Most Viewed Videos

On Tuesday, the Washington Post published a bombshell drawn from a forthcoming book by the journalists Bob Woodward and Robert Costa: during the final days of Donald Trump’s presidency, Gen Mark Milley, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and the US’s highest-ranking military officer, called the senior ranking general of the Chinese military and offered to warn him in advance of any American military action against China.

Milley, who reportedly believed that Trump was unstable and might launch a politically motivated military operation, contacted the Chinese without the knowledge of the White House. He no doubt thought that his decision was for the greater good. But if he did indeed negotiate with a foreign military rival without authorization, he violated the longstanding American political tradition that the military is subordinate to elected civilian leaders.

A spokesman for Milley released a statement on Wednesday acknowledging the substance of Woodward and Costa’s reporting, and defending Milley’s actions as “in keeping with [his] duties and responsibilities conveying reassurance in order to maintain strategic stability”.

So far President Biden has declined to discipline Milley. On Wednesday, he told reporters that he had “great confidence” in the general. But he shouldn’t. If anything, Biden should demand Milley’s immediate resignation.

Milley called the Chinese general Li Zuocheng in October and January. On one call, he reportedly said, “General Li, you and I have known each other for now five years. If we’re going to attack, I’m going to call you ahead of time. It’s not going to be a surprise.”

That alone should be grounds for immediate dismissal. No US military officer can seize authority from the president and call the commanding general of our greatest global rival and tell that general that he’ll be given advance warning of military action ordered by the president. Such an act is dangerously close to treason, as Senator Marco Rubio and others have noted. But Milley deserves to be relieved of duty for far more than this one act of insubordination.

Milley has a troubling, years-long record of poor military judgment and a tendency to subvert his civilian leaders. This is particularly evident in his rosy assessments of the war in Afghanistan and the capabilities of the Afghan military.

In 2013, when Milley was the commander of the International Security Assistance Force Joint Command in Afghanistan, he praised the Afghan forces at a Pentagon press briefing. “This army and this police force have been very, very effective in combat against the insurgents every single day,” Milley gushed. “And I think that’s an important story to be told across the board.”

Yet analysts and observers of the war already knew it was going poorly. Around the time that Milley was praising them, the Brookings Institution’s Vanda Felbab-Brown, for example, argued that Afghan troops “continue to suffer from deeply inadequate logistical, sustainment, and other support capabilities and are also deeply pervaded by corruption, nepotism, and ethnic and patronage fissures.”

It is difficult to say whether Milley knew that the Afghan forces were woefully inadequate, or simply had a glaringly poor ability to assess the progress of a war that he was prosecuting. Either way, he consistently, for years, failed to accurately convey the situation to senior US leaders. But that’s not the worst of it.

In November 2020, according to an investigation by Axios, Trump signed a directive to complete the military withdrawal from Afghanistan by 15 January 2021, five days before the end of his term as president. Milley was “appalled” at the idea of a full withdrawal, according to Axios, and worked behind the scenes to derail the effort. Trump was forced to revise the planned withdrawal deadline to 1 May 2021.

When Trump’s national security adviser, Robert O’Brien, said that the president was going to reduce the troop levels from 4,500 to 2,500 before leaving office, Milley publicly challenged the words of the president’s senior adviser, saying, “I think that Robert O’Brien or anyone else can speculate as they see fit.”

On 21 July 2021, Milley told the Pentagon press corps that despite reports that the Taliban had been capturing scores of districts from government forces, the Afghan forces had “the capacity to sufficiently fight and defend their country”. Less than a month later and mere days after the Taliban had seized Kabul, Milley claimed, “There was nothing that I or anyone else saw that indicated a collapse of this army and this government in 11 days.”

But Milley’s revisionist claim that neither he “nor anyone else” could have foreseen the collapse of the Afghan military is laughable. Just two days earlier, John Sopko, the long-time Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (Sigar), told NPR that the collapse was not in the least surprising:

I mean, we’ve been warning – my little agency – for the last almost 10 years about issues with the … Afghan security forces’ capabilities and sustainment. All the signs have been there. I mean, we’ve been shining a light on it in multiple reports going back to when I started [in] 2012 about changing metrics, about … ghost soldiers who didn’t exist, about poor logistics, about the fact that the Afghans couldn’t sustain what we were giving them. … I think the speed maybe is a little bit of a surprise. But the fact that the [Afghan forces] could not fight on their own should not have been a surprise to anyone.

Moreover, had Milley continued the process of withdrawal that Trump committed to completing by 1 May, the US would almost certainly have been able to finish the mission on time and in relative order – and 13 US service members might still be alive.

The US is not a military junta; it is a republic led by elected civilian leaders, and it cannot allow the creation of any precedent, large or small, of military insubordination.

In 1951, after Gen Douglas MacArthur repeatedly publicly clashed with President Harry Truman’s direction of the Korean war, Truman fired MacArthur. The American public widely considered MacArthur a war hero, and Truman’s decision was bitterly unpopular, but he believed MacArthur had given him no choice. Similarly, in 2010, after a Rolling Stone article depicted Gen Stanley McChrystal and his staff badmouthing President Barack Obama and undermining his command of the war in Afghanistan, Obama summoned McChrystal to Washington and accepted his resignation.

Both decisions were controversial – but they were the right ones, and arguably the only ones, that those presidents could take.

Milley cannot continue serving as the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. For the good of the nation, Biden must relieve him of duty.

  • Daniel L Davis is a senior fellow at Defense Priorities and a former lieutenant colonel in the US army who deployed in combat zones four times. He is the author of The Eleventh Hour in 2020 America

Source Article from https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep/17/general-milley-cannot-undermine-civilian-authority-the-us-is-not-a-military-junta

SURFSIDE, Fla. – Haunted by the recent tragedy in Surfside, some residents of ocean-side apartments in South Florida have been searching for information about the structural integrity of their condominiums. The residents of a Collins Avenue building with prior warnings in Miami Beach said they are horrified about what they found.

The fear started after Champlain Towers South, at 8777 Collins Ave., turned into the epicenter of heartbreak and grief on Thursday morning. Some of the residents of the Champlain Towers North and East decided to evacuate.

On Monday, several residents at Maison Grande Condominium, an 18-story building with 502 units, said they are worried about the safety of the 1971 building at 6039 Collins Ave., in Miami Beach. They have photographs showing corroded steel and concrete spalling.

Records show there have been five inspections that determined the building is an “unsafe structure.” The building envelope is among the list of concerns. There were also warnings that the two-story parking garage and pool deck “have reached the end of their useful life and require repair, replacement,” or “a combination thereof.”

On Nov. 19, 2020, a city official wrote, “Structure with evidence of spalling concrete. Need to submit a report signed and sealed by [an] engineer to evaluate the structure together with methods of repairs.” Near an entrance, there is a Dec. 28, 2020 red “unsafe structure” violation notice.

Residents of Collins Avenue buildings worry about maintenance issues

On Wednesday, people trusted Champlain Towers South was safe enough to sleep in. The 12-story northern section of the L-shaped building collapsed shortly before 2 a.m. Thursday. Residents of neighboring buildings said they woke up to loud noise. Some said their windows shook and there was a large white cloud of dust.

Fire Rescue personnel moved to evacuate trapped survivors who waited in their balconies for their turn to climb into a cherry picker. Survivors said it was an agonizingly slow process. An army of rescuers wearing hard hats moved in. Dogs started sniffing the scattered ruins. Experts from as far as Israel and Argentina arrived.

Search-and-rescue teams continued to tunnel through a compact mountain of pancaked concrete in hope of finding survivors Monday. They have been taking turns to search day and night while facing sporadic rain and spontaneous fires. Crews are using a crane to carefully remove hazardous metal and concrete. Authorities have a warehouse where they are keeping items recovered.

The death toll rose, as more than 150 people were unaccounted for. And as the world wondered how this could be possible in Florida, where hurricanes have forced officials to increase structural standards, a troublesome 2018 report surfaced. It shows engineers had reported there was structural damage at Champlain Towers South. Property owners were preparing to contribute their part in more than $9 million in projects.

Officials said the 1981 building was in the process of recertification, which is required every 40 years and involves scrutinizing every part of the residential property. Survivors filed a lawsuit against Champlain Towers South Condominium Association alleging there was negligence when a lack of maintenance led to the deterioration that they allege caused the collapse.

“It’s sad. And people ask me, ‘Where are you going to go? Where are you going to be?’ Well, for sure I am not getting a condo on the beach. That’s done,” said Steve Rosenthal, a survivor from Unit 705 who filed a lawsuit against the Champlain Towers South association.

Related story: Surfside condo attorney says it’s too early to tell what went wrong

Gov. Ron DeSantis said it’s going to take time to find out with certainty what exactly caused the tragedy. Engineers with The National Institute of Standards and Technology are collecting preliminary information to make a recommendation about whether or not a federal probe into the cause of the collapse is needed.

Related story: Geologist warned of instability in Surfside

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz said the findings of the NIST probe and other investigations could allow federal and state lawmakers to make changes to prevent a future tragedy. As countless unanswered questions lingered, the Miami-Dade Police Department was slowly releasing the identities and ages of the victims.

Stacie Dawn Fang, 54, died on Thursday on her way to the Aventura hospital after crews pulled her out of the rubble. Her 15-year-old son survived after he managed to get the attention of a neighbor who was near the rubble. Crews also recovered the body of Antonio Lozano, 83.

On Friday, crews found the bodies of Lozano’s wife, Gladys Lozano, 79, and Manuel “Manny” LaFont, 54. On Saturday, crews found the bodies of Luis Bermudez, 26, Ana Ortiz, 46, Marcus Guara, 52, and Leon Oliwkowicz, 80. On Sunday, crews found the body of Christina Beatriz Elvira Oliwkowicz, 74. On Monday, crews found Frank Kleinman, 55, and Michael Altman, 50.

Complete coverage

Coverage on Monday

Coverage on Sunday

Coverage on Saturday

Coverage on Friday

Coverage on Thursday

Local 10 News Reporter Amy Viteri contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://www.local10.com/news/local/2021/06/29/residents-of-other-unsafe-structures-fear-outcome-of-surfside-building-collapse/

Migrant families are still being separated by the Trump administration, sometimes over “uncorroborated allegations” of crimes, according to a report published Thursday by a Texas civil rights group.

“Family separations are still very much happening in the southern border, they’re still being torn apart by the U.S. government,” Efrén Olivares, director of racial and economic justice at the Texas Civil Rights Project, told NBC News.

While the separations were not happening at the same scale as when the Trump administration announced the “zero tolerance” policy last spring, some occurred under troubling circumstances, Olivares said. The report, which looked at cases between June 22 through Dec. 17 in McAllen, Texas, comes roughly eight months since the government formally ended the policy.

The report said it found 38 cases of parents and legal guardians separated from their children.

One of those cases involved Mr. Perez-Domingo, an indigenous migrant father from Guatemala whose primary language is Mam, according to the report. Perez-Domingo was separated from his 2-year-old daughter in July after being accused by Customs and Border Protection of not being the girl’s biological father and providing a fraudulent birth certificate, according to the report. He was not given an interpreter during his interview.

The civil rights group said it investigated the incident and discovered the birth certificate was authentic and a DNA test determined Perez-Domingo was the child’s father. They were reunited in August.

“The lack of assistance of translators, in combination with aggressive questioning by the CBP agent, resulted in severe discrimination and traumatic consequences for this indigenous family,” the report says, adding, had the group “not interviewed this father early in the process, it is highly likely that Mr. Perez-Domingo would have been deported without his daughter, and his child unlawfully orphaned in the United States.”

The report lists another migrant father, identified as Mr. A, whose 11-year-old daughter and 9-year-old son were taken from him over “uncorroborated allegations of gang affiliation.” The civil rights group claimed that an investigation into the man’s background did not find evidence of known criminal convictions in the U.S. or in his home country of El Salvador or proof of any gang affiliation.

After the end of “zero tolerance,” administration officials have said immigration authorities are separating families only if the adult is not the parent or legal guardian of the child, if the safety of the child is at risk or because of “serious criminal activity” by the adult.

Customs and Border Protection said in a statement that the the Texas Civil Rights Project had “published a flawed report without asking for or including input” from the federal agency. It also claimed the civil rights group used flawed data including “all types of familial relationships without regard to the statutory definition” of an unaccompanied migrant child.

Based on that definition, Customs and Border Protection acknowledged a total of 38 family separations in McAllen.

Source Article from https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/migrant-families-still-being-separated-border-report-texas-group-says-n973766

A state Republican group apologized Sunday after sharing a meme calling four Democratic congresswomen the “The Jihad Squad.” The post showed a faux movie poster featuring Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ayanna Pressley, Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar –– progressive lawmakers known as “the Squad” who were the target of attacks from President Trump last week. 

The Illinois Republican County Chairman’s Association (RCCA), a group that helps elect Republicans in the state, drew widespread criticism from both sides of the aisle after it posted a photoshopped image of the four congresswomen with guns, labeled “The Jihad Squad.” A logo for the RCCA appeared at the bottom. 

The association’s president, Mark Shaw, apologized in a statement Sunday night for the meme. “I condemn this unauthorized posting and it has been deleted,” Shaw wrote. “I am sorry if anyone who saw the image was offended by the contents.” 

He added,”This unauthorized posting is an unfortunate distraction from the serious debate surrounding the policies advocated by these four socialist members of the United States House of Representatives of which I strongly disagree.” 

The meme, which mimics the poster for the 2013 action flick “Gangster Squad.” depicts Pressley aiming a handgun, Omar with a high-powered rifle, Tlaib shouting with a gun in her hand, and Ocasio-Cortez wearing a red dress surrounded by flames. Omar and Tlaib are the first two Muslim women ever elected into Congress. The slogan under the photo said: “Political jihad is their game. If you don’t agree with their socialist ideology, you’re a racist.”

The Illinois Republican Party chairman Tim Schneider condemned the post, saying it doesn’t reflect his party’s values. “Bigoted rhetoric greatly distracts from legitimate and important policy debates and further divides our nation. My intense disagreement with the socialist policies and anti-semitic language of these four congresswomen has absolutely nothing to do with their race or religion,” he said.

The Cook County Democratic Party called the meme a “racist and inflammatory attack” on the four congresswomen, adding, “The post perpetuates the recent attacks by President Trump, promoting lies and racism to alienate immigrants, women, and people of color.” 

The post follows a string of public comments from Mr. Trump attacking the four congresswomen of color that began with a series of tweets. He told them to “go back” to the “totally broken and crime infested places from which they came.” In an interview with “CBS This Morning” co-host Gayle King last week, the congresswomen called the attacks a “distraction.”

During a campaign rally in North Carolina on Wednesday, Trump supporters began to chant “send her back” after the president mentioned Omar. Mr. Trump did not stop the chants. The next day he said he was “not happy” with it, but soon he seemed to reverse course again, praising the rally crowd and continuing to attack Omar.

Then on Sunday, he had more to say against the four freshmen lawmakers. “I don’t believe the four Congresswomen are capable of loving our Country. They should apologize to America (and Israel) for the horrible (hateful) things they have said,” he tweeted.

Source Article from https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jihad-squad-illinois-republican-party-meme-poster-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-rashida-tlaib-ilhan-omar-ayanna-pressley/

Boone Pickens—’Oracle of Oil,’ corporate raider, billionaire…

T. Boone Pickens was a wildcatter, corporate raider, hedge fund founder, and billionaire philanthropist.

read more

Source Article from https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/11/t-boone-pickens-oracle-of-oil-and-corporate-raider-dies-at-91.html

Source Article from https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2021/08/04/florida-texas-hospitals-covid-unvaxxed-patients/5452766001/

Derechos de autor de la imagen
Reuters

Image caption

El USS John S McCain sufrió daños importantes.

El destructor lanzamisiles de la Armada de Estados Unidos USS John S. McCain colisionó con un buque petrolero de bandera liberiana cerca del Estrecho de Malaca, en aguas de Singapur.

Las autoridades estadounidenses informaron que 10 miembros de la tripulación del barco se encuentran desaparecidos y que otros cinco resultaron lesionados. Hay un operativo de búsqueda y rescate en desarrollo.

La colisión ocurrió a las 5:24 hora local del lunes (21:24 GMT del domingo), cuando “la nave estaba en tránsito a una visita de rutina a un puerto de Singapur”, detalló la Armada en un comunicado.

Según el texto, los daños en el USS John S. McCain son “sustantivos”.

Sin embargo, posteriormente se informó que el barco está navegando de forma autónoma y que se dirige al puerto de Singapur.

Operaciones de salvamento

Helicópteros militares de Estados Unidos, así como de la Armada y de la Guardia Costera de Singapur participan en las operaciones de búsqueda y rescate.

Derechos de autor de la imagen
Getty Images

Image caption

Imagen del USS John S McCain durante una visita a Vietnam en 2010.

Las vías marítimas en torno a Singapur son unas de las más congestionadas del mundo, pues por ellas transita una parte sustancial del comercio de bienes y de petróleo del mundo.

De hecho, el Estrecho de Malaca es considerado como una de las rutas marítimas más estratégicas del planeta.

La colisión del USS John S. McCain es el segundo accidente importante de un destructor de la Armada estadounidense en aguas asiáticas en dos meses.

El jueves pasado, la Armada anunció medidas disciplinarias contra los comandantes de otro buque de guerra, el USS Fitzgerald, que colisionó con una nave de carga en junio, matando a siete tripulantes estadounidenses.

Un tanquero enorme

El USS John S. McCain colisionó con el buque petrolero Alnic MC, una embarcación de grandes dimensiones.

Unos 90 minutos después de ocurrido el incidente, la web MarineTraffic, una página que hace seguimiento a las embarcaciones, lo ubicaba a varios kilómetros de distancia de la costa oriental de Malasia, a la altura del estado de Johor.

Según informó la Autoridad Marítima y Portuaria de Singapur (MPA, por sus siglas en inglés), esta embarcación tuvo daños en el tanque del pique de proa, a unos 7 metros por encima de la cota de agua.

Sin embargo, su tripulación no fue afectada.

Derechos de autor de la imagen
Twitter

Image caption

El senador John McCain dijo que él y su esposa rezan por la tripulación del destructor estadounidense.

La MPA también informó que no se ha detectado contaminación en el agua por pérdida de combustible y que el tráfico marítimo en la zona no se ha visto alterado por el incidente.

El destructor estadounidense fue bautizado con el nombre del padre y del abuelo del senador John McCain, quienes sirvieron en la Armada de ese país.

El dirigente republicano publicó un mensaje en Twitter diciendo que él y su esposa estaban rezando por los marineros.

Source Article from http://www.bbc.com/mundo/noticias-internacional-40995800

The brother of George Floyd testified in court Monday how the two of them were close growing up in Texas, and he then gave in to tears when a photo of their mother holding George as a baby was shown to the jury.

At the start of the third and what appears will be the final week of testimony before jury deliberations in the Derek Chauvin murder trial, Philonise Floyd spoke of his brother’s devotion to their mother, saying, “He loved her so dearly.”

Philonise Floyd described in Hennepin County District Court the image to jurors, saying, “That’s my mother, she’s no longer with us, but that’s my oldest brother George. I miss both of them.”

He added that his wedding anniversary is in May, but his brother and mother both died in the month of May. “It’s a bittersweet moment because I’m supposed to be happy when that month comes,” he said.

George Floyd was able to speak to their mother on phone while she was in hospice care but didn’t see her before she died on May 30, 2018, Philonise said. George repeatedly called out “Momma” to her at her funeral and wouldn’t leave the casket, the brother said.

Philonise said his brother’s relationship with his mother “was one of a kind. George, he would always be up on our mom. He was a big mama’s boy. … Every mother loves all of her kids, but it’s so unique how they were. He would lay up on her like in the fetus position, like he was in the womb.”

In the family’s community, Philonise Floyd said, George “was one of those people in the community, when they had church outside, people would attend church just because he was there. Nobody would go out there until they seen him. He was a person everybody loved around the community. He just knew how to make people feel better.”

Although about seven years apart, the brothers spent a lot of time together growing up in Houston and “playing video games all the time” such as “Double Dribble” and “Tecmo Bowl.”

He also recalled his older brother “used to make the best banana mayonnaise sandwiches. … George couldn’t cook. He couldn’t boil water.”

Marks on a wall in the family home tracked George Floyd’s growth, Philonise Floyd said. “He wanted to be taller all the time because he loved sports,” the brother said. “He wanted to be the best.”

Judge Peter Cahill ended the day by telling jurors they should expect to hear the defense’s case starting Tuesday and closing arguments from the attorneys next Monday before sequestration for deliberations on the charges.

Cahill said it appeared the jurors could start deliberating as soon as Friday, but he wanted to make sure they would not be sequestered over the coming weekend.

“So, pack a bag” and bring it to court on Monday, the judge told the jurors.

Chauvin is charged with second-degree unintentional murder, third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter in the killing of Floyd. Three other fired officers who assisted in Floyd’s 2020 arrest — J. Alexander Kueng, Lane and Tou Thao — are scheduled to be tried in August on charges of aiding and abetting murder and manslaughter.

The first witness called Monday was Dr. Jonathan Rich, a medical expert in cardiology from Northwestern Memorial Hospital in the Chicago area, who the prosecution hoped to counter defense contentions that Floyd died from health problems and illicit drug use.

“I believe that Mr. George Floyd’s death was absolutely preventable,” Rich testified.

Rich testified that he believes Floyd’s cause of death was cardiopulmonary arrest caused by low oxygen levels. Those levels, he said as have others before him, “were induced by the prone restraint and positional asphyxia that he was subjected to.”

Further, the doctor said, “I can state with a high degree of medical certainty that George Floyd did not die from a cardiac event and he did not die from an overdose.”

Rich said he has watched bystander and other video from the scene and saw no evidence in Floyd’s behavior or appearance that he was having difficulty with his heart until being pinned on the pavement by Chauvin and two other officers.

Had he been stricken in connection from ongoing heart condition, he would immediately fall unconscious, Rich said.

In Floyd’s case, the doctor said, low oxygen sent him into cardiopulmonary arrest “much more gradually and slowly. … His speech [was] starting to become less forceful … until his speech became absent and his muscle movements were absent.”

The doctor added that his review of autopsy records also led him to conclude that Floyd did not suffer a heart attack on May 25 or at any other time in his life.

Rich went to say that despite seeing coronary artery blockage in Floyd’s heart, the doctor said he saw nothing in the medical records to suggest that played a role in the death.

Prosecutor Jerry Blackwell turned his questioning to Floyd’s illicit drug use, and Rich echoed what many earlier witnesses told the jury: “I see no evidence to suggest that a fentanyl overdose caused Mr. Floyd’s death,” said Rich who treats patients who have used fentanyl.

The doctor dismissed just as firmly any impact methamphetamine had on Floyd’s fate, saying the drug had “no substantive role” given that where was “a very relative low level of methamphetamine in his system.”

Prevention measures that would have helped included “not subjecting him to that prone restraint” in the first place, relieving Floyd from that position and administering CPR once another officer said no pulse was detected.

Blackwell wrapped up by asking Rich whether Floyd would have survived his encounter with police if not for his 9 minutes and 29 seconds on restraint on the pavement. “Yes, I believe he would have lived.”

Defense attorney Eric Nelson asked on cross examination whether Floyd would have survived if he had followed police orders and gotten into the squad car upon arrest.

Rich replied “yes, I would agree with you” that any number of scenarios before being pinned to the pavement, including complying with the officers, would have spared Floyd’s life.

The doctor did agree that Floyd had a significant presence of heart disease but tried to fend off Nelson’s questions about the dangers of a 90% narrowing of a coronary artery being especially life-threatening, saying the heart finds way to create new paths for blood to circulate under those conditions.

Also, while Rich said during prosecution questioning that he reviewed all of the 46-year-old Floyd’s medical records, the doctor acknowledged to the defense attorney that those records went back only three years.

Also testifying was Seth W. Stoughton, of the University of South Carolina Law School, a former police officer who is an academic bringing a national perspective to the case about law enforcement tactics concerning use of force.

Stoughton went through various points in the arrest as video clips were shown and said Floyd never should have been put stomach-down on the pavement in the first place.

He said Floyd told officers “thank you” for being removed from the squad car while handcuffed and put on his knees.

Citing there being five officers in total at the scene, Stoughton concluded, “It’s clear from the number of officers here, the fact that he’s handcuffed and has been searched, he doesn’t present a threat. … Given the range of other alternatives available to the officers, it’s just not appropriate to prone someone who is at that point cooperative.”

On the whole, Stoughton said, “No reasonable officer would have believed that [the restraint used on Floyd] was appropriate, acceptable or reasonable force.”

Nelson has raised previously and in Monday’s questioning of Stoughton that Chauvin’s use of force is affected by many factors at the scene. Also, Nelson said, Stoughton had the luxury of reviewing arrest video in slow motion and repeatedly.

Nelson noted for Stoughton various elements of the situation that Chauvin likely knew soon after arriving at the scene: two of the officers were in their first days as Minneapolis officers, that Floyd was resisting arrest, an agitated crowd was close by, Floyd was suspected us of illicit drugs, and paramedics were on their way to the scene.

The defense also suggested that Stoughton rushed to judgment in the early days after Floyd’s death by condemning the actions of Chauvin and the other officers in a Washington Post opinion article he wrote on May 29.

“Floyd’s death was a foreseeable consequence of the officers’ actions,” Stoughton wrote with two peers. “They knew they were being observed and recorded, but continued to engage in obvious misconduct.”

Nelson questioned how Stoughton could come to such a conclusion with only being aware of part of the evidence. He replied that the additional evidence he scrutinized only confirmed what he and the others wrote.

Once the prosecution rests, the defense gets its turn to prove several elements it has raised starting with Nelson’s opening statement and consistently continuing throughout the cross examination of the stream of witnesses so far. Those points include that Floyd’s health problems and drug use caused his death.

Also before testimony resumed Monday, defense attorney Nelson asked Judge Cahill to immediately sequester the jurors and question them regarding what they might have learned about the civil unrest following the fatal shooting of a man Sunday in Brooklyn Center.

Nelson pointed said that he has concerns that jurors could avoid finding Chauvin not guilty out because they are worried about the potential for violence in response.

“I understand that it’s not this case, I understand it’s not the same parties, but the problem is the ultimate response sets the stage for the jury to say ‘I’m not going to vote not guilty because I’m concerned about the outcome,’ ” Nelson said.

Nelson also wanted Cahill to order the jurors to avoid all news media, an expansion of the judge’s ruling that they only avoid coverage of this trial.

Prosecutor Steve Schleicher opposed both defense requests. While acknowledging that the incident in Brooklyn Center also involved a citizen’s death during an encounter with police, “We don’t know the real events of what happened.”

Schleicher said, “We can’t have every single world event that might affect somebody’s attitude or emotional state be grounds to come back and [re-examine] the jurors,” he said. “This is a totally different case, and I realize there is civil unrest and maybe some of the jurors did hear about that.”

He noted that “all of the jurors were sworn to be fair and impartial, [and] the law presumes that jurors will follow the court’s instructions. … It’s very difficult to avoid all media. Media comes at us in all different forms.”

Cahill swiftly declined both requests of the defense, so sequestration will only begin upon deliberations, which the judge said he anticipates will start next Monday. He also declined to tighten his order on juror caution about avoiding news media.

“It’s a totally different case,” he said of the Brooklyn Center killing. “It’s not a big surprise that there is civil unrest in this case.”

One matter still to be settled from last week was whether a man in Floyd’s SUV the night of his arrest should be compelled to testify.

Morries L. Hall has told the court that he intended to invoke his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination should he be called as a witness. Through his attorney, Hall has told the court that testifying could expose him to potential charges of third-degree murder and other felony allegations.

Autopsy results have shown that Floyd had illicit drugs — specifically fentanyl and methamphetamine — in his body at the time. Floyd’s girlfriend has testified that Hall provided Floyd with drugs during the month of his death.

The judge told defense attorney Eric Nelson to make a list of questions he would like to ask Hall and present them to the court. Should Cahill decide that Hall can be called as a witness, he might limit the breadth of questioning.

The prosecution and defense made their opposing pitches again Monday. Nelson also brought up statements made by Hall that he made under questioning by law enforcement in Texas and said he wants his answers to be presented as evidence. Among other things, the defense attorney said, Hall admit to having counterfeit money in the car, throwing something fro the car, giving false identification to police at 38th and Chicago, etc. He denied giving Floyd drugs, Nelson said.

In a setback to the defense, Cahill ruled after the midday break that Hall’s statements in Texas are inadmissible, at one point questioning Hall’s credibility. Now, should Hall be called to testify, he could well invoke his right to avoid self-incrimination with each question posed.

Star Tribune staff writers Rochelle Olson and Chao Xiong contributed to this report.

Paul Walsh • 612-673-4482

Source Article from https://www.startribune.com/brother-breaks-down-telling-jurors-in-derek-chauvin-murder-trial-of-george-floyd-s-love-for-their-mo/600044978/

El ministro de Trabajo, Ernesto Murro, fue consultado este martes sobre la situación de la empresa Uber en el país. El jerarca recalcó que los métodos de transporte individual de personas habilitados en Uruguay al día de hoy son el taxi y el remise.

“En el caso de que se decida o no habilitar una tercera forma, eso lo puede decidir cada intendencia o el congreso de intendentes. Nosotros venimos actuando en el marco de nuestras competencias, hemos hecho acciones, vamos a continuar con las acciones, pero dependemos de si las intendencias van a autorizar una tercera forma de transporte individual de personas o de transporte colectivo, donde podría haber intentos de este tipo de empresas de introducirse en el Uruguay”, indicó.

El ministro destacó las “buenas noticias” de las últimas semanas. “En primer lugar el triunfo sobre Phillip Morris, que es el triunfo de la salud, los uruguayos y la soberanía nacional. En segundo lugar los bonos uruguayos que se han colocado muy bien y en muy poco tiempo a los inversores internacionales; y en tercer lugar la noticia de esta  tercera planta de celulosa para el país. Son tres cosas muy buenas que le están sucediendo al Uruguay, que nos hacen bien a todos los uruguayos y espero que las valoremos, para seguir superando los problemas que nos ha generado la desaceleración económica”, señaló.

Consultado sobre si estas noticias van a influir en la nueva ronda de negociaciones salariales, que comenzará el jueves 21 con la instalación del nuevo Consejo superior tripartito, Murro afirmó que “todo incide en todo”. Ante el contexto de mayor conflictividad laboral anunciado desde el Pit-Cnt, el jerarca dijo que el ministerio “se está preparando” para esta situación.

Según indicó Murro, el 60% de los acuerdos fueron tripartitos. El 40% restante abarcó a los que el Poder Ejecutivo votó en contra, se abstuvo, votó con una de las partes o votó solo (una de las partes se abstuvo y la otra votó en contra). La que comienza el jueves será la tercera etapa de la sexta ronda de negociaciones, en la que estarán involucradas 109 grupo de trabajo.

Source Article from http://www.elpais.com.uy/informacion/buenas-noticias-inversiones-inciden-ronda-salarial.html

(CNNMoney) – Es momento de una nueva regla en internet: ya no doble revisión, sino triple revisión antes de compartir algo. Especialmente si se ve muy bueno para ser cierto.

¿Por qué? Basta con mirar la cuenta de Twitter de Donald Trump. Trump dijo en la mañana del domingo que “Twitter, Google y Facebook están enterrando la investigación criminal contra Clinton”.

No solo no había prueba de eso, sino que era muy fácil de refutar. La investigación de los correos electrónicos del FBI estaba en lo más alto de Google News; el nombre de James Comey, director del FBI, estaba en lo más alto de la caja de tendencias de Facebook y en la sección de “moments” de Twitter había una nota prominente sobre esa controversia.

No obstante, la afirmación equivocada de Trump sobre que la noticia estaba “enterrada” fue el tuit más popular del día. Alrededor de 25.000 cuentas lo retuitearon y tuvo casi 50.000 ‘me gusta’, ayudando a esparcir ampliamente esa falsedad.

El auge de las redes sociales tiene muchos beneficios, pero una desventaja ha sido la propagación de desinformación. Las noticias falsas se han vuelto una plaga en internet, especialmente en redes sociales como Facebook. Fuentes no confiables sobre esta elección se han vuelto muy numerosas para ser contadas.

Así que lo que yo recomiendo una regla de “triple revisión antes de compartir”.

Nuevos sitios web diseñados para engañar y despistar a la gente parecen surgir cada día. Para sus creadores, los incentivos son claros: publicaciones más veces compartidas en redes significan más page views y más dólares de ingresos por publicidad.

Pero las historias mentira afectan a la gente que las lee y las comparte una y otra vez. Muchas de esas noticias falsas refuerzan las visiones de votantes liberales o conservadores y los aíslan de la verdad. Las historias se aprovechan de las personas que quieren creer lo peor sobre la oposición.

Un reciente estudio de BuzzFeed sobre “las páginas en Facebook hiperpartidistas” halló que ese tipo de páginas “consistentemente nutren a millones de usuarios con información falsa o engañosa”.

Entre más engañoso el contenido, con mayor frecuencia es compartido: algo que no es un buen augurio para la alfabetización informativa de la nación durante una larga y amarga temporada electoral.

“Las páginas de derecha son más propensas a compartir información falsa o engañosa que las de izquierda”, reporta el equipo de BuzzFeed.

En unas pocas ocasiones, historias inventadas o muy engañosas incluso se han metido en la caja de tendencias de Facebook, un problema que la compañía dice que está tratando de atacar.

En unos casos, asesores de Trump y familiares del candidato han sido engañados por noticias falsas, incluyendo la de una versión falsa de ABC News con el titular “Manifestante contra Trump habla: ‘Me pagaron 3.500 dólares para protestar en un mitin de Trump”.

Una mirada cuidadosa al sitio web revela que no es, de hecho, la página de ABC News. Pero el sitio engañó al hijo de Trump, Eric, a principios de octubre. “Finalmente, la verdad sale a la luz” tuiteó con un enlace a la noticia falsa.

En cuanto hablé de esto en televisión el domingo, detractores de CNN llenaron mi buzón con mensajes diciendo que CNN es el máximo ejemplo de “noticias falsas”.

Pero eso es un intento deliberado de confundir el asunto. Independientemente de las fallas de CNN, los medios de comunicación —pequeños y grandes— trabajan duro para reportar la verdad.

Los sitios de noticias falsas y el contenido en Facebook, por otro lado, atraen tráfico con desinformación. Considero que hay tres tipos de estos sitios:

  • Sitios falsos con titulares completamente inventados que intentan engañarte
  • Sitios hiperpartidistas que no mienten, per se, pero que son engañosos porque solo comparten buenas noticias sobre tu partido político y malas sobre el otro
  • “Híbridos” que presuntamente mezclan un poco de hechos con mucho de ficción

Esos sitios no van a desaparecer, así que depende de los usuarios de internet detectar las noticias falsas y evitar propagarlas.

Sitios de verificación de datos como Snopes pueden ayudar: se dedican a buscar y detectar engaños y falsedades.

Alex Howard de The Sunlight Foundation tuiteó estos consejos:

  • Busca la fuente del enlace en Twitter
  • Búscals en Google
  • Revisa en Snopes
  • Considera el historial de la fuente

Josh Stearns, un activista de medios que ahora trabaja para Democracy Fund, dice que las redacciones de prensa también tienen un papel clave.

“La revisión de datos ha sido protagónica en esta elección, pero las redacciones deben ir más allá de verificar las declaraciones de los políticos y deberían ayudar a refutar desinformación viral también”, me dijo. “En un momento en que la confianza en los medios está en un bajo histórico, los periodistas deberían denunciar estas historias falsas y ayudar a los ciudadanos a distinguir hechos y ficción”.

La falsa afirmación de Trump sobre que Google, Facebook y Twitter “entierran” las noticias malas sobre Clinton criticaba a los “medios deshonestos”. Irónicamente, estaba usando Twitter para criticar a Twitter.

Trump pudo haber quedado con esa idea a partir de una publicación imprecisa del blog Zero Hedge que habla de un “apagón de redes sociales”. La entrada del blog contenía información falsa.

Le pedí a la campaña de Trump que me proporcionaran la fuente para esa osada afirmación, pero nadie ha respondido.

 

Source Article from http://cnnespanol.cnn.com/2016/10/31/una-plaga-de-noticias-falsas-se-tomo-las-redes-sociales-asi-puedes-descubrir-que-es-un-engano/

Crews continue to battle California wildfires that have burned into some groves of ancient giant sequoias, the world’s largest tree.

The National Weather Service (NWS) issued a weather watch for critical fire conditions in the Sequoia national park in the Sierra Nevada, where the Colony fire was burning about a mile from Giant Forest, a grove of 2,000 sequoias.

Firefighters wrapped the base of the General Sherman Tree in fire-resistant aluminum of the type used in wildland firefighter emergency shelters and to protect historic wooden buildings, fire spokeswoman Rebecca Paterson said.

Firefighters pose next to the General Sherman Tree after wrapping it in fire-resistant blanket on 17 September. Photograph: National Park Service/EPA

The General Sherman Tree is the largest in the world by volume, at 52,508 cubic ft, according to the National Park Service. It is 275ft high and has a circumference of 103ft at ground level.

Some Californians are choosing to wrap their homes in the fire-resistant aluminum. One wrapped home near Lake Tahoe survived the Caldor fire while neighboring houses were destroyed.

The wrapping deflects heat, helping prevent flammable materials from combusting. It also keeps airborne embers, a major contributor to spreading wildfires, from slipping through vents and other openings. With a fiberglass backing and acrylic adhesive, the wraps can withstand heat of up to 1,022 F, or 550C.

The current fires are eating through tinder-dry timber, grass and brush. Historic drought tied to climate change is making wildfires harder to fight. It has killed millions of trees in California alone. Scientists say climate change has made the west much warmer and drier in the past 30 years and will continue to make weather more extreme and wildfires more frequent and destructive.

More than 7,000 wildfires in California this year have damaged or destroyed more than 3,000 homes and other buildings and torched well over 3,000 square miles of land, according to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection.

The Colony fire is one of two lightning-caused blazes, known together as the KNP Complex, that have burned about 18 square miles of forest.

interactive map

The fires forced the evacuation of the park and parts of Three Rivers, a community of about 2,500 people outside the park’s main entrance. Crews have been bulldozing a line between the fire and the community.

Cooler, calmer weather and morning low-hanging smoke that choked off air limited the fire’s growth in recent days but the NWS said a low-pressure system will bring some gusty winds and lower humidity through Sunday in the fire area. However, fire officials weren’t expecting the kinds of explosive wind-driven growth that in recent months turned Sierra Nevada blazes into monsters that devoured hundreds of homes.

A home is completely wrapped in fire-resistant material in Meyers, California. Photograph: Jae C Hong/AP

“There isn’t a lot of extreme weather predicted for the next few days, which is good news, there’s not a lot of big wind shifts predicted. However, there’s also no rain predicted,” fire information spokeswoman Rebecca Paterson said. “So we’re anticipating that the fires are going to continue to grow. Hopefully they’re not going to grow too fast.”

Giant sequoias are adapted to fire, which can help them thrive by releasing seeds from their cones and creating clearings that allow young sequoias to grow. But the extraordinary intensity of fires – fueled by climate change – can overwhelm the trees.

The fires have burned into several groves containing trees as tall as 200ft and 2,000 years old. They include Oriole Lake grove in the national park and Peyrone North and South groves in the neighboring Sequoia national forest.

The fire had reached Long Meadow grove in the national forest, where two decades ago Bill Clinton signed a proclamation establishing a national monument.

“These groves are just as impressive and just as ecologically important to the forest,” Tim Borden, who is sequoia restoration and stewardship manager for the Save the Redwoods League, told the Bay Area News Group. “They just aren’t as well known. My heart sinks when I think about it.”

A fire crew member keeps an eye on a hillside as flames roil the Sequoia national forest on 16 September. Photograph: Brian van der Brug/Los Angeles Times/REX/Shutterstock

To the south, the Windy fire grew to nearly 11 square miles on the Tule River Indian Reservation and in Giant Sequoia national monument, where it has burned into one grove of sequoias and threatens others.

Fire officials haven’t yet been able to determine how much damage was done to the groves, which are in remote and hard-to-reach areas.

Last year, the Castle fire killed an estimated 7,500 to 10,600 large sequoias, according to the National Park Service. That was an estimated 10% to 14% of all the sequoias in the world.

Source Article from https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/sep/18/california-wildfires-giant-ancient-sequoias-fire-conditions

In two years as president, Donald Trump has done more to crack down on immigrants — both those seeking to come and those already here — than most presidents have done in four or eight.

Trump’s bombastic rhetoric on immigration and his stubborn insistence on building barriers along the US-Mexico border has distinguished him from his predecessors and led to a political realignment.

But the Trump administration’s impact on immigrants’ lives goes far beyond rhetoric and political fights.

Under Trump, the departments of Homeland Security (which oversees Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement), Justice, and State have all taken steps to reduce the number of immigrants coming to the US — and make the lives of those who are already here more precarious.


More than 4000 people were sleeping in this tent encampment in Tijuana on November 23, 2018, hoping for political asylum in the US.
Omar Martinez/Picture Alliance via Getty Images

Refugee admissions have plummeted, while rejections of asylum applications have increased. Arrests of immigrants without criminal records have returned to the levels of the first term of the Obama administration, while Trump works to make hundreds of thousands more immigrants vulnerable to deportation, by stripping them of protections under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program or Temporary Protected Status. And the travel ban quietly churns on.

We can’t do a full accounting of the lives that have been touched by Trump’s immigration crackdown. But here’s an attempt to start.

Enforcement: Immigration arrests per day have soared since 2016

“If you’re here illegally,” Trump’s first head of ICE, Tom Homan, told Congress in 2017, “you should be afraid.”


President Trump stands with Border Patrol agents in McAllen, Texas, on January 10, 2019.
Jim Watson/AFP/Getty Images

The Trump administration hasn’t engaged in the mass deportations Trump recklessly promised as a presidential candidate. It’s still working to reverse the de-escalation of the last two years of the Obama administration, and return to the “deporter-in-chief” levels of President Obama’s first term. But its policy of arresting and detaining as many unauthorized immigrants as possible is making its mark. Any way you slice it, more immigrants are more at risk than they were the day before Trump arrived.

  • 436: The average number of daily immigration arrests under Trump between February 2017 and September 2018, including immigrants with and without criminal records, up from 300 in 2016, according to ICE statistics. Of that 436, an average of 139 arrests were of immigrants without criminal records, up from 47 in 2016.

  • 44,631: The average daily population of people in ICE custody, as of October 20, an apparent record. It’s also about 4,000 more people than Congress has authorized ICE to keep at a time under current funding levels. That’s up from 34,376 in fiscal year 2016 (October 2015-September 2016), the pre-Trump record for detention.

  • 2,737: The official count of children separated from their families under the Trump administration’s “zero tolerance” policy, who were in government custody as of July 2018. Of that number, 131 were still in government custody as of December 12. An unknown number of children — possibly thousands — were separated from their parents but released to a sponsor (or otherwise released from custody) before July.
  • 14,056: The number of unaccompanied minors in government custody as of November 16, a record. In 2016, the monthly average topped out at 9,000. The change isn’t due to family separation — the explosion in the number of children in custody came after the government stopped separating families as a matter of practice — but the increased time that children are being kept in custody before being placed with sponsors.
  • 59: the average length of stay in custody for an unaccompanied minor before being placed with a sponsor as of September 14. In 2016, the average was 35 days. The Department of Health and Human Services has made several policy changes that both make officials less likely to release children quickly to sponsors, and put unauthorized-immigrant relatives at risk of deportation if they step forward to sponsor a child.

DACA: Hundreds of thousands of immigrants could have their protections stripped away

America has never had a generation of unauthorized immigrants as socially integrated into the nation as the immigrants protected by the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, instituted by Obama in 2012 to protect people who’d come to the US as children from deportation and allow them to work legally in the US.

Trump is seeking to strip them of those protections, putting families and communities in limbo. Trump’s third year could see the end of DACA, as the Supreme Court is widely expected to take up a lawsuit over Trump’s actions and to side with the president. The question for Congress and the executive branch will be what happens next.


DACA and DREAMer supporters chain themselves to each other outside the US Capital on March 5, 2018.
Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images for MoveOn.org

  • 699,350: People with temporary protection from deportation under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, as of August 31, 2018, whose protections and work permits depend on the outcome of a court battle expected to arrive at the Supreme Court in spring 2019. The Trump administration attempted to sunset DACA in fall 2017, which would have resulted in several hundred thousand people losing legal protections by the end of 2018, but was stopped by court rulings in January 2018. (Source: USCIS.)
  • 200,000: The estimated number of US citizen children with at least one “DACAmented” parent — a parent protected by the DACA program.

Temporary Protected Status: Trump is trying to strip protections from long-settled immigrants

“Temporary means temporary,” former Trump Homeland Security Secretary (and chief of staff) John Kelly used to say. And Temporary Protected Status, in theory, is supposed to be temporary too — a way to allow people whose home countries are suffering from war or natural disaster to stay safe and work in the US until the disaster has subsided.

But when Trump came into office, hundreds of thousands of immigrants had held TPS protections for years or decades, bought houses, and raised US citizen children. The Trump administration’s efforts to put the “Temporary” back in Temporary Protected Status have been put on hold by another lawsuit — but TPS holders’ precariousness and anxiety remain.


Demonstrators gather in front of the White House on November 9, 2018, to protest against President Trump’s administration’s decision to terminate Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for people from Sudan, El Salvador, Haiti, and Nicaragua.
Nicholas Kamma/AFP/Getty Images

  • 328,386: The number of immigrants whose legal status under the Temporary Protected Status program (TPS) is dependent on the outcome of an ongoing court case. The Trump administration has attempted to end TPS for people from Sudan, Nicaragua, El Salvador, and Haiti, but those decisions were put on hold by a federal judge in 2018.

  • 263,282: the number of TPS holders from El Salvador, all of whom have been in the US since March 2001 or earlier, originally set to lose their legal status in September 2019.
  • 58,706: the number of TPS holders from Haiti, all of whom have been in the US since January 2011 or earlier, originally set to lose their legal status in July 2019.
  • Approximately 57,000: the number of TPS holders from Honduras whose TPS is currently set to expire on January 5, 2020. Honduran TPS holders are not affected by the lawsuit. All have been living in the US since 1999.
  • 273,000: estimated number of US citizen children with at least one parent with TPS from Honduras, El Salvador, or Haiti.

Legal immigration: Denials of visa applications are increasing

It’s hard to see the Trump administration’s impact on legal immigration to the United States, because you can’t see an absence.


Migrants are dropped off at a housing facility to be cared for after being released by the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement on January 14, 2019, in El Paso, Texas.
Joe Raedle/Getty Images

Under Trump — the rare Republican who’s often expressed as much skepticism of legal immigration as unauthorized immigration — applications for visas or green cards have often been held up or denied under tighter standards, while rejected applications from immigrants currently in the US are now automatically referred to ICE for potential deportation.

Thanks to a 2018 Supreme Court decision, the administration continues to bar nearly all people from several (mostly Muslim-majority) countries from coming to the US. And the resettlement of refugees — something that America has been a global leader in for decades — has been all but dismantled, with official resettlement targets slashed to under half of 2016 levels and actual resettlements far below that.


  • 86 percent: Drop in immigrant visas given to people from countries covered by the Trump administration’s travel ban (which applies to applicants for immigrant visas from Iran, Libya, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen) from March-June 2017 (when the first version was on hold in court) to the same months of 2018, when the third version was fully in effect before being permanently upheld by the Supreme Court in June 2018. In theory, there are exceptions and waivers for the travel ban, but in practice those are rarely given — and the process is opaque and arguably arbitrary.

  • 30,000: The maximum number of refugees the US is agreeing to settle in FY 2019.
  • 22,491: The number of refugees resettled in the US in FY 2018 — not even half of the 44,000 cap the US set for the year.
  • 73.5%: The drop in refugee resettlement from FY 2016 to FY 2018.
  • 260,000: The number of refugees who had applied for resettlement in the US and were awaiting processing as of summer 2018, according to a US Department of State briefing with congressional officials.

Spreading fear: Latino immigrants feel they’re losing their place in America

Beyond each one of the immigrant lives counted here is a ripple effect of fear — to family members, community peers, or simply people who look like that person and wonder if they could be next. We’ll never be able to quantify the effects of the Trump administration on making immigrants (and Latinos, Asian-Americans, and Muslims who are citizens) feel more afraid and less American than they did before Donald Trump arrived in office. But it’s difficult to deny that they are.


US border patrol officer with a tear gas canister near the border fence in Tijuana, Mexico on December 2, 2018.
Atilgan Ozdil/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images

78%: Share of Hispanics who are not citizens or legal permanent residents who worry (up from 67 percent in January 2017).



A woman looks out over the border fence separating Mexico and the US in Tijuana, on January 14, 2019.
Spencer Platt/Getty Images

Source Article from https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/1/19/18123891/trump-immigration-statistics

February 10 at 9:48 AM

Bipartisan talks aimed at resolving the border wall dispute and averting a government shutdown Friday have broken down and are at an impasse, lawmakers and others familiar with the situation said Sunday.

“I think the talks are stalled right now,” Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Richard C. Shelby (Ala.), the lead Republican negotiator, said on Fox News Sunday. “I’m not confident we’re going to get there.”

Lawmakers had been trading offers, trying to finalize how much money could go to barriers along the border as President Trump demands money for his wall. Trump has called for $5.7 billion, but lawmakers were trying to find a number between $1.3 billion and $2 billion that would be acceptable to both sides.

At the same time, Democrats were trying to limit the number of detention beds that the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency would have access to. Democrats want to cap detention beds as a way to limit aggressive detention activities by ICE.

People familiar with the talks said that the question of ICE beds led to the impasse, as Democrats try to cap the number, while Republicans seek a way to exclude violent criminals from the cap.

“It’s all over the map, and I think it’s all over the map because of the Democrats,” White House Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney said on “Meet the Press,” regarding the status of talks. “The president really does believe that there is a national security crisis and a humanitarian crisis at the border and he will do something about it.”

Lawmakers and Trump face a Feb. 15 deadline to pass new legislation to keep the government open. If they don’t, large portions of the government will begin to shut down.

The Homeland Security Department and other agencies are operating on a short-term spending bill that Trump signed Jan. 25, when he ended the nation’s longest ever government shutdown after 35 days. The shutdown was caused by his demand for border wall money — and Democrats’ refusal to provide it.

The breakdown in talks makes it uncertain how the situation will be resolved. Trump has threatened to declare a national emergency to circumvent Congress and build his wall with the military, but that option faces GOP opposition and legal hurdles.

The president is scheduled to travel to El Paso, Texas, for a rally Monday night and is widely expected to focus on his demands for a border wall, a signature issue of his 2016 campaign in which he repeatedly promised Mexico would pay for the wall.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/border-talks-at-impasse-as-shutdown-looms-friday-officials-say/2019/02/10/aa8ef08c-2d36-11e9-813a-0ab2f17e305b_story.html

Cheney, who was stripped of her position as the party’s House conference chair, went on to say that continuing to support individuals who question the 2020 election results and the democratic process could lead to more incidents like the Jan. 6 attacks.

“I think there’s no question” that something like Jan. 6 could happen again, Cheney said.

“I mean, you know, we’ve now seen the consequences. We’ve — we’ve seen how far the president — President Trump was willing to go. We’ve seen not only his, his provocation of the attack, but his refusal to send help when it was needed, his refusal to immediately say, ‘Stop.’ And that in and of itself, in my view, was a very clear violation of his oath and of his duty.”

Cheney was stripped of her position because of her willingness to publicly reject Trump’s theories about a rigged election. In the ABC interview, she said that she agreed with Illinois Rep. Adam Kinzinger, another maverick in the Republican caucus, that few members of the House GOP really believe Trump’s baseless conspiracy theories.

Cheney also said that Trump’s conspiracy-mongering bolsters enemies of democracy overseas.

“To cause that kind of questioning about our process, frankly, it’s the same kinds of things that the Chinese Communist Party says about democracy: that it’s a failed system, that America is a failed nation. I won’t be part of that,” she said.

Source Article from https://www.politico.com/news/2021/05/16/liz-cheney-republicans-dangerous-488652

The two Ukrainian visitors — Andriy Yermak, a top Zelensky adviser, and Oleksandr Danyliuk, the head of Ukraine’s national security and defense council — were first escorted to Bolton’s office, where they met with Vindman, Sondland, White House Russia adviser Fiona Hill and Kurt Volker, the State Department’s special envoy to Ukraine.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/white-house-lawyer-moved-transcript-of-trump-call-to-classified-server-after-ukraine-adviser-raised-alarms/2019/10/30/ba0fbdb6-fb4e-11e9-8190-6be4deb56e01_story.html

El Instituto Uruguayo de Meteorología (Inumet) emitió esta mañana una advertencia amarilla por vientos fuertes para los departamentos de Montevideo, Lavalleja, Maldonado, Treinta y Tres, Rocha, Florida, Colonia, Canelones y San José.

El llamado de atención estará vigente desde las 10 horas hasta por lo menos las 18 de hoy martes.

Para los departamentos mencionados se esperan vientos persistentes del sector Este que irán de los 30 a los 50 kilómetros por hora con rachas que podrían oscilar entre los 60 y 75 kilómetros por hora.

En el resto del país no hay riesgo meteorológico.

Ayer Inumet anunció que habrá vientos fuertes y persistentes en los departamentos ubicados al noreste del país y sur del Río Negro, en un comunicado especial.

Entre el martes 25 y miércoles 26 se prevé un incremento en la intensidad del viento promedio del sector Este.

Source Article from http://www.elpais.com.uy/informacion/alertan-vientos-fuertes-varios-departamentos.html

President Trump renewed his personal attacks against Robert S. Mueller III on Thursday, leveling discredited accusations that the former special counsel had conflicts of interest that made him a biased investigator.

The attacks came a day after Mueller’s first and only public statement since the conclusion of his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and whether Trump sought to obstruct the probe. During a brief news conference, Mueller reiterated his finding that if his team had concluded Trump did not commit a crime, they would have said so — a statement that sparked a new round of calls from Democrats to impeach the president.

Trump, in tweets and in comments to reporters, accused Mueller of being a “true never-Trumper,” who was conflicted due to a past “business dispute” between them. He also alleged that Mueller asked him for a job.

“Look, Robert Mueller should’ve never been chosen because he wanted the FBI job and he didn’t get it,” Trump said. “And the next day, he was picked as special counsel. So you tell somebody, ‘I’m sorry, you can’t have the job.’ And then, after you say that, he’s going to make a ruling on you? It doesn’t work that way. Plus, we had a business dispute. Plus, his relationship with [former FBI Director James B.] Comey was extraordinary.”

But Trump’s conflict claims have been disputed by people familiar with his interactions with Mueller. Further, former White House aides told the special counsel’s office that they informed the president they were baseless when he started making them after then-Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein selected Mueller to lead the investigation following Comey’s firing in May 2017.

Former White House adviser Stephen K. Bannon “recalled telling the President that the purported conflicts were ‘ridiculous’ and that none of them was real or could come close to justifying precluding Mueller from serving as Special Counsel,” according to the special counsel’s report.

Trump nonetheless has persisted in charging over the past two years that Mueller was conflicted, and the president’s advisers said his anger Thursday was sparked by his view that the special counsel’s appearance Wednesday led to a public perception that Trump had committed a crime. While some advisers, and Trump’s lawyers, tried to play down Mueller’s remarks, Trump was frustrated that they dominated the news and seemed to put more pressure on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to begin impeachment proceedings.

“He’s somebody that dislikes Donald Trump,” the president told reporters, referring to Mueller.

Trump has repeatedly alleged that he and Mueller had a business dispute that led to bad blood between the two after the former FBI director resigned his membership at Trump National Golf Club in Sterling, Va. But the special counsel’s report describes a far less contentious parting of ways than the president has described.

In October 2011, Mueller informed Trump’s club that his family was canceling their membership because they lived in Washington and were “unable to make full use of the Club.” He then asked if they would be “entitled” to a refund of a portion of their initial membership fee that was paid in 1994. The club responded that the Mueller family would be put on a list for a potential refund.

“The Muellers have not had further contact with the club,” according to the report.

The White House did not respond to a request for comment about Trump’s assertion that he had a business dispute with Mueller and other allegations of a conflict of interest.

Trump has sought to portray Mueller and Comey as particularly close — “he loves Comey,” the president claimed Thursday. But associates of the two men have said they had a close professional relationship but did not socialize.

Trump’s contention that Mueller wanted to replace Comey as FBI director and was turned down by the president — “I told him NO,” Trump tweeted Thursday — also has been disputed by people familiar with their meeting.

The two men had a roughly 30-minute meeting at the White House in May 2017.

Mueller was invited to the White House because Trump aides were concerned about the political fallout and controversy over Comey’s firing and believed having the former FBI director meet with the president could have a calming effect, according to a former administration official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive issue.

Bannon told investigators the purpose of the meeting was not a job interview but to have Mueller “offer a perspective on the institution of the FBI,” according to the special counsel’s report, and “although the White House thought about beseeching Mueller to become Director again, he did not come in looking for the job.”

The former administration official confirmed that account, saying that Mueller told White House officials he took the meeting only as a courtesy to the president.

Trump was friendly during their talk, the official said, and when the issue came up of whether Mueller might be interested in once again becoming FBI director, he said he could not take the job unless a law was changed. In July 2011, Congress cleared legislation allowing Mueller to serve an additional two years as director beyond his 10-year term. That law effectively prevented him from serving again.

At the meeting, White House officials told Mueller they were willing to push Congress to pass a new law to make his reappointment possible, but Mueller told the president he was probably not the best person for the post, according to the former official.

“He was never offered the job, nor did he seek the job,” the official said. “He had one meeting with the president.”

The next day, Mueller was selected by Rosenstein to lead the Russia investigation, a move that continues to irk Trump.

“A total Conflict of Interest. NICE!” the president tweeted Thursday.

Mueller’s former spokesman at the Justice Department, Peter Carr, said he could not comment because the special counsel’s office is closed, and he instead referred to pages of the final report that dealt with Trump’s claims of a conflict of interest.

Trump’s focus on Mueller’s perceived conflicts plays a central role in the section of the report examining whether Trump illegally obstructed the special counsel’s investigation.

According to investigators, Trump became agitated about the issue of conflicts after Justice Department ethics experts concluded in May 2017 that Mueller could oversee the investigation even though his former law firm represented several people who could be caught up in the matter.

He told then-White House counsel Donald McGahn in June 2017 that Mueller was too conflicted to fairly run the probe. Trump wanted McGahn, according to the report, to tell Rosenstein that Mueller had conflicts that prevented him from serving as special counsel.

McGahn advised Trump that trying to oust Mueller would appear as if he was trying to meddle in the investigation and be used against him to claim obstruction of justice.

Trump continued to push for Mueller’s firing, McGahn told the special counsel, but McGahn and other aides believed “the asserted conflicts were ‘silly’ and ‘not real,’ ” and had said so to the president.

Devlin Barrett contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-uses-discredited-conflict-of-interest-charges-to-attack-mueller/2019/05/30/2f7c7908-82f6-11e9-95a9-e2c830afe24f_story.html