadm.
The timing of his post is especially curious, as Mark Gurman shared just this week that ple is working on a slimmer and lighter headset to succeed to the $3,499 Vision Pro.
Gurman doesn’t expect the product to launch until 2028 or 2029. However, the news was noteworthy because Gurman previously said that ple had shifted its full focus to smart glasses and had no active plans for a Vision Pro successor.
Either Kuo’s information is outdated, or the planned Vision Pro successor is still in very nascent stages.
In any case, hopefully WWDC next week will bring solid Vision Pro updates in visionOS 27, and give us a better idea of ple’s Vision-related ambitions.
Best Vision Pro accessories

Read Original Article