William Montanez is used to getting stopped by the police in Tampa, Florida, for small-time traffic and marijuana violations; it’s happened more than a dozen times. When they pulled him over last June, he didn’t try to hide his pot, telling officers, “Yeah, I smoke it, there’s a joint in the center console, you gonna arrest me for that?”
They did arrest him, not only for the marijuana but also for two small bottles they believed contained THC oil — a felony — and for having a firearm while committing that felony (they found a handgun in the glove box).
Then things got testy.
As they confiscated his two iPhones, a text message popped up on the locked screen of one of them: “OMG, did they find it?”
The officers demanded his passcodes, warning him they’d get warrants to search the cellphones. Montanez suspected that police were trying to fish for evidence of illegal activity. He also didn’t want them seeing more personal things, including intimate pictures of his girlfriend.
So he refused, and was locked up on the drug and firearms charges.
William MontanezCourtesy of William Montanez
Five days later, after Montanez was bailed out of jail, a deputy from the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office tracked him down, handed him the warrants and demanded the phone passcodes. Again, Montanez refused. Prosecutors went to a judge, who ordered him locked up again for contempt of court.
“I felt like they were violating me. They can’t do that,” Montanez, 25, recalled recently. “F— y’all. I ain’t done nothing wrong. They wanted to get in the phone for what?”
He paid a steep price, spending 44 days behind bars before the THC and gun charges were dropped, the contempt order got tossed and he pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor pot charge. And yet he regrets nothing, because he now sees his defiance as taking a stand against the abuse of his rights.
“The world should know that what they’re doing out here is crazy,” Montanez said. The police never got into his phones.
While few would choose jail, Montanez’s decision reflects a growing resistance to law enforcement’s power to peer into Americans’ digital lives. The main portals into that activity are cellphones, which are protected from prying eyes by encryption, with passcodes the only way in.
As police now routinely seek access to people’s cellphones, privacy advocates see a dangerous erosion of Americans’ rights, with courts scrambling to keep up.
“It’s becoming harder to escape the reach of police using technology that didn’t exist before,” said Riana Pfefferkorn, the associate director of surveillance and cybersecurity at the Center for Internet and Society at Stanford Law School. “And now we are in the position of trying to walk that back and stem the tide.”
While courts have determined that police need a warrant to search a cellphone, the question of whether police can force someone to share a passcode is far from settled, with no laws on the books and a confusing patchwork of differing judicial decisions. Last month, the Indiana Supreme Court heard arguments on the issue. The state supreme courts in Pennsylvania and New Jersey are considering similar cases.
As this legal battle unfolds, police keep pursuing new ways of breaking into cellphones if the owners don’t cooperate — or are enlisting help from technology firms that can do it for them. This has put them at odds with cellphone makers, all of whom continually update their products to make them harder for hackers or anyone else to break into.
But the hacking techniques are imperfect and expensive, and not all law enforcement agencies have them. That is why officials say compelling suspects to unlock their cellphones is essential to police work. Making the tactic more difficult, they say, would tilt justice in favor of criminals.
“It would have an extreme chilling effect on our ability to thoroughly investigate and bring many, many cases, including violent offenses,” said Hillar Moore, the district attorney in East Baton Rouge, Louisiana, who got the FBI’s help in breaking into a cellphone belonging to a suspect in a deadly Louisiana State University fraternity hazing ritual. “It would basically shut the door.”
Clashes over passcodes
In the part of Florida where Montanez lives, authorities are guided by a case involving an upskirt photo.
A young mother shopping at a Target store in Sarasota in July 2014 noticed a man taking a picture of her with his phone while crouching on the floor. She confronted him. He fled. Two days later, police arrested Aaron Stahl and charged him with video voyeurism.
Authorities got a search warrant for Stahl’s iPhone, but he wouldn’t give them the passcode, citing his Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself. A trial judge ruled in his favor, but a state appellate court reversed the decision in December 2016, saying Stahl had to provide the code. Facing the possibility of getting convicted at trial and sentenced to prison, Stahl agreed to plead no contest in exchange for probation.
While Stahl did not provide the passcode in the end, prosecutors still rely on the precedent established by the appellate ruling to compel others to turn over their passcodes under the threat of jail.
“Up until that point you could be a pedophile or a child pornogropher and carry around the fruits of your crime in front of law enforcement officers, prosecutors and judges and taunt them with fact that they couldn’t get the passcode,” said Cynthia Meiners, who prosecuted Stahl at the 12th Judicial Circuit State’s Attorney’s Office. “You could say, ‘I’m a child pornographer and it’s on my phone but I’m not giving you my passcode because I would be incriminating myself.’”
But that ruling only holds in a few counties of Florida. Elsewhere in the country, skirmishes remain unresolved.
In Indiana, police officials are trying to force a woman to share her passcode as they investigate her for harassment, saying she was making it impossible for them to obtain key evidence. The woman’s lawyer says authorities haven’t said what evidence they think is in the phone, raising concerns about a limitless search.
Her appeals reached the state Supreme Court, whose ruling could influence similar cases around the country. Attorneys general in eight other states filed a brief in support of the police, warning against a ruling that “drastically alters the balance of power between investigators and criminals.”
The stakes are similar in New Jersey, where a sheriff’s deputy accused of tipping off drug dealers to police activities has refused to hand over passcodes to his iPhones. The state Supreme Court agreed in May to hear the case.
These clashes aren’t limited to the use of passcodes. Police have also tried to force people to open phones through biometrics, such as thumbprints or facial recognition. Legal experts see the Fifth Amendment argument against self-incrimination as more of a stretch in those cases. The law has generally been interpreted as protecting data that someone possesses — including the contents of their mind, such as passcodes — but not necessarily their physical traits, such as thumbprints. Still, some judges have refused to sign warrants seeking permission to force someone to unlock their phone using their face or finger.
“Depending on where you are in the country, there is different case law on what police can do,” said Andrew Crocker, a senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a civil liberties nonprofit.
In some states, there is no authoritative court ruling, leaving law enforcement authorities to decide for themselves. Virginia falls into that category. Bryan Porter, the prosecutor in the city of Alexandria, said he has told local police it’s OK to try to force someone under the threat of jail to open a cellphone by thumbprint or face. But demanding a password seems to go too far, he said.
Criminals shouldn’t be able to inoculate themselves from investigations, Porter said. “But it kind of rubs me the wrong way to present a piece of paper to someone and say, ‘Give us your passcode.’”
‘What they were doing to me was illegal’
In Tampa, Florida, where Montanez was arrested last year, judges still rely on the 2016 ruling against Stahl by the Second District Court of Appeals. That is what prosecutors cited when they tried to force Montanez to give up his passcodes.
But Montanez’s lawyer, Patrick Leduc, argued that, unlike Stahl’s case, police had no reason to search the phone, because it had no connection to the offenses he was charged with. The “OMG, did they find it?” text message — which turned out to be from Montanez’s mother, who owned the car and the gun in the glove box — was meaningless, Leduc said. He warned of a police “fishing expedition” in which authorities could search for anything potentially incriminating on his phone.
While sitting in lockup for contempt, Montanez’s resolve not to give up his passcodes hardened. “What they were doing to me was illegal and I wasn’t going to give them their business like that,” he said.
“They told me I got the key to my freedom,” he added. “But I was like, ‘F— that.’”
But the experience shook him. “I ain’t the toughest guy in the world, but I can protect myself. But it was crazy,” he said. “Bad food, fights here and there, people trying to take your food.”
At the same time, the drugs and gun case against Montanez was crumbling. Laboratory tests on the suspected THC oil came back negative, voiding that felony charge and the gun charge related to it. That left prosecutors with only minor pot charges. But he remained in jail on the contempt charge while his lawyer and prosecutors negotiated a plea deal.
In August 2018, after Montanez had spent more than five weeks in jail for refusing to provide the passcode, an appellate court dismissed the contempt case on a technicality. The court invited prosecutors to try again, but by then the passcode’s value had diminished. Instead, prosecutors allowed Montanez to plead no contest to misdemeanor drug charges and he was freed.
When he was released, Montanez carried a notoriety that made him feel unwelcome in his own neighborhood. He noticed people looking at him differently. He was banned from his favorite bar.
The police keep pulling him over, and he now fears them, he said. He finally left Tampa and lives in Pasco County, about an hour away.
“Yeah, I took a stand against them,” he said. “But I lost all that time. I gotta deal with that, going to jail for no reason.”
U.S. Border Patrol agents stand in front of a secondary fence in San Diego, Calif., looking across the border wall toward Mexico. This area is one where the Pentagon will spend more resources shifted away from military construction projects.
Rebecca Blackwell/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
Rebecca Blackwell/AP
U.S. Border Patrol agents stand in front of a secondary fence in San Diego, Calif., looking across the border wall toward Mexico. This area is one where the Pentagon will spend more resources shifted away from military construction projects.
In all, he detailed 11 wall projects that would be completed as a result of the diversion of Pentagon funds. They include new pedestrian fencing and barriers in San Diego, Calif., replacement of vehicle barriers in El Paso, Texas, and new fencing at the border in Yuma, Ariz.
Congressional sources said the full list of cut military projects was slated to be released Wednesday after lawmakers were directly alerted of which ones were located in their districts.
Esper cites the national emergency that President Trump declared in February that required the use of armed forces for projects along the southwest border.
“Based on analysis and advice from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and input from the Commander, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and the Department of the Interior and pursuant to the authority granted to me in Section 2808, I have determined that 11 military construction projects along the international border with Mexico, with an estimated total cost of $3.6 billion, are necessary to support the use of the armed forces in connection with the national emergency,” Esper states in a letter to House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith, D-Wash.
Democrats on Capitol Hill decried the move and argued that moving money from planned projects to border construction efforts could put U.S. forces at risk.
The determination on the documents only applied to a set of records provided to the White House on Sept. 8, and Remus wrote: “We continue to review materials you provided to the White House after that date and will respond at an appropriate time.”
Biden’s decision triggers a window of at least 30 days for Trump to challenge the determination in court before the National Archives releases them to the Jan. 6 panel, experts have told POLITICO. It mirrors a similar decision made by Biden and his DOJ earlier this year to waive privilege and and allow former Trump DOJ officials to testify before congressional committees about the former president’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election.
In a Friday letter addressed to Ferriero obtained by POLITICO, Trump said the records sought by the committee would contain information shielded by “executive and other privileges, including but not limited to the presidential communications, deliberative process, and attorney-client privileges.”
Trump indicated that he wished to assert privilege over 45 specific documents identified by the National Archives as responsive to the committee’s request. Those documents, Trump said in the two-page letter, included protected “presidential communications,” as well as deliberative process materials and attorney-client privileged materials.
Trump also indicated he wants to preemptively declare future requests by the panel, “potentially numbering in the millions,” as presumptively barred from release.
“Should the committee persist in seeking other privileged information, I will take all necessary and appropriate steps to defend the Office of the Presidency,” Trump wrote.
The White House’s statement comes after the House select panel investigating the attack announced two close allies of former President Donald Trump — former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and former Pentagon aide Kash Patel — were “engaging with” it on their subpoenas, the panel’s top two lawmakers said Friday.
Panel Chair Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) and Vice Chair Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) confirmed in a statement that the two Trump associates had been in touch with the panel. Thompson and Cheney also threatened criminal contempt for former Trump campaign chief Steve Bannon, who had informed the committee he wouldn’t cooperate with their inquiry into the Jan. 6 Capitol attack.
“Though the Select Committee welcomes good-faith engagement with witnesses seeking to cooperate with our investigation, we will not allow any witness to defy a lawful subpoena or attempt to run out the clock, and we will swiftly consider advancing a criminal contempt of Congress referral,” Thompson and Cheney said.
A lawyer for Bannon, Robert Costello, told the committee on Thursday that Bannon would refuse to comply because of Trump’s claim that he can invoke executive privilege to block Bannon’s testimony.
“Until these issues are resolved, we are unable to respond to your request for documents and testimony,” Costello wrote to the Jan. 6 committee. Costello’s letter was first reported by The New York Times; POLITICO reported on Thursday that Trump had instructed Bannon and other former aides subpoenaed by the select panel not to comply with lawmakers’ demands.
It’s a questionable claim from Bannon’s lawyer, because the ex-Trump aide was years removed from the White House by the time the former president’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election — the subject of the committee’s subpoena — began in earnest. Executive privilege is typically reserved for a president’s closest advisers and not meant to be a broad shield for testimony requests.
Any move by the Jan. 6 committee to hold a witness in criminal contempt would first require the panel to vote on a contempt resolution. That resolution would then move to the House floor for a vote.
The select panel investigating the insurrection by Trump supporters had subpoenaed four onetime aides to the former president: former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, longtime Trump adviser Dan Scavino, former Trump Pentagon aide Kash Patel and Bannon. All were asked to provide documents by Thursday, and the panel is also seeking to depose the four men next week.
A lawyer for Meadows didn’t immediately return a request for comment on the subpoena deadline.
Patel said in a statement Thursday that “I will continue to tell the American people the truth about January 6, and I am putting our country and freedoms first through my Fight with Kash initiative.”
Scavino was served with his subpoena Friday, according to two sources familiar with the situation. He was served in New York, according to one of the sources, who noted this was the first time service was attempted, as Scavino has been out in public since the subpoenas were issued.
The Jan. 6 committee declined to comment on the status of the subpoena to Scavino, who was not mentioned in Thompson and Cheney’s statement.
If any of the foursome don’t comply, the committee could seek criminal contempt referrals, which would require the House to take a full floor vote when it returns to session later this month. That move, if taken, would send the matter to the Justice Department for review. It’s unclear whether DOJ would act quickly on any prospective referrals, but members of the Jan. 6 panel have expressed hope that the Biden administration would act urgently.
Next week’s deadline for depositions from the subpoenaed former Trump aides would be more significant, according to sources close to the committee, given that the foursome still has time to comply. If they didn’t show up in the coming weeks, the committee could meet to consider a referral, then vote and send it to the full House for consideration.
Rep. Thompson has indicated he wants to complete its investigation by the spring. That time frame, if the nine-member bipartisan panel wants to stick to it, does not allow for protracted legal battles over enforcing subpoenas or litigating against recalcitrant witnesses.
Heather Caygle and Natasha Korecki contributed to this report
Tras nueve años de funcionamiento, Airbnb está demostrando que las plataformas de economía colaborativa son un negocio más que rentable. Es así como la compañía, fundada por Brian Chesky, proyecta que para 2020 ganará US$ 3.500 millones al año. La cifra supera las ganancias del 85% de las compañías del índice Fortune 500 y supera en 3.400% las ganancias de la compañía en 2016.
Según los expertos, la fortaleza económica que está demostrando el portal de arriendo de viviendas privadas la convertirá en la primera compañía de economía colaborativa en convertirse en un éxito financiero, superando incluso a Uber, otra de las más populares del mundo.
A pesar de las proyecciones de crecimiento, la compañía todavía enfrenta varios inconvenientes, especialmente en lo que se refiera a regulación en los diferentes mercados en los que opera. (El Mercurio / GDA)
As a concurrent resolution, the House measure doesn’t require Trump’s signature. But it’s not clear whether it would actually tie Trump’s hands. The Supreme Court may ultimately have to decide if it has the binding force of law.
The Senate bill would have the force of law, and it would be significant if approved by the GOP-controlled chamber. But it does require Trump’s signature and has almost no chance of becoming law since it would be vetoed, and would then need 67 votes to override a veto.
“We’re taking this path because it does not require a signature of the president of the United States,” she added. “This is a statement of the Congress of the United States and I will not have that statement be diminished by whether the president will veto it or not.”
Key Democratic senators, however, aren’t convinced this is the way to go.
“The one that I have would go to the president’s desk, if it passes,” he said. “I’m likely to call up mine.”
Kaine noted that his resolution, which is privileged and cannot be blocked from receiving a floor vote, is due to be automatically discharged out of the Foreign Relations Committee on Tuesday.
“Mine is on time clock where I could call it up starting next week. Theirs would not be,” he said. “I can get it up promptly and I can get it [passed] on a majority vote.”
Democratic aides in both chambers say that the House-passed war powers resolution would also be considered a privileged measure and guaranteed a vote in the GOP-controlled Senate, but Kaine said it would have to be put on a later timeline since the House just approved it Thursday.
The timing of the war powers debate is in flux because of Trump’s looming impeachment trial.
Pelosi says she will meet with the House Democratic caucus on Tuesday to discuss naming a team of prosecutors and sending the articles of impeachment across the Capitol. As soon as she does, the trial is set to begin immediately.
Even so, there will be a lull between when senators get sworn in as jurors and the start of opening arguments, when lawmakers will have a chance to act on legislative business.
Kaine has already shopped his legislation to about ten Senate Republicans who are in various stages of reviewing it.
Kaine acknowledged Trump may well veto his war powers resolution but argued that the act of putting it on the president’s desk will send a more powerful message than the concurrent resolution.
“I want to put it on the president’s desk. We did that with the Yemen resolution and even though the president vetoed, they stopped fueling the Saudi jets on the way to bombings. They actually stopped doing the thing we ordered them not to do,” he said, referring to U.S. support of a Saudi-backed coalition fighting in Yemen.
Senate Democrats say they’re keeping their options open and may try to advance both Kaine’s and Pelosi’s competing measures.
“Those conversations are going on right now,” said a Democratic senator, who requested anonymity to talk about internal discussions. “It doesn’t have to be either/or but I think at some point we should figure out what we’re going to prioritize.”
Lee, who backs the Kaine-Durbin bill, disputes Pelosi’s argument that the House-passed resolution will have the force of law.
He pointed to the 1983 Supreme Court decision in INS v. Chadha in which the high court ruled in an opinion penned by then Chief Justice Warren Burger that legislation affecting persons outside the legislative branch must be presented to the president for his signature.
“I was surprised when I saw that that resolution was styled as a [House concurrent resolution.] It makes me wonder why they did it that way or whether it might have been a mistake from the outset,” Lee said.
“Prior to the decision by the Supreme Court in INS v. Chadha 1983, you had had an opportunity for Congress through a concurrent resolution to alter the legal status quo that didn’t require presentment to the president. Post Chadha that went away,” he said.
Lee said the House-passed resolution “could never be more than akin to a sense of the House or a sense of the Senate.”
A senior House Democratic aide said that legal question may have to be decided anew by the federal courts.
“There are arguments for why this part of the war powers resolution might not be binding, but we decided to follow the process in the war powers resolution as our first step. It makes Congressional intent crystal clear and the President should respect that,” the aide said.
“A one-size-fits-all approach doesn’t work for every community in California, and the strategy of ‘no’ no longer works,” McGuire said. “No matter if you are a large city, a small city, an urban county, a rural county, everyone has to do their part to be able to combat this crisis of lack of affordable housing.”
CHICAGO (CBS) — A massive fire early Monday morning in the Albany Park neighborhood destroyed two businesses and an apartment building, injuring one person and leaving several others homeless.
Fire Department officials believe the fire started around 3:30 a.m. in a 3-story apartment building at 4337-39 N. Richmond St., and then spread to the neighboring building at the southeast corner of Richmond Street and Montrose Avenue – which housed Twisted Hippo Taproom and Eatery, and Ultimate Ninjas gym.
The fire burned for several hours as firefighters worked to contain the flames. Neighbors reported hearing explosions.
Firefighters have their work cut out for them this morning
Wind, cold and a roof truss on a larger building containing nitrogen / CO2 tanks have made this a tough fight, they say
Five hours after the fire started, firefighters were still pouring water on the building from above and below, calling it a “surround and drown” tactic, but crews had to be careful to stay away because of the danger.
“The building itself is a one-story truss roof. To us, it is the most dangerous type of building to fight. So precautions are taken, collapse zones are set up,” said Chicago Fire Department Deputy District Chief Thomas Carbonneau.
Several cars were left buried under rubble after part of the roof and a large section of the rear wall of the Twisted Hippo collapsed.
Late Monday afternoon, it was still not confirmed where the fire started. But the damage at the scene hours later showed just how fast the fire spread.
Five people were left without a home because of the fire at the apartment building, and what was left of the neighboring building that housed the two businesses will need to be torn down.
Marilee Rutherford, the owner of the Twisted Hippo Brewery, which is now in rubble, spoke earlier to CBS 2’s Marissa Parra as she watched her business continue to burn.
She said she was given the news by her husband, who was called by a community member overnight. When she arrived on the scene, her business engulfed in flames. She said the cause of the explosions might have been the CO2 and nitrogen tanks used for dispensing draft beer.
“We have CO2 and nitrogen tanks, just as a regular part of our business, and I’m certain that’s what the explosions were,” Rutherford said.
She said her focus is on the safety of her staff and the community.
“It’s hard to see everything you worked for go up in flames, but I’m just glad my staff and everyone is okay. That’s all I’m focused on,” Rutherford said.
With tears in her eyes Marilee Rutherford stands in front of the rubble from her brewery, Twisted Hippo
“It’s hard to see everything you worked for go up in flames, but I’m just glad my staff and everyone is okay. That’s all I’m focused on”@cbschicagopic.twitter.com/A1SgRPdHz5
The brewery opened in 2019, and Rutherford said the goal was to create a “light, bright, warm, and inviting space, with a little bit of something for everyone” in the community.
“I think we have done that, but we’ll just have to see how we move forward,” she said.
The destruction of Ultimate Ninjas is also a big loss for the community. It’s been around for years, and does a lot of work with children. They had camps scheduled for Monday, and were expecting 90 kids to show up, but now both the gym and Twisted Hippo are both a total loss.
Ultimate Ninjas owner Jeff Piejak called it terrible timing for both businesses.
“That’s the sad part is we really brought a lot of life to this area, and it really needed it. You know, Albany Park really kind of needed something like this to come and fill the neighborhood full of kids,” Piejak said. “It’s not going to be easy to find a similar location, but yeah, we’ll be back.”
A massive fire breaks out inside a three story apartment building destroying two beloved neighborhood business- we’ll share how the community is already coming together to support them – on @cbschicagopic.twitter.com/ZPm45P4lvl
Fire Department officials said the fire was struck out around 8:30 a.m., but crews would remain on the scene for several hours to douse hotspots, and prevent the fire from flaring up again. The rest of the building that housed the brewery and gym also will need to be demolished. The neighboring apartment building also was gutted.
The massive fire also affected hundreds of neighbors, as ComEd had to cut off power to about 350 homes and businesses so firefighters could safely fight the fire. Power has since been restored for 228 ComEd customers, and ComEd is waiting for the green light from the Fire Department to restore power to the rest.
Paris Wadhwa said he has been without power and heat since around 4 a.m.
“I have a baby, and a little girl, we’re trying to them in the house, and making sure that they are warm,” he said. “The cooking gas is working, so that’s a good thing, but there’s no heat and no electricity. So we’re hoping that the power comes back on.”
Wadhwa said he was told power should be restored by 12:30 p.m., but he’s really hoping it will be back sooner.
Police said a 60-year-old man was taken to a local hospital for possible smoke inhalation. Several other residents of the apartment building were able to escape safely. The Red Cross is on the scene, assisting five people displaced by the fire.
VIDEO: “I woke up to the sound of explosions, it cracked my window”
Unreal damage here at Albany Park’s Twisted Hippo Brewery
A total collapse left cars buried in rubble after a fire on the block— neighbors say they saw it start in apartment bldg next door@cbschicagopic.twitter.com/kzuDa0XE0C
A veces pienso que estamos en los 80. Hay algo parecido. Cierta sensación de amenaza en el aire, cierto tono apocalíptico que se cuela a diario en las conversaciones, como si las cosas estuviesen todos los días y por un segundo al borde del desastre total.
Me imagino que no soy el único que capta ese zeitgeist de película de ciencia ficción barata hecha de acontecimientos imposibles que suceden a diario. Basta ver las noticias, que parecen sacadas de alguna película de Paul Verhoeven o de un cómic de Frank Miller, ambos artistas expertos en usar las paradojas de la utraviolencia para describir ciertos movimientos de la sociedad. No creo que exagere al mencionarlos a ambos. Películas como Robocop o Total recall y cómics como El caballero de la noche regresa o Give Me Liberty hacen un uso interminable y provechoso de los noticieros, reportajes periodísticos y programas de debate como telón de fondo de lo que relatan. Las historias centrales están ahí (las vidas un policía cíborg, un agente doble de Marte, un Batman terminal o una soldado de la III Guerra Mundial) acompañadas de todas esas notas sobre la vida cotidiana del futuro que se colaban como telón de fondo a lo que veíamos o leíamos por medio de pantallazos de televisores prendidos de modo perpetuo.
Kike Morandé, Cecilia Pérez, Checho Hirane, Marco Enríquez-Ominami, Alberto Mayol, Alejandro Guillier: todos parecen personajes de una película de los 80”.
Son las noticias de esos presentes falsos donde hay crisis económicas, campañas políticas, guerras lejanas, escándalos sexuales. A Miller y Verhoeven les encantaba meterlas, haciendo que en esas cintas o en esos cómics uno se sometiese a la locura hiperreal con la que sus creadores estaban representando el mundo en el que les tocaba vivir. Por supuesto, eran una broma, sátiras que jugaban con los hechos hasta volverlos imposibles e irreales, pero que aun así se constituían como comentarios descarnados sobre el presente de ciudades como Detroit o Nueva York, sobre el funcionamiento de las megacorporaciones, sobre la estupidez de los discursos nacionalistas del gobierno de Reagan y del pánico a la diferencia.
Que Verhoeven y Miller se solazaran con aquella estética, buscando en el shock cierta clase de belleza violenta y vulgar, sólo volvía más ambigua su lectura, pero no quitaba el hecho de que quien se acercase a esas obras estaba sometido a la intensidad de ese noticiario crónico, salido de un mundo imposible que prefiguraba nuestro presente.
No creo exagerar. Hay días en que es imposible no sentirse parte de una de esas ficciones, pensarse a uno mismo avanzando en el decorado de una obra de ciencia ficción barata de los 80, con todo el horror o la comedia cruel que eso implica. Pienso en eso al ver a Kike Morandé en el Consejo Ciudadano de Piñera, al lado de Marcelo Zunino, un futbolista devenido a la vez en participante de un reality y en concejal de RN por La Florida. O en la resurrección mediática de Checho Hirane y Alberto Plaza. O el deseo de Cecilia Pérez de sacar una semana del aire a Canal 13 porque Yerko Puchento se mofó de ella en su rutina. Pienso en eso al ver cualquier noticia del PS. O la conversación entre Tomás Mosciatti y Marco Enríquez-Ominami (algo podría estar en cualquiera de las viejas de RoboCop; otra esquirla robada a la CNN de los 80; dos voces superpuestas sin punto de encuentro, ME-O pensando en Mosciatti como un prueba de blancura que es incapaz de pasar). Pienso en eso al ver a Alberto Mayol en campaña (hay algo ahí interesante, un relato sobre una caída sorda: cómo el viejo analista del 2011 carga con la mochila de sus propias palabras, cómo desaparece cualquier elocuencia, cómo se convierte la claridad de un discurso en un laberinto que lo asfixia y lo ahoga, dejándolo sin nada que decir, paralizado frente a Felipe Kast, que le respondió de forma artera con una falacia ad hominem de manual, a la deriva frente a Beatriz Sánchez; hundido en una primaria que lo desborda).
O en la languidez en la que parece haberse sumergido la candidatura de Alejandro Guillier, donde nadie, ni sus adherentes o él mismo, parece creer en ella; todos lucen entregados, avanzando en círculos, peleando minucias con los partidos políticos, sin un comando de rostros definidos o potentes; atrapados en la promesa de un triunfo que no sólo se ve cada vez más lejos, sino que también ha perdido sentido como aventura, como épica.
Todas estas imágenes podrían estar en esas viejas películas e historietas. Fragmentos de un mundo en crisis. Voces sin sentido, discursos inverosímiles proyectados en una pantalla dentro de la pantalla, en una viñeta dentro de una viñeta en medio de la historia sobre cómo un policía robot y un vigilante vestido de cuero salen armados a cazar delincuentes en calles sin luz o fábricas vacías mientras esperan que una bomba atómica caiga sobre ellos. Pero son imágenes reales. Es lo que hay, los apuntes de esta semana, de estos días; las noticias falsas de un mundo verdadero o al revés; las noticias verdaderas de un mundo falso.
Soon after speaking to President Trump about the firing of his boss James Comey, Andrew McCabe, who became the bureau’s acting director, began obstruction of justice and counterintelligence investigations involving the president and his ties to Russia. In his first television interview since his own firing, McCabe tells 60 Minutes’ Scott Pelley he wanted those inquiries to be documented and underway so they would be difficult to quash without raising scrutiny.
“I was very concerned that I was able to put the Russia case on absolutely solid ground, in an indelible fashion,” McCabe tells Pelley in the interview. “That were I removed quickly, or reassigned or fired, that the case could not be closed or vanish in the night without a trace.”
The interview with the veteran FBI agent who rose to acting director of the bureau will be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, February 17 at 7:00 p.m., ET/PT on CBS.
“I wanted to make sure that our case was on solid ground and if somebody came in behind me and closed it and tried to walk away from it, they would not be able to do that without creating a record of why they made that decision,” McCabe said.
The White House responded to the opening of that investigation, calling it a “completely baseless investigation.”
The first excerpt from the interview was broadcast on “CBS This Morning” Thursday as Pelley appeared on the program to talk about his report on McCabe.
Andrew McCabe tells “60 Minutes” why he opened investigations involving Trump
“The most illuminating and surprising thing in the interview to me were these eight days in May when all of these things were happening behind the scenes that the American people really didn’t know about,” Pelley said on the show.
“There were meetings at the Justice Department at which it was discussed whether the vice president and a majority of the Cabinet could be brought together to remove the president of the United States under the 25th Amendment,” Pelley said. “These were the eight days from Comey’s firing to the point that Robert Mueller was appointed special counsel. And the highest levels of American law enforcement were trying to figure out what do with the president.”
Pelley said McCabe confirms in their interview that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein considered wearing a wire in meetings with President Trump. Previously, a Justice Department statement claimed that Rosenstein made the offer sarcastically, but McCabe said it was taken seriously.
“McCabe in [the 60 Minutes] interview says no, it came up more than once and it was so serious that he took it to the lawyers at the FBI to discuss it,” Pelley told “CBS This Morning.”
McCabe has written a book, “The Threat: How the FBI Protects America in the Age of Terror and Trump,” in which he describes his career, and the FBI investigative process. It’s an insider’s account that details FBI decisions in the 2016 election and what took place at the bureau in the days between the firing of Comey and the appointment of Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller to probe Russian influence in the election.
Image caption
Rodeado de una multitud que lo aclamaba, Erdogan dijo: “El gobierno está en control”.
El presidente de Turquía, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, regresó en la mañana de este sábado a Estambul horas después de que iniciara un intento de golpe de Estado en su contra por parte de un grupo de militares.
Y frente a una multitud que lo aclamaba en el aeropuerto de Estambul, dijo: “El gobierno está en control”.
Por su parte, el nuevo jefe interino del estado mayor del ejército, Ümit Dündar— quien fue nombrado en sustitución a Hulusi Akar, capturado por los golpistas y cuyo paradero se desconoce— , también informó que el intento de golpe ya fue “frustrado”.
Y el primer ministro Binali Yildim describió el levantamiento como “una mancha negra en el historial democrático de Turquía”.
Según las autoridades, el levantamiento y la respuesta para controlarlo dejaron como consecuencia 265 muertos, “la mayoría de ellos civiles”, más de 1.000 heridos y más de 2.800 militares vinculados al golpe arrestados.
La televisión turca mostró a decenas de soldados presuntamente involucrados en el intento de golpe rindiéndose, abandonando los tanques con las manos en alto.
El gobierno turco también informó que 29 coroneles y 5 generales fueron apartados de sus cargos, así como unos 3.000 jueces.
Image copyright Reuters
Image caption
Decenas de personas se manifestaron en Ankara contra el levantamiento.
Ya lo advirtió Erdogan en el aeropuerto, a donde llegó tras disfrutar de unas vacaciones en el sur del país: “Este levantamiento, este movimiento es un gran regalo de Dios para nosotros. Porque el ejército será limpiado“.
Y en su desafiante discurso agregó que los golpistas “pagarán caro este acto de traición”.
Así se ha vivido el intento de golpe en Turquía.
Asimismo, el presidente turco señaló como culpables del intento de derrocamiento a los seguidores del clérigo musulmán turco Fethullah Gulen.
Aunque el clérigo, quien vive autoexiliado en Estados Unidos, negó categóricamente cualquier vínculo con los acontecimientos de Turquía.
Este sábado el presidente Erdogan pidió a EE.UU. que extradite al clérigo Gulen durante un discurso ante una multitud de seguidores en Estambul.
Image caption
Un grupo de partidarios de Erdogan festeja sobre uno de los tanques militares que bloquearon los puentes en el Bósforo.
Image caption
Las autoridades turcas informaron de que decenas de militares fueron apartados de sus cargos y la televisión turca mostró estas imágenes de soldados golpistas rindiéndose.
Grecia informó del arresto de ocho hombres que llegaron al país en un helicóptero militar turco.
El aparato aterrizó en la ciudad norteña de Alexandroupolis y los hombres solicitaron asilo político, según las autoridades griegas.
Pero Turquía ya adelantó que pedirá su extradición.
Cómo ocurrió
En la noche de este viernes, un grupo de militares de los cuales no se sabe aún quién los dirigía, aseguró tener el control de Turquía tras posicionar escuadrones de soldados en puntos estratégicos de Estambul y Ankara, las dos principales ciudades del país.
Decretaron el toque de queda y la ley marcial, y en un comunicado leído en la televisión estatal aseguraron haber instalado en el gobierno a un “consejo para la paz de la patria”.
Image copyright Reuters
Image caption
Un hombre se enfrentó solo a un tanque de guerra que intentaba entrar en el aeropuerto de Ataturk en Estambul.
Miles de personas ignoraron el toque de queda y salieron a protestar en apoyo a Erdogan, algunos incluso saltando sobre los tanques en actitud desafiante.
Durante toda la noche, las imágenes y reportes de medios locales mostraron enfrentamientos entre militares y civiles, y explosiones en edificios gubernamentales.
Image copyright EPA
Image caption
Erdogan dijo que “el ejército será limpiado” y que los golpistas pagarán por su “traición”.
En la plaza Taksim, en Estambul, por ejemplo, se escucharon dos explosiones grandes. Las mismas fueron acompañadas por el sonido de aviones de combate.
Los medios estatales informaron que una bomba impactó el edificio del Parlamento en Ankara.
Por otra parte, un avión de combate del gobierno derribó un helicóptero militar que era tripulado por fuerzas golpistas.
Image copyright Getty Images
Image caption
Hay reportes de 17 policías muertos en el cuartel de las fuerzas especiales de la capital.
El primer ministro de Turquía, Binali Yildirim, había dado la orden de derribar cualquier aeronave secuestrada por los golpistas. Según informó, jets militares habían despegado de la base militar ubicada en Eskisehir, al este de Ankara.
También se reportaron tiroteos y una explosión cerca del complejo presidencial en Ankara, y que sólo en el cuartel de las fuerzas especiales de la capital 17 policías habían muerto, aunque no se tiene claro si estas víctimas están incluidas en la cifra de fallecidos general.
“Orden democrático”
Horas antes, los uniformados emitieron en la televisión estatal un comunicado en el que aseguran haber tomado el poder para “preservar el orden democrático”.
Image copyright Getty Images
Image caption
Tras el levantamiento militar, el presidente Erdogan habló con CNN Turk y aseguró que seguía en ejercicio de su cargo.
El comunicado del grupo militar, leído por un presentador del canal nacional de televisión TRT— según él, obligado a punta de pistola—, aseguraba que el imperio de la ley democrática y secular se había visto erosionado por el actual gobierno, y que entraría en vigencia una nueva Constitución.
Sin embargo, Erdogan habló por medio de una videollamada desde un celular al canal de televisión CNN Turk para asegurar que seguía en ejercicio de su cargo e instó a sus partidarios a salir a las plazas y calles del país en favor de la democracia.
El mandatario se refirió al intento de golpe como “el levantamiento de una minoría”.
El inicio
Image copyright AP
Image caption
La plaza Taksim en Estambul fue uno de los lugares donde los partidarios de Erdogan se reunieron de a cientos para oponerse al golpe de Estado.
Los primeros reportes de una situación irregular en Turquía habían llegado cuando medios locales empezaron a hablar de sobrevuelo de aviones caza-bombarderos y helicópteros militares, así como disparos en Ankara.
Además, tanques bloqueaban dos puentes sobre el río Bósforo, en la ciudad de Estambul, la más grande del país. También impedían el acceso a los aeropuertos de esta ciudad y de la capital, Ankara.
Grupos de monitoreo de internet dijeron que el acceso a redes sociales como Facebook y Twitter estaba siendo restringido en Turquía, aunque no estaba claro quién bloqueaba el acceso.
Image copyright Getty Images
Image caption
Militares bloquearon este viernes el puente sobre el río Bósforo en Estambul.
La televisión turca anunció que altos mandos militares fueron tomados rehenes en Ankara. Según informes, uno de ellos era el jefe del estado mayor de las fuerzas militares, general Hulusi Akar, cuyo paradero sigue siendo desconocido.
Entre tanto el secretario de Estado de EE.UU., John Kerry, dio una declaración desde Moscú diciendo que esperaba que hubiera paz y continuidad en Turquía.
Junto a Kerry, el ministro de Relaciones Exteriores de Rusia, Sergei Lavrov, dijo que “es necesario evitar cualquier enfrentamiento cruento y resolver los problemas por conductos constitucionales”.
Y un portavoz del Kremlin, Dmitry Peskov, pidió que se volviera al “camino de la estabilidad y el orden” en Turquía.
Image copyright Reuters
Image caption
El primer ministro Binali Yildirim, dijo que las fuerzas de seguridad habían sido llamadas para manejar la situación.
El secretario general de Naciones Unidas, Ban Ki-moon, llamó a la calma.
“El secretario general está siguiendo de cerca los acontecimientos de Turquía”, informó un portavoz de la ONU, Farhan Haq.
“Naciones Unidas busca aclarar la situación en el terreno y llama a la calma”, añadió.
Además de hacer unas declaraciones similares y pedir “un respeto total para las instituciones democráticas de Turquía”, el secretario general de la Organización del Tratado del Atlántico Norte (OTAN), Jens Stoltenberg, recordó que Ankara es “un valioso aliado”.
Lo es sobre todo contra el gobierno del presidente Bashar al Asad en Siria y en el combate al grupo autodenominado Estado Islámico, ya que permite a la coalición internacional liderada por Estados Unidos su base de Incirlik para sus incursiones contra los yihadistas en Irak y Siria.
Image copyright Reuters
Image caption
Decenas de personas salieron a la calle en Estambul para rechazar lo que el presidente Erdogan denunció como un “intento de golpe” de Estado.
Por su parte, el presidente del Consejo Europeo, Donald Tusk, dijo que las tensiones en Turquía no se pueden resolver con armas.
Y agregó que la Unión Europea apoya totalmente al gobierno democráticamente electo del país, algo en lo que también insistió la canciller alemana Angela Merkel.
En unas palabras similares a las utilizadas por Erdogan, Qatar, la monarquía absoluta bañada por las aguas del Golfo Pérsico y aliado de Turquía, también denunció el “intento de golpe de Estado”.
“Pagarán el precio más alto”
El primer ministro turco dijo que las fuerzas de seguridad habían sido llamadas para manejar la situación y que “nada podrá perjudicar la democracia turca”.
“Estamos analizando la posibilidad de una intentona. No permitiremos esto”, dijo Yildirim, sin ofrecer más detalles.
“Aquellos que participen de este acto ilegal pagarán el precio más alto“, añadió.
No caben dudas de que el Gobierno necesita, desde varios puntos de vista, que la economía empiece a recuperarse lo más pronto posible. Hace cinco años que el nivel de actividad no se expande (hoy tenemos el mismo PBI real que teníamos en 2011, al tiempo que el PBI real per cápita es un 5% más bajo), por lo que lograr que la economía vuelva a crecer es, indudablemente, el primer gran desafío de la administración Macri.
Existe cierto consenso, entre los analistas (tanto locales como extranjeros) que siguen el día a día de la economía argentina, en torno a la idea de que en el corto plazo se producirá una recuperación del nivel de actividad. Sin embargo, la pregunta relevante a esta altura no es si dicha recuperación va a producirse o no, sino a qué velocidad será. Más allá de que es cierto que el retorno del crecimiento económico es una buena noticia en sí misma, también lo es que en algún momento el Gobierno va a necesitar que la velocidad de recuperación se acelere lo suficiente como para que la sensación de mejora de la situación económica resulte palpable para una amplia proporción de la sociedad. Estamos a un año de las elecciones legislativas (la campaña electoral va a empezar mucho antes, no bien finalice el verano), y sin la “ayuda” de una economía creciendo a buen ritmo todo será más difícil para el oficialismo de cara a dichos cruciales comicios de medio término.
En lo que respecta a cuestiones estrictamente domésticas, hay una serie de factores que permiten ser optimistas en cuanto a las posibilidades de una expansión del nivel de actividad interno en los próximos meses. En efecto, la estabilización/recuperación del poder adquisitivo, la baja –aunque lenta– de la tasa de interés, el mayor “empuje” fiscal, el blanqueo de capitales y las perspectivas de una buena campaña agrícola para el ciclo 2016/17 son todos aspectos que, ceteris paribus, tenderán a generar una expansión del nivel de actividad respecto de los alicaídos niveles que tenemos hoy.
Sin embargo, algunas cuestiones estructurales aún no han sido resueltas –desde el déficit fiscal y los bajos niveles de productividad hasta el precio relativo del dólar, la alta presión tributaria y la insuficiencia de infraestructura productiva– y van a limitar de alguna u otra manera la tasa de crecimiento potencial de Argentina en el corto/mediano plazo. Teniendo en cuenta lo anterior, va a resultar de vital importancia la ayuda que reciba la economía argentina desde el contexto internacional. En este marco, analizar el estado actual –y lo que se espera para los próximos trimestres– de las variables externas que tienen mayor incidencia sobre la dinámica económica de Argentina cobra especial trascendencia.
Si bien varios factores internacionales afectan el día a día de la actividad interna, por razones de simplicidad hemos centrado el análisis en cuatro ítems principales: 1) tasa de crecimiento real del PBI brasileño; 2) spread de riesgo soberano emergente; 3) precio internacional de la soja, y 4) poder adquisitivo del dólar norteamericano en Brasil.
Mediante la combinación de estas cuatro variables hemos construido el Indice de Condiciones Externas (ICE). Un aumento de dicho índice debe ser interpretado como una situación en la que, en promedio, el contexto internacional está “empujando” el crecimiento económico en Argentina, y viceversa.
Lo primero que hay que remarcar es la muy fuerte caída que sufrió el ICE durante el año pasado. En efecto, el índice se redujo nada menos que un 17,4% en 2015, contracción que se suma a la que se produjo en 2014 (período durante el cual el ICE cayó 5,4%). Durante el año pasado, todos los ítems que componen el ICE sufrieron un marcado deterioro, en especial los asociados a la evolución de la economía brasileña y al precio internacional de la soja. En el primer caso, la fuerte apreciación real del dólar (con respecto a la moneda brasileña), en conjunto con la contracción de la actividad económica en Brasil (en torno al -3,9% durante 2015), significó un duro impacto para la economía argentina, en general, y para el sector industrial (dada su alta dependencia de la demanda brasileña) en particular. Asimismo, la caída del precio internacional de la soja (que resultó el año pasado, en promedio, un -24,1%) también implicó un shock negativo, que tendió a limitar la dinámica del nivel de actividad durante 2015.
La buena noticia es que, luego de dos años de fuerte deterioro, el ICE se estabilizó durante 2016. En efecto, según nuestros cálculos, el ICE aumentaría, en promedio, un 1,6% durante este año. El factor que más colabora en dicho leve aumento es la apreciación real del real brasileño frente al dólar, que tiende a compensar la caída esperada para este año del PBI real de Brasil. También la compresión de los spreads de riesgo de los mercados emergentes representó una ayuda externa para Argentina durante este año, en especial si tenemos en cuenta que el gobierno federal y las provincias han estado recientemente muy activos en la realización de operaciones de colocación de deuda pública en los mercados internacionales.
De cara a 2017, la situación luce aún más alentadora. Según nuestros cálculos, el ICE aumentaría un 8,5% durante el próximo año, gracias en buena medida a la caída esperada en el precio real del dólar en Brasil y al retorno de la economía brasileña al sendero del crecimiento económico. En el mismo sentido, también se espera un leve aumento, en promedio, del precio internacional de las commodities agrícolas y una reducción del spread de riesgo promedio para los mercados emergentes.
Si bien la mejora del contexto internacional esperada para 2016 no llega a igualar las “ayudas” que Argentina recibió del mundo durante el período 2003/2007 (con una tasa de crecimiento promedio del ICE de 13,0% por año) y 2010/11 (con una expansión del ICE de 11,8% promedio por año), no va a pasar inadvertida.
En resumen, el “mundo” vuelve a darle buenas noticias a Argentina, en general, y a la administración Macri en particular. Está claro que la leve mejora de las variables internacionales, que son relevantes para Argentina, no hará por sí sola que la economía crezca a un ritmo acelerado durante 2017. Pero, sin dudas, ayuda y mucho.
Nikole Hannah-Jones accepting a Peabody Award in May 2016.
Mike Coppola/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Mike Coppola/Getty Images
Nikole Hannah-Jones accepting a Peabody Award in May 2016.
Mike Coppola/Getty Images
Trustees for the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill voted Wednesday afternoon at a closed session to give tenure to star New York Times writer Nikole Hannah-Jones, several months after refusing to consider her proposed tenure.
The case inspired a bruising debate over race, journalism and academic freedom. It led both to national headlines and anger and distress among many Black faculty members and students at UNC. Some professors there have publicly said they were reconsidering their willingness to remain at the university over the journalist’s treatment by the university..
“We welcome Nikole Hannah-Jones back to campus,” the UNC’s board chairman, Richard Stevens, said at the close of statements after the three-hour special session of the trustees. “Our university is not a place to cancel people. Our university is better than that. Our nation is better than that.
“We embrace and endorse academic freedom and vigorous debate and constructive disagreement,” Stevens said. He also said the campus was not a place for calling people “woke” or “racist.” The trustees, he said, had to endure terrible insults but could not respond for privacy reasons involving the decision.
The dean of the UNC School of Journalism and Media, Susan King, said in a statement that she was heartened by the outcome.
“It has taken longer than I imagined, but I am deeply appreciative that the board has voted in favor of our school’s recommendation,” she wrote. “I knew that when the board reviewed her tenure dossier and realized the strength of her teaching, service and professional vision they would be moved to grant tenure.”
Protesters had demonstrated at the Carolina Inn on Wednesday afternoon, where the meeting was held, and were confronted inside before its start by campus police. They relented, heading outside, after being informed that Hannah-Jones had asked for a private meeting.
Months earlier, board members asked for more information about her credentials when originally declining to take up her proposed tenure. However, it soon became clear that opposition had focused on her work on “the 1619 Project,” a New York Times initiative she conceived on the legacy of slavery on U.S. society today.
Opposition came from a donor
Some of that opposition came from Walter Hussman, a UNC donor and Arkansas newspaper publisher whose name adorns UNC’s journalism school. Hussman, who is also an alumnus, told NPR he was given pause by criticism of prominent scholars that Hannah-Jones distorted the historical record in arguing that the protection of slavery was one of the primary motivations of the Founding Fathers in seeking independence from the British. (Hannah-Jones has recently tweeted that she will be able to back up that contention in her forthcoming book.)
He spoke to a trustee and administrators about his concerns, while saying it is the university’s choice to make.
Predecessors got tenure
Hannah-Jones was up for a professorship endowed by the Knight Foundation; several predecessors in the professorship were granted tenure while, like Hannah-Jones, also lacking a doctorate. Tenure is the promise of near-certain lifetime employment as a professor, barring misdeeds or dereliction of professional obligations. It is intended to ensure academic freedom for scholars to explore ideas and inquiry independent of public or political pressure.
It is highly unusual for a distinguished university’s trustees to turn down a professor for tenure once it has been backed by the relevant department’s faculty, chairman, the dean, and the provost, or chief academic officer. It is seen as interfering in the academic operation of the campus. Dean King had offered a Hannah-Jones a five-year contract to teach and said she intended to continue to seek the trustees’ approval for tenure.
Hannah-Jones is recipient of MacArthur genius grant
Hannah-Jones has won some of the most prestigious awards in journalism, and more. She won a MacArthur “genius grant” for her reporting on the persistence of segregation in American life. She won a Pulitzer Prize for her essay accompanying “the 1619 Project.”
Hannah-Jones also won a Peabody award for a three-part project for This American Life on racially segregated schools in contemporary America. She also won a national magazine award. She earned a master’s degree from the school itself in 2003. A former reporter for the News and Observer in nearby Raleigh, Hannah-Jones was also a reporter for the Portland Oregonian and the investigative outlet ProPublica.
Earlier this month, Hannah-Jones announced she would not accept the offer and would consider suing the university if it failed to give her tenure.
Hussman argued against her credentials by saying she was helping to erode trust in the press by ignoring important journalistic principles of objectivity – the idea that reporters should not take sides.
“I worry that we’re moving away from those time-tested principles of journalism that we had in the 20th century that were so effective at engendering tremendous trust in the media,” Hussman told NPR. He reiterated, however, his pledge of $25 million to the journalism school was not contingent on UNC’s vote on Hannah-Jones’s tenure, and that it was the university’s decision to make.
In a separate interview with NPR, Hannah-Jones said the promise of objectivity is a subterfuge.
“Most mainstream newspapers reflect power,” she said. “They don’t actually reflect the experiences of large segments of these populations, and that’s why many of these populations don’t trust them. So when I hear that, I think he’s speaking to a different audience.”
King has argued that Hannah-Jones’ intensive interests in reporting on race and society spoke to the moment and would enhance student experience. “She is a journalist’s journalist, a teacher’s teacher and a woman of substance with a voice of consequence,” King said Wednesday. “Hannah-Jones will make our school better with her presence. She will deepen the University’s commitment to intellectual integrity and to access for all.”
At 6:36p.m., about a half-hour after the announcement, Hannah-Jones posted a photo of herself on Twitter holding what appeared to be a celebratory glass of whiskey or bourbon. It had been mostly consumed.
FILE: Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks at the California Legislative Black Caucus Martin Luther King Jr., Breakfast, in Sacramento, Calif. (AP)
California Gov. Gavin Newsom is slated to pull several hundred National Guard troops from the state’s border with Mexico on Monday in an apparent rebuff to President Donald Trump’s characterization of the region being under siege by Central American refugees and migrants, according to reports.
The move comes despite his predecessor’s agreement – along with other past and current border state governors – to send troops to the border at the Trump administration’s request. Former California Gov. Jerry Brown originally approved the mission through the end of March, but qualified that the state’s troops “will not be enforcing federal immigration laws.”
Newsom’s plan will require the National Guard to immediately begin withdrawing troops but still give it until the end of March to do so. According to excerpts from his Tuesday State of the State address, he will call the “border emergency” a “manufactured crisis,” and will say that “California will not be part of this political theater.”
Newsom’s order will require around 110 National Guard troops to help the state prepare for its next wildfire season while another 100 members will be deployed to focus specifically on combating transnational crime, according to excerpts from his speech. A spokesman for Newsom said his office will separately request federal funds for the expansion of the state’s counterdrug task force program, The Los Angeles Times reported.
California has repeatedly styled itself as the flagship resistance state to the Trump administration’s policies. Newsom, who is just a month into his governorship, has held up the state as an antidote to what he’s characterized as a corrupt Washington, a message he will likely try to convey in his State of the State speech on Tuesday.
Daniel Artana, economista jefe de FIEL, criticó el gradualismo implementado por el gobierno de Mauricio Macri a la hora de hacer anuncios impopulares por considerar que la “percepción es que la cosa es peor de lo que va a ser en el futuro”.
“La pregunta es por qué no dieron todas las malas noticias en el primer trimestre. Eso hubiera generado un mayor lio en el primer trimestre, pero dado la sensación de que ahora la cosa se acabó”, explicó Artana en diálogo con radio Mitre.
“El Gobierno hizo gradualismo y anunció malas noticias en cuotas. Eso prolongó la sensación de zozobra en el segundo trimestre del año, cuando pudieron haber puesto todas las malas noticias en el primero”, agregó.
En este sentido, el economista indicó que “a partir de ahora se debería parar con esto” y que “mayo debería tener un tránsito sin malas noticias todos los meses”.
“El problema es esta historia de que todos los meses se le da a la gente una mala noticia y la percepción es que la cosa es peor y en economía uno se maneja con expectativas”, consideró Artana.
Asimismo, el economista señaló que si bien la salida del cepo, las retenciones y el arreglo con los holdouts fueron medidas de shock, en el frente fiscal -por ejemplo- se decidió ir más despacio. Igual que el tema de la inflación.
“Los precios fueron delante de los salarios y las jubilaciones”, remarcó en diálogo con Radio Mitre. “Tenes gente que tiene salarios viejos a precios nuevos. Eso genera una caída del salario real importante”.
“El Gobierno anunció las malas noticias durante cinco meses y eso es un poco largo”, concluyó.
This is a widget area - If you go to "Appearance" in your WP-Admin you can change the content of this box in "Widgets", or you can remove this box completely under "Theme Options"
