Conservative youth organization Turning Point USA made headlines this week when President Trump spoke at the group’s “Teen Student Action Summit.” TPUSA Founder and President Charlie Kirk was thrilled by the president’s speech, bragging that a few teenagers “slept outside the door” to hear Trump’s remarks.
TPUSA is initially attractive to many young people due to the organization’s savvy marketing using memes, posters, and catchy slogans such as “socialism sucks.” And at first glance, this may seem like a good thing for the conservative movement.
But everyone should be concerned by the mainstreaming of TPUSA and Kirk. Turning Point claims to exist for the mission of “promoting the principles of fiscal responsibility, free markets, and limited government.” In reality, it’s an organization that pulls kids too young to know any better into a group that’s deeply troubled and dishonest at its core.
Turning Point’s entire existence is deceptive. At first glance, the group seems to stand for conservative values, but in recent years, TPUSA has become a partisan, pro-Trump group, bowing to the whims of donors and the Trump family while ignoring the wishes of staff and activists.
Now, Kirk bends over backwards to explain Trump’s trade policies, which to any clear-headed person, are strikingly in opposition to TPUSA’s original free trade principles. In an op-ed for the Hill, Kirk carries water for the president and attempts to defend Trump’s protectionist record.
Kirk knows the president’s trade practices aren’t in line with free market principles. His defense isn’t due to stupidity — it’s calculated, thought out, and downright dishonest. He has chosen the Trump family’s good graces over the principles he founded an organization on.
To make matters worse, TPUSA has a troubling track record with racism. The Huffington Post reported that “Turning Point USA Keeps Accidentally Hiring Racists,” and they aren’t exactly wrong. TPUSA came under hot water when the group’s national field director texted a fellow employee “I HATE BLACK PEOPLE … I hate blacks. End of story.”
The group claimed to have taken “decisive action” in removing the employee within 72 hours. But the racism within the organization didn’t stop there.
Ironically, Kirk replaced his national field director with someone who had quite a bit of baggage of her own. In since-deleted tweets, the newly hired employee repeatedly used the N-word, bragged that “I love making racist jokes”, and stated that if you are “any other race than white”, she promises to “make racist jokes towards you.”
The intense backlash prompted a memo from the HR department, offering complimentary background checks and encouraging employees to “lock down [their] social media.”
The New Yorkerdived deeper into the racist history of the organization, interviewing Gabrielle Fequiere, a former employee of TPUSA. She discussed hearing speakers at conferences who “spoke badly about black women having all these babies out of wedlock,” adding that “it was really offensive.”
Kirk has denied the allegations, saying they’re “baseless” and “absurd.” And obviously, these are just a few staffers and a handful of incidents but a concerning pattern nonetheless.
Turning Point’s bad faith engagement goes beyond racial lines. For some time, the group has repeated simplistic statements, calling the Left “cultural Marxists” who “don’t want borders, genders, markets, traditions, or order.”
In a recent tweet, Kirk even accused Democrats of supporting “bring[ing] back ISIS” and “kill[ing] every new job.” He’s clearly a bad-faith actor and not a good role model for young conservatives.
Democrats 2020 platform:
Bring back ISIS Keep North Korea Nuclear Raise your taxes War with Russia Crash the stock market Abolish ICE Sympathy for MS13 Open borders Kill every new job Illegals over citizens No genders
The move away from Turning Point’s original message has created deep tensions within staff, which does include some principled, good people.
A current TPUSA staff member, who requested anonymity, confirmed to me that “the biggest issue by far is the disconnect between headquarters and field staff. Many field staff … value the original aspects of Turning Point. We value free speech, limited government, personal freedoms, and the exchanging of ideas.”
But that’s not what the organization is about anymore — it’s just a cheerleading front for President Trump. Young conservatives should avoid Turning Point USA at all costs.
Jordan Lancaster is a contributor to Red Alert Politics and a senior at Wake Forest University. She can be found on Twitter @jordylancaster.
Fox News Flash top headlines are here. Check out what’s clicking on Foxnews.com.
If the congressional gig doesn’t work out, the Washington Nationals may be able to use Rep. Greg Steube.
Steube (R-Fla.) briefly took the focus off President Biden during Wednesday night’s Congressional Baseball Game by hitting a rare out-of-the-park home run in the Democrat vs. Republican grudge match.
As Biden greeted Steube’s GOP teammates in the home dugout at Nationals Park amid ongoing drama over the fate of two massive spending bills on Capitol Hill, the second-term lawmaker turned on the first pitch of the bottom of the third inning from Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.) and sent it deep to left field.
Rep. Greg Steube, R-Fla., pitches during the first inning of the Congressional baseball game at Nationals Park Wednesday, Sept. 29, 2021, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
As the ball hit off a railing in front of the first row of the stands and ricocheted back onto the field, Steube broke into a Kirk Gibson-style slow trot around the bases. He was congratulated by Democratic fielders he encountered before being mobbed by his red-clad teammates as he crossed the plate.
Steube is the first lawmaker to clear the fence at Nationals Park since the game was moved there in 2008. Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) is believed to have been the first lawmaker to hit an out-of-the-park home run in the game, doing so in 1979 at Alexandria, Va. In 1997, Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.) clanged a home run off the foul pole at Prince George’s Stadium in Bowie, Md.
In addition to showing his prowess at the plate, Steube was also the GOP’s starting pitcher — taking the mound in a red “Save America” hat signed by former President Donald Trump — and toiled through 5 2/3 innings and 120 pitches before moving to third base.
Rep. August Pfluger (R-Texas) managed to record the final four outs as the GOP held on for a 13-12, seven-inning win, their first since 2016. The last out was recorded by — who else? — Steube, who caught a pop-up off the bat of Rep. Greg Stanton (D-Ariz.) with the tying run on second to preserve the Republican victory.
Image caption
El presidente habló de la “opresión comunista” que prevalece en la isla y anunció una política más dura hacia Cuba.
Donald Trump regresó este viernes a Miami, bastión del exilio cubano en Estados Unidos, para dar un discurso que en Cuba algunos vieron como “un regreso a la retórica de la Guerra Fría”.
Y es que con esas palabras se refirió el diario oficialista Granma al tono cargado de hostilidad hacia el régimen de Raúl Castro del presidente de Estados Unidos en Miami.
“Lograremos una Cuba libre“, dijo Trump en medio de aplausos en un auditorio entregado momentos antes de firmar la orden ejecutiva.
En un esperado discurso, el presidente llegó para presentar la nueva postura de EE.UU. con la isla. Y aunque dijo que iba a “cancelar el acuerdo completamente desequilibrado del gobierno anterior con Cuba”, lo cierto es que en concreto sólo presentó dos cambios.
Por una parte, habló de restricciones para hacer negocios con las empresas administradas por los militares cubanos e imponer de manera más estricta las limitaciones de viaje a la isla que ya rigen sobre los estadounidenses.
Las medidas anunciadas norevierten los pilares de la política de acercamiento impulsada por Obama, incluido el restablecimiento de relaciones diplomáticas entre ambos países.
El presidente justificó su decisión porque las medidas aprobadas por su antecesor en la Casa Blanca “no favorecen al pueblo cubano, sino que enriquecen al régimen”.
Image caption
El presidente Trump reúne simpatizantes dentro de la comunidad cubana que reside en Miami, Florida.
Según Trump, su nueva política sigue procurando la apertura hacia los ciudadanos cubanos, pero bajo una estrategia de restringir los negocios con el gobierno de la isla.
En su discurso, el mandatario habló de la “opresión comunista” que prevalece en la isla y mencionó nombres de disidentes, como las Damas de Blanco, para denunciar las violaciones a los derechos humanos que dijo han aumentado desde el deshielo anunciado en 2014.
Además, pidió al gobierno cubano que “ponga fin al abuso hacia la disidencia” y dijo que estará dispuesto a sentarse a negociar un mejor acuerdo con el gobierno de la isla si libera a los presos políticos, se legalizan todos los partidos políticos y se celebran elecciones supervisadas y libres.
Reducir las actividades económicas de Estados Unidos, incluidas las relacionadas con el turismo, con el conglomerado militar cubano Grupo de Administración Empresarial (Gaesa)
Permitir a los ciudadanos y entidades estadounidenses que desarrollen lazos económicos con el sector privado y emergente de Cuba
Reforzar las restricciones de viaje para los estadounidenses que quieran visitar la isla
Prohibir los viajes individuales de estadounidenses bajo la categoría “persona a persona” que había permitido el gobierno de Barack Obama
Los cubanos radicados en EE.UU. podrán seguir enviando remesas y visitar a sus familiares en la isla
Continuar el embargo económico impuesto a la isla hace más de 50 años
Mantiene los vuelos regulares y los cruceros a la isla
Endurecimiento
Aunque deja en pie varios aspectos de la política de Obama hacia Cuba, la orden ejecutiva de Trump sí implica un endurecimiento que se apega más a las propuestas de legisladores republicanos de origen cubano, como el senador de Florida Marco Rubio, quien califica al gobierno de la isla como una dictadura que viola los derechos humanos.
Image caption
El turismo de estadounidenses a Cuba aumentó desde la reapertura de relaciones diplomáticas entre ambos países.
La medida central de lo anunciado por Trump pasa por impedir los negocios con los militares de la isla, que, aunque sea de manera más o menos indirecta controlan sectores clave de la economía del país caribeño, como es el turismo.
En cualquier caso, esta prohibición de hacer negocios con las empresas vinculadas al ejército cubano tendrá sus excepciones.
Según anunció la Casa Blanca, se mantendrán los vuelos regulares de aerolíneas estadounidenses y los cruceros a Cuba, a pesar de que la autoridad aeroportuaria está controlada por una empresa que pertenece a los militares.
Además, los negocios hechos hasta ahora por empresas estadounidenses con entidades del gobierno cubano no se cancelarán.
Un ejemplo de esto es el hotel Four Points de La Habana, gestionado por la cadena Starwood del grupo estadounidense Marriott. El copropietario cubano es la cadena Gaviota, que pertenece al ejército.
Derechos de autor de la imagen Getty Images
Image caption
Los vuelos regulares de aerolíneas estadounidenses y los cruceros a Cuban se mantendrán.
El otro elemento fundamental de lo anunciado este viernes por el presidente estadounidense pasa por aplicar de manera más rigurosa las limitaciones de viaje a la isla que rigen sobre los estadounidenses.
Aunque viajar por turismo a Cuba está prohibido para los estadounidenses y sólo existen 12 categorías que les permite visitar la isla, con Obama se habían relajado de alguna manera estas limitaciones, con lo que aumentó sustancialmente el número de visitantes de EE.UU. a ese país.
Con las nuevas medidas, el gobierno de EE.UU. pasará a auditar a todos los ciudadanos de su país que vayan a Cuba para comprobar que su viaje se ajusta de manera rigurosa a esas 12 categorías y no fueran de vacaciones.
“Retórica de la Guerra Fría”
Mientras el presidente Trump daba el discurso en Miami, el medio oficialista Granma iba comentando sobre el evento en una cobertura en directo desde su página web.
Allí, calificaron las palabras del republicano como “un regreso a la retórica de la Guerra Fría que parecía que se había superado”.
El medio citó a Trump cuando dijo que va a “reforzar el bloqueo para que las inversiones lleguen a las personas de Cuba” y habló de su discurso como una “contradictoria lógica, pues precisamente el boqueo (es) la principal causa de las limitaciones de los ciudadanos comunes en la isla”.
Otro medio oficialista, Cuba Debate, rechazó la nueva política de Trump y escribió en Twitter: “Bloqueo, imposiciones, bravuconería de imperio es la ‘creativa’ política de Trump para Cuba. ¿Ya no hemos vivido bastante eso? #CubaesNuestra”.
Derechos de autor de la imagen Twitter Cubadebate
Hubo quienes respaldaron la decisión del presidente estadounidense. El disidente cubano Guillermo Fariñas pidió a Trump en su Twitter que “continúe” con sus políticas a pesar de que “tras su discurso (el de Trump) se recrudezca la represión”.
Varios opositores cubanos residenciados en Miami también respondieron positivamente a los anuncios del gobierno.
“Esperábamos que el presidente Trump se pronunciara en los términos en que lo hizo (…) el tema de los derechos humanos había pasado a un segundo plano con Obama”, dijo el activista Ángel Moya.
Análisis: ¿qué gana Trump?
William LeoGrande, profesor de Ciencia Política en la American University de Washington y experto en la política hacia Cuba y el Congreso de EE.UU., le dijo a BBC Mundo que hay dos formas de ver las relaciones de Trump con Cuba: desde la política exterior y la interior.
“Si se mira como un tema de política exterior, tiene mucho sentido para Estados Unidos involucrarse con Cuba: logramos firmar 23 acuerdos bilaterales en temas de interés mutuo solo en los últimos dos años”, dijo.
“Pero si se mira como un tema de política doméstica y eres un republicano que quiere apelar a un segmento de la comunidad cubano-estadounidense que es el más conservador, ignoras esas cosas”, añadió.
El experto mencionó que el congresista republicano cubano-estadounidense Mario Díaz-Balart y el senador Marco Rubio, del mismo partido, fueron las voces políticas principales en promover una política más restrictiva con la isla.
“Un cálculo es que parece que Díaz-Balart negoció con Trump por su voto para revocar (la reforma de salud del anterior gobierno conocida como) el Obamacare y una de las demandas que hizo fue que Trump tuviera una política dura con Cuba”.
“Y hay que recordar que (el senador republicano) Marco Rubio tiene una silla en el comité de inteligencia del Senado que investiga el involucramiento de la campaña electoral de Trump con Rusia”.
The House Intelligence Committee voted Monday evening to release transcripts of Michael Cohen’s closed-door testimony before the panel in February and March.
“The public should judge for themselves both the evidence released today in conjunction with Cohen’s testimony related to Trump, his troubling relationship with Russia, and the efforts by Trump and those close to him to hide the relationship and potential business deals,” House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said in a statement. “The public also deserves the chance to judge Cohen’s credibility for themselves, including by examining some of the evidence he provided.”
The vote to make the transcripts public had a 12-7 margin.
The ranking member, Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., reportedly walked out of the meeting and said to reporters: “You guys are sad, sad, sad.”
Cohen, President Trump’s former personal attorney, told the committee that Trump attorney Jay Sekulow instructed him to lie to lawmakers in 2017 about when negotiations to erect a Trump Tower in Moscow had ended. Cohen said Sekulow ordered him to tell lawmakers in 2017 that discussions about the project ended by Jan. 31, 2016, ahead of the Feb. 1 Iowa caucuses. Cohen later admitted negotiations lasted until June 2016.
Sekulow’s legal team attacked Cohen’s credibility, arguing he has a long history of deception. “That this or any Committee would rely on the word of Michael Cohen for any purpose — much less to try and pierce the attorney-client privilege and discover confidential communications of four respected lawyers — defies logic, well-established law, and common sense,” they said.
Cohen pleaded guilty in November to “knowingly and willfully” making “a materially false, fictitious and fraudulent statement and representation” to the House and Senate Intelligence panels about a Trump Tower in Moscow. He is serving is serving three years in prison for lying to Congress, campaign finance violations, and tax and bank fraud.
WASHINGTON – Two national security aides who listened to a July 25 call between President Donald Trump and Ukraine’s president arrived Tuesday to testify on Capitol Hill in the Trump impeachment inquiry.
Jennifer Williams, an aide to Vibe President Mike Pence, and Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, a National Security Council expert on Ukraine, both listened to the phone call Trump had with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky.
Williams described the Trump call with Zelensky as “unusual” for its discussion of “a domestic political matter.” Vindman said Trump’s request of Zelensky sounded like a “demand.”
Refresh this page for updates on the hearing.
Witnesses deny partisan affiliation
Both witnesses were asked by Rep. Jim Himes, D-Conn., if they would consider themselves “Never Trumpers,” in response to previous tweets by the president attacking Williams and other witnesses.
“I’m not sure I know an official definition of a Never Trumper,” Williams said, “I would not, no.”
“Representative, I call myself ‘never partisan,'” Vindman said.
“Tell Jennifer Williams, whoever that is, to read BOTH transcripts of the presidential calls, & see the just released statement from Ukraine,” Trump tweeted Nov. 17. “Then she should meet with the other Never Trumpers, who I don’t know & mostly never even heard of, & work out a better presidential attack!”
– Nicholas Wu
Accusations of leaking
Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, said that Timothy Morrison, a National Security Council senior director for Europe and Russia, who is scheduled to testify Tuesday afternoon, told lawmakers during his closed-door deposition that some officials had questioned Vindman’s judgment and that Morrison worried he might leak information.
“Any idea why they have those impressions?” Jordan said.
Vindman read a July performance evaluation from Morrison’s predecessor, Fiona Hill, who is scheduled to testify Thursday and described Vindman as “brilliant,” “unflappable” and someone who “exercised excellent judgment.”
“I think you get the idea,” Vindman said. “I can’t say why Mr. Morrison questioned my judgment.”
Vindman also denied ever leaking information.
“I never did, never would,” Vindman said. “That is preposterous that I would do that.”
– Bart Jansen
Vindman getting military protection
Vindman’s involvement in the impeachment inquiry has prompted the Army to provide protection to him and his family.
“The Army is providing supportive assistance to help Lt. Col. Vindman with the public attention,” said Col. Kathy Turner, an Army spokeswoman. “As a matter of practice, the Army would neither confirm nor deny any safety or security measures taken on behalf of an individual; however, as we would with any soldier, the Army will work with civilian authorities to ensure that he and his family are properly protected.”
– Tom Vanden Brook
Tensions over identity of whistleblower
Rep. Devin Nunes, the ranking Republican on the Intelligence Committee, questioned Williams and Vindman on whether they leaked information regarding Trump’s July 25 phone call with Zelensky.
The Republican then pressed Vindman on whether he knows anyone who discussed the phone call with members of the media. Vindman directed Nunes to the NSC communications office before saying he did not know anyone.
When Nunes asked if either witness discussed the call with anyone outside the White House, Vindman said he discussed the call with State Department Deputy Secretary George Kent and an individual in the intelligence community.
Nunes asked who the member of the intelligence community was, prompting Schiff to interject to ensure it was not an attempt to out the whistleblower, whose letter about the call sparked the impeachment probe. Vindman said he was advised by his lawyer not to identify anyone when asked about members of the intelligence community.
Nunes continued to press Vindman to identify the member of the intelligence community he spoke to but the National Security Council aide refused to concede. Tensions grew as Vindman’s lawyer intervened to say his client was not going to answer the question while Schiff supported the decision, arguing that it appeared Nunes was attempting to identify the whistleblower.
“I want to make sure that this is not an attempt to out the whistleblower,” said Schiff, who said the whistleblower is protected with anonymity by law.
Nunes stated Vindman had testified that he didn’t know who the whistleblower was.
“I do not know who the whistleblower is,” Vindman said.
Nunes then asked how it was possible he could identify the whistleblower, if he didn’t know the name.
“Sir, under advice of my counsel, I have been advised not to answer specific questions about members of the intelligence community,” Vindman said.
Nunes reminded Vindman that he was testifying at the Intelligence Committee, to laughter in the audience. But Vindman declined to answer.
“Under advice of my counsel and instructions of the chairman, I have been advised not to provide any specifics on who I have spoken to inside the intelligence community,” Vindman said. “But I can offer that these people were properly cleared individuals with a need to know.”
Nunes said Republicans had tried to subpoena the whistleblower, but the motion was tabled by committee Democrats. Nunes ended his questioning by calling the hearings an “impeachment inquisition.”
A woman in the gallery gasped when Schiff told the room not to out the whistleblower and other members of the audience raised their heads to get a better look at the exchange.
“I was shocked,” said Mar Roberts of Washington, D.C., who gasped when the topic of the whistleblower came up because, she said, that’s a statutory issue. Roberts, 68, who was taking detailed notes on her phone, said she also attended the Watergate impeachment hearings.
– Courtney Subramanian and Bart Jansen
Vindman says Ukrainians offered him defense minister position
Republican counsel Steve Castor asked Vindman if the Ukrainians offered him the position of defense minister.
Vindman said he “immediately dismissed” the three offers and notified his superiors and counterintelligence officials.
“I’m an American. I came here when I was a toddler, and I immediately dismissed these offers. I did not entertain them,” he said. “It’s pretty funny for a lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army, which isn’t really that senior, to be offered that illustrious of a position.
“Just to be clear, there were two other staff officers, embassy Kiev staff officers that were sitting next to me when this offer was made,” Vindman said. One of the officers, Vindman said, was David Holmes, who testified behind closed doors last Friday.
A member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., told reporters during a recess that lawmakers weren’t challenging Vindman’s loyalty to the U.S.
“No, I don’t have any reason to question his loyalty, and I don’t think anyone on the committee is either, but I think we need to see the entire picture,” Perry said. “The American people need to see what happens in these discussions with foreign governments and the people who work for our government.”
He suggested the offer to Vindman was an example of how foreign governments try to “curry favor” with U.S. officials.
Perry said testimony revealed that Vindman disagreed with U.S. officials about whether Trump’s call for investigations coincided with national-security interests.
“The president will decide that,” Perry said.
– Nicholas Wu and Bart Jansen
Vindman corrects Nunes on his rank
Vindman corrected Nunes after the Republican referred to him as “mister,” rather than by his military rank.
“Mr. Vindman, you testified in your deposition that you did not know the whistle-blower,” Nunes started to ask.
In response to questions from Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., NSC aide Alexander Vindman said he knew without hesitation that he had to report his concerns about the July 25 call to White House lawyers. Vindman said that coming from a military culture, Trump’s request sounded more like a demand than a polite request that Ukraine could disregard.
“It was inappropriate,” Vindman said. “It was improper for the president to request, to demand an investigation into a political opponent, especially a foreign power where there is at best dubious belief that this could be an impartial investigation and that this would have significant implications if it became public knowledge.”
Vindman said that given the “power disparity” between the United States and Ukraine, it was clear that Trump’s request for investigations was more of a demand than a request.
“The culture I come from, the military culture, when a senior asks you to do something, even if it’s polite and pleasant, it’s not to be taken as a request. It’s to be taken as an order,” Vindman said. “In this case, the power disparity between the two leaders, my impression is that in order to get the White House meeting, President Zelensky would have to deliver the investigations.”
— Bart Jansen
Aide to give classified statement on Pence-Zelensky call
At the direction of her attorney, Mike Pence aide Jennifer Williams declined to answer a question from Schiff about a Sept. 18 call between the vice president and Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky.
“The September 18 call is classified,” said her attorney, adding that Pence’s office had said she could not talk about it in an open setting.
Williams said she would submit a classified statement to the committee in writing about the call.
A summary from the vice president’s office of the call said Pence commended Zelensky’s administration for “bold action to tackle corruption through legislative reforms, and offered full U.S. support for those efforts.”
— Nicholas Wu
Vindman: ‘I was concerned by the call’
National Security Council aide Alexander Vindman told the House Intelligence Committee he reported his concerns about a July 10 meeting with Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, and the July 25 call between Trump and Zelensky. The decorated Army soldier said he privately reported his concerns through official channels out of a sense of duty.
“I was concerned by the call,” Vindman said. “What I heard was inappropriate.”
— Bart Jansen
Williams says she found the July 25 call ‘unusual’
Jennifer Williams, a State Department official detailed to Vice President Mike Pence’s office, testified about how she found Trump’s July 25 phone call “unusual” because of the discussion of “a domestic political matter.”
“I found the July 25 phone call unusual because, in contrast to other presidential calls I had observed, it involved discussion of what appeared to be a domestic political matter,” she said.
She did not, however, discuss the call with the vice president or any of her other colleagues.
Williams also outlined her career in public service as a “career officer” rather than a partisan.
“As a career officer, I am committed to serving the American people and advancing American interests abroad, in support of the President’s foreign policy objectives,” she said.
— Nicholas Wu
Nunes slams Democrats, news media
Nunes, the top Republican on the Intelligence Committee, attacked the media and Democrats in his opening statement, slamming “fake news” and calling news outlets “puppets of the Democratic Party.”
“If you watched the impeachment hearings last week, you may have noticed a disconnect between what you actually saw and the mainstream media accounts describing it,” Nunes said.
“With their biased misreporting on the Russia hoax, the media lost the confidence of millions of Americans,” he added.
— Nicholas Wu
Schiff opens the hearing
Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff opened the hearing by noting how both witnesses were on the July 25 call, giving them firsthand knowledge of the events that day.
He laid out the case Democrats hope to make today as lawmakers debate whether to impeach the president.
“If the President abused his power and invited foreign interference in our elections, if he sought to condition, coerce, extort, or bribe an ally into conducting investigations to aid his reelection campaign and did so by withholding official acts — a White House meeting or hundreds of millions of dollars of needed military aid — it will be up to us to decide, whether those acts are compatible with the office of the Presidency,” Schiff noted.
Both witnesses were subpoenaed to appear today, Schiff noted.
“Today’s witnesses, like those who testified last week, are here because they were subpoenaed to appear, not because they are for or against impeachment,” Schiff said.
House Republicans have criticized previous witnesses for their indirect knowledge of events on the call, calling it “hearsay.”
— Nicholas Wu
Trump tweets about stock market
Just before the hearing began, President Donald Trump posted a tweet right before the hearing started, stressing the rise of the stock market.
Trump has previously slammed Vindman on Twitter as a “Never Trumper” and urged him to read a transcript of the call. The call occurred during a suspension in providing U.S. military aid to Ukraine, but Trump has insisted he didn’t demand the investigation in exchange for the funding.
Asked on Nov. 3 for evidence that Vindman was a “Never Trumper,” the president replied: “You’ll be seeing very soon what comes out.”
Schumer wants protections for whistleblowers
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., sent a letter Monday to Defense Secretary Mark Esper urging him to notify all civilian and military personnel of their legal rights to make protected disclosures to Congress free from retaliation. Schumer said Vindman and Laura Cooper, a deputy assistant secretary of Defense, who is scheduled to testify Wednesday, have been attacked as traitors in the media.
“Bravely, in the face of these shameful attacks, these individuals have still chosen to come forward and tell the truth despite the risk of professional reprisals and threats to their personal safety,” Schumer said. “I fear, however, these attacks will only increase after their participation in these public hearings.”
Esper has said the Pentagon has protections for whistleblowers and Vindman “shouldn’t have any fear of retaliation.”
The hearing begins at 9 a.m.
Jennifer Williams also to testify
Also on Tuesday morning, the committee will hear from Jennifer Williams, a National Security Council aide assigned from the State Department to the office of Vice President Mike Pence. She listened to the July 25 call and provided a memo about the call to Pence, although she couldn’t say whether he read it. She told lawmakers at her closed-door deposition that it was “folly” to withhold military aid to Ukraine and that the call was “unusual.”
“I would say that it struck me as unusual and inappropriate,” Williams said when asked what her own personal reaction to the call was.
On Tuesday afternoon, the panel will hear from Kurt Volker, the former U.S. special envoy to Ukraine, and Tim Morrison, a National Security Council senior director for Europe and Russia.
Republicans had asked to hear from Volker and Morrison to compare their testimony to Vindman’s. Volker in his closed-door testimony described Trump’s longstanding presumption of corruption in Ukraine. The special envoy also said “no,” when asked if Trump asked Ukraine to manufacture dirt on the Bidens, in contrast to looking for evidence of whether Burisma tried to influence the 2016 U.S. election.
“Even if he’s asking them to investigate the Bidens, it is to find out what facts there may be rather than to manufacture something,” Volker said.
Republicans have argued that the dispute about the July 25 call amounts to policy disagreements, and that Trump has the authority to direct foreign policy.
Morrison told lawmakers in his closed-door deposition that he asked National Security Council lawyers to review Trump’s July 25 call because he thought it “would be damaging” if it “leaked.”
But Morrison also said the White House chief of staff’s office had informed the Office of Management and Budget that “it was the President’s direction to hold the assistance.”
UVALDE, Texas — Funeral directors, morticians, florists and others from around Texas arrived this week to help as the first funerals begin Tuesday for the 19 students and two teachers killed last week at Robb Elementary School.
Nineteen of those killed will be laid to rest in caskets customized by Trey Ganem and his son, who are based in Edna, Texas, and worked over the three-day weekend to finish, CNN reported.
The first two funerals were set for Tuesday afternoon and evening, following visitations on Monday at the town’s two funeral homes whereAmerie Jo Garza, 10, was remembered as an “outgoing and funny” child who “wanted to help everyone else out,” and Maite Rodríguez, 10, was described as “smart, bright, beautiful, happy” and dreamed of being a marine biologist.
Beyond NRA: Gun-rights groups spend millions to influence gun laws
The National Rifle Association is accustomed to drawing national attention amid calls for gun-safety legislation following mass shootings. But a handful of other gun-rights groups also hold significant sway in the nation’s capital, where they fork over millions to lobbyists each year to help persuade legislators and policymakers to take their side on issues they care about.
Gun-rights advocacy organizations spent a record $15.8 million on lobbying last year, according to an analysis by Open Secrets, a nonpartisan nonprofit that tracks lobbying and campaign contributions. Since 1998, the industry has spent nearly $200 million on federal lobbying.
The top spender last year was not the NRA, which held its annual convention over the weekend. That spot went to the National Shooting Sports Foundation, which paid lobbyists $5 million in 2021. Read more here.
— Donovan Slack and Chelsey Cox, USA TODAY
Chief who led shooting response won’t be sworn into city council
Uvalde school district police chief Pete Arredondo, who led the law enforcement response to the mass shooting, was set to be sworn in as a newly elected city council member Tuesday, but Mayor Don McLaughlin said Monday that would not happen.
“Our focus on Tuesday is on our families who lost loved ones,” McLaughlin said in a statement Monday provided to USA TODAY. “We begin burying our children tomorrow, the innocent victims of last week’s murders at Robb Elementary School.”
It was not immediately clear if Arredondo would be sworn in at a later time or if it would be done privately. He was one of three council members scheduled to be sworn in Tuesday.
“Pete Arredondo was duly elected to the City Council,” McLaughlin said. “There is nothing in the City Charter, Election Code, or Texas Constitution that prohibits him from taking the oath of office. To our knowledge, we are currently not aware of any investigation of Mr. Arredondo.”
At a stunning news conference Friday, Director of the Texas Department of Public Safety Steven McCraw said not confronting the gunman after two officers received grazing wounds following an initial encounter was “the wrong decision.”
“Clearly there were kids in the room. Clearly they were at risk,” McCraw said.
At Monday’s visitation for Amerie, mourners wore shades of purple, her favorite color, at the request of her stepfather, Angel Garza. At Maite’s visitation, family wore green tie-dye shirts with an illustration showing the 10-year-old with angel wings.
A dozen funerals are planned this week for those killed in the shooting, 11 for students and one for teacher Irma Garcia. In total, the gunman killed 21 people.
Over Memorial Day weekend, hundreds of Uvalde residents and visitors from surrounding communities cycled through the Uvalde Town Square in the majority Latino community of 16,000 about 75 miles west of San Antonio. Churches from Uvalde and neighboring cities organized prayer vigils at the square.
Visitors wore maroon and blue shirts emblazoned with Uvalde Strong or the Uvalde High School Coyotes mascot and wiped away tears as they embraced each other and paid their respects.
Dan Hinojosa, pit master and owner of Harris County General Store Barbecue Company, on Monday said he drove down early to set up a food tent near one of the funeral homes and town square.
“My heart goes out to the community and we are just out here trying to spread love,” Hinojosa said.
Other community members put together car washes and plate sales to help raise money for families. On the roads around the elementary school, residents were handing out cold water and teddy bears to visitors. Support from across the country resulted in millions of dollars raised on GoFundMe.
Senators meet to discuss possible gun safety regulations
Biden said he plans to continue to push for gun safety regulations, as a bipartisan group of about 10 senators have met to discuss possible legislation.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., also said last week he wanted Republican lawmakers to work with Democrats on legislation “directly related” to the Uvalde shooting.
The three topics they discussed included background checks for guns purchased online or at gun shows, red flag laws designed to keep guns away from those who could harm themselves or others and programs to bolster security at schools and other buildings.
The gunman in the Uvalde shooting legally purchased two rifles after his 18th birthday, police said. He was armed with more than 1,000 rounds of ammunition, and more than 140 spent cartridges were found inside the school, according to law enforcement.
Contributing: Rafael Carranza and Donovan Slack, USA TODAY; The Associated Press
function govideo(idvideo,id,image,file,tipo,titulo,creditos)
{
document.getElementById(‘incrustado’+id).className=’news_media_b’;
if (tipo==’video’ || tipo==’audio’)
{
var bgplayer=image;
var skinplayer=’swf/rpp.zip’;
var h=413;
var w=550;
if (tipo==’audio’){ h=123; /*bgplayer=”tmp/img/player_audio-dummy_mm.jpg”;*/ }
} else
if (tipo==’galeria’)
{
document.getElementById(idvideo).innerHTML=’X‘;
}
}
Sbado, 07 de Marzo 2015 | 9:45 pm
Créditos: EFE/Referencial
La mandataria explic que el embajador Ibarra se encontraba en Chile por vacaciones, cuando el caso apareci en los medios peruanos, y permaneci para ayudar en la respuesta a la primera nota de protesta peruana.
La presidenta de Chile, Michelle Bachelet, anunció que el embajador de su país para el Perú, Roberto Ibarra, se quedará en Santiago para trabajar la respuesta a la segunda nota de protesta enviada por Lima, sobre la denuncia peruana de espionaje.
Tras concluir el Consejo del Gabinete de su Gobierno, realizado en Cerro Castillo, la mandataria explicó que el embajador Ibarra se encontraba en Chile por vacaciones, cuando el caso apareció en los medios peruanos, y permaneció para ayudar en la respuesta a la primera nota de protesta peruana.
“Hemos recibido una nueva nota que se seguirá trabajando por los canales diplomáticos”, afirmó Bachelet, en declaraciones que reproducen medios chilenos.
Asimismo, aseguró que Ibarra “va a permanecer por unos días más, trabajando junto al Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores para contestar esta nueva nota”.
Respecto al retiro del embajador peruano en Santiago por este tema, Michelle Bachelet refirió que cada Gobierno “toma las decisiones que le compete, y no haremos comentarios al respecto”.
if (data && data.searchResult && data.searchResult.spaces && data.searchResult.spaces[0] && data.searchResult.spaces[0].ads) {
var ads = data.searchResult.spaces[0].ads;
for (var i = 0; i < ads.length; i++) {
var ad = ads[i];
if (ad.creative && ad.creative.content && ad.creative.content.length && ad.creative.images) {
var titularText = '';
var cuerpoText = '';
var displayUrlText = '';
var content = ad.creative.content;
for (var j = 0; j < content.length; j++) {
var contentItem = content[j];
if (contentItem.key === 'Titulo')
titularText = cX.library.getAllText(contentItem.value);
if (contentItem.key === 'Cuerpo')
cuerpoText = cX.library.getAllText(contentItem.value);
if (contentItem.key === 'DisplayUrl')
displayUrlText = cX.library.getAllText(contentItem.value);
}
var images = ad.creative.images;
var imgSrc = '';
var textWidth = 295;
for (var k = 0; k
Des Moines police said one person has died and two others hospitalized in a shooting outside of East High School on Monday afternoon that injured three people.
Police at the scene said there are “multiple shooting victims outside of the school.” Three people who appear to be teens were hospitalized in critical condition, according to police. Police later said one victim has died.
The shooting happened outside of the school but on school grounds just before 3 p.m. The school was locked down Monday afternoon and residents were asked to stay clear. Streets around the school were shut down as well.
No other injuries have been reported and police said they do not believe there is a continued threat to the public. Sgt. Paul Parizek said suspects have been detained in the case.
“We’ve got some potential suspects detained. That will be a piece that moves through the night that we’re going to have to be working on,” Parizek said. “The kids in that school are our community’s most precious cargo. So, the medics and the firefighters did an outstanding job getting up here. You know, it’s sad. We do train for this. We have to be prepared for it. And this is why.”
East High student Kaylie Shannon told KCCI she was outside of the school when she heard gunfire.
“I was just sitting in my friend’s car and then all of the sudden I heard 11 gunshots and some boys screaming,” Shannon said.
Des Moines police continue to investigate.
Check the KCCI Breaking News and Weather App for updates on this developing story.
All indications are that GOP voters are united and energized and the party is doing what’s necessary to make Kevin McCarthy speaker in January 2023, which would instantly squash the never-very-plausible talk of Joe Biden being the next FDR or LBJ.
The foundation of the GOP’s unity, of course, is that Donald Trump, with a very brief exception of the immediate aftermath of January 6, effortlessly maintained his control of the GOP. The anticipated civil war came and went with barely a shot fired.
Cheney is certainly a casualty, although she is now less a leader of a significant faction of the party and more a voice crying in the wilderness. That is an honorable role, and she may well be vindicated in the fullness of time (and deserves to be on the merits).
But the party will pay no electoral price for the drama over her leadership role, or, likely, for its continued loyalty to Trump.
Despite Trump’s grip, he’s not front and center for the average voter. He isn’t president and he isn’t on the ballot anywhere. Republicans aren’t going to be running next November on relitigating the 2020 election or January 6. The focus inevitably will be on Biden and his agenda, which will loom much larger than anything the former president can do from Mar-a-Lago.
The Democratic polling outfit Democracy Corps just did a survey of 2022 battlegrounds that confirmed for Republicans this general picture. Fully three-quarters of the GOP are Trump loyalists or Trump-aligned. As Stanley Greenberg writes in a memo about the poll, among Republicans, “the percent scoring 10, the highest level of interest in the election, has fallen from 84 to 68 percent. But Democrats’ engagement fell from 85 percent to 57 percent.”
Greenberg calls the GOP base “uniquely unified and engaged.”
More evidence is the boffo fundraising by the National Republican Campaign Committee so far. It raised $33.7 million in the first quarter, a bit less than the Democrats, but the Democrats have an overhang of debt. Meanwhile, GOP candidate recruitment is ahead of the pace of prior midterm cycles, whereas Democrats are seeing worrisome retirements.
It’s not as though there’s a high bar for the GOP. Republicans need to flip only six seats in the House, when in the post-World War II era the president’s party has lost on average 27 seats in midterm elections.
With the margin so slim, even a marked overperformance, say, where Biden matches George H.W. Bush’s feat in 1990 of holding losses to eight seats, wouldn’t be enough to save the House.
On top of this, the playing field is tilting the GOP’s way. Reapportionment gave more seats to states where Republicans predominate and fewer to states where Democrats predominate. Based on their strength in state legislatures, Republicans also have the upper hand in redistricting, including in Texas, Florida and Ohio.
The Biden theory is that $6 trillion in spending will deliver a roaring economy that will take the edge off typical midterm losses. But the latest jobs and inflation numbers show that it might not be so simple, and there is considerable doubt whether Biden can get his spending. Democrats may find themselves in the same dispiriting position as Trump-era Republicans after John McCain’s thumbs-down on Obamacare—controlling the elected branches of Washington, but largely stymied on substance.
Greenberg derives some comfort from his belief that, in contrast to 2020, “this time, Democrats cannot fail to see how early Trump’s party is fully engaged with its ongoing culture war, focused on crime, open borders, and defunding the police.”
Yet there is no indication of any effort to seriously defuse these issues. Biden’s polices have needlessly created a crisis at the border, and murder rates continue to climb in major cities, even as much of the left still talks of the police as if it’s a racist occupying force.
There are miles to go before November 2022. Biden might find a way to thread the needle of cooperating with Republicans on infrastructure and police reform without alienating his own base, and unforeseen events always take a hand.
But the story of 2021 is emphatically not a Republican meltdown. Despite what you read, the GOP stands a good chance to end its bout in the wilderness after two short years.
Detail of a scarf print from the Beyond Buckskin Boutique. Photo courtesy of shop.beyondbuckskin.com. Download Full Image
Morris said by spearheading innovative partnerships and leveraging resources from ASU, tribes and community organizations, she hopes that Inno-NATIONS will create a “collision community,” causing a ripple effect of economic change in tribal communities.
Both events are free and take place at The Department in downtown Phoenix.
Inno-NATIONS will also launch a three-day pilot cohort with approximately 20 Native American businesses starting in June.
“Beyond Buckskin” features Jessica Metcalfe, a Turtle Mountain Chippewa, Dartmouth graduate and entrepreneur, who grew a small online store into a successful boutique on the Turtle Mountain Indian Reservation in North Dakota.
The store promotes and sells Native American-made couture, streetwear, jewelry, and accessories from more than 40 Native American and First Nations artist, employing tribe members from the Turtle Mountain community.
ASU Now spoke to Metcalfe to discuss her work.
Jessica Metcalfe
Question: We’ve seen Native American fashion emerge and evolve. How did you get into the business?
Answer: I was writing my master’s thesis in 2005 and my advisor at the time had told me about some research she had done, which looked at Native American fashion in the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s. She had wondered if I was interested in picking up where her research left off. I looked into it and found that there were these breadcrumbs, little bits here in there, that something had been going on in the past 60-70 years, but hadn’t been looked at as a collective movement.
Through my doctoral dissertation, what I discovered was that Native American fashion has gone through waves of acknowledgements by the broader public, but what we’re experiencing now is perhaps the biggest wave yet.
You have designers like Patricia Michaels out at New York’s Style Fashion Week and the Native Fashion Now traveling exhibit touring the country, so there’s really a lot of exciting things happening lately. It’s coming from a collective movement. Designers basically grouping together to share costs but also to put together more events to cause a bigger ruckus.
Q: How did you build your online store into a brick-and-mortar business?
A: I first launched a blog in 2009 as an outlet for my dissertation research, and wanted to share it with more people and to also get more stories and experiences. My readers kept asking where could they see and buy these clothes? At that time, there wasn’t an easy way to access functions like a Native American Pow Wow or market in order to do that.
I had established a rapport with designers through my research and writing. They saw what I was doing through the blog and then a question popped into my head. “How would you feel about creating a business together?” There were 11 initial designers who said they needed the space, and I worked with them to sell their goods online. We just now opened our design lab on the Turtle Mountain Indian Reservation. We are creating a system where we can meet demand and maximize a need in Indian Country.
We employ Native Americans from ages 15 to 22. There aren’t a whole lot of opportunities for people that age on the reservation. They either work at the grocery store or the gas station. One of them is interested in film and photography and so they run our photo shoots. Another person is interested in business entrepreneurship, and they get to see how an idea goes from concept to execution.
Q: The subtext is that this isn’t just about fashion but, history, representation and cultural appropriation?
A: Our clothing is just more than just objects. It’s about how the material was gathered, what the colors represent, what stories are being told and how does that tie into our value system. One of the things I often discuss is the Native American headdress. Our leaders wear them as a symbol of their leadership and the dedication to their communities. These stories are a way to share our culture with non-Natives and protect our legacy for future generations.
Q: Why is it important for Native American businesses to branch out into other cultures?
A: Native American people desperately need to diversify their economic opportunities on and off the reservations. Up until recently, people haven’t thought of fashion or art as a viable career path.
A recent study conducted by First Peoples Fund that found a third of all Native American people are practicing or are potential artists. That is a huge resource we already have in Indian Country and we need to tap it and develop it, and push for Natives in various fields to look at themselves as entrepreneurs and launching businesses.
Now, Native American people have an opportunity to make a positive impact in their local communities by reaching people through their art and sharing our culture with the rest of the world.
La respuesta rápida a la pregunta en el título es: sí. Para ello necesitamos empresas informativas comprometidas en entregar información confiable, pero también necesitamos consumidores de noticias más responsables.
A pesar de que la humanidad siempre está en constante cambio, a veces nos tardamos en adaptarnos, aunque, al final, siempre imperan los cambios.
Estamos en contacto con los cambios tecnológicos y la innovación digital ha introducido un nuevo nivel de influencia en los hábitos de consumo de noticias del público en general a nivel mundial. En la última década los medios de comunicación, las aplicaciones de mensajería, los mensajes de texto y el correo electrónico proporcionan un flujo constante de noticias de personas que tenemos cerca, así como de desconocidos totales.
En general se supone que los medios de noticias deben informar solamente los “hechos” y los lectores o los espectadores siempre deben llegar solos a las conclusiones correctas acerca de la información que se les presenta, aunque esto es sólo parte de la suposición, porque aunque se necesita que las noticias contengan información confiable, también necesitamos que aquellos que la reciben sean consumidores responsables de medios.
Pero vivimos en una época complicada para la credibilidad de los medios de comunicación. Los medios de comunicación tradicionales, como la radio, la televisión y los periódicos viven una etapa de desconfianza por parte de la ciudadanía, según una encuesta más reciente realizada por Parametría. Según los datos de Parametría nunca antes habían registrado un porcentaje tan alto de mexicanos que dice tener poco o nada de confianza en los medios de comunicación: ocho de cada diez mexicanos desconfían de estas fuentes de información.
Los noticieros de televisión son los que presentan mayores niveles de desconfianza; el 83% de los mexicanos dijo tener poca o nada de confianza en ellos. En cuanto a los noticieros de radio, el 81% de entrevistados dijo no confiar en ellos. En cuanto a los periódicos la desconfianza llegó a 79 por ciento.
La pérdida de confianza en los medios de comunicación no es un fenómeno exclusivo de México, ya que la mayoría de países presenta una baja en la confianza. Las redes sociales se han convertido en una herramienta que los ciudadanos usan cada vez con mayor frecuencia para enterarse de los acontecimientos.
El problema es que las noticias ahora aparecen en los medios sociales en partes o completas, pero extrañamente en redes sociales le damos más importancia al mensaje que a la fuente. Durante la pasada campaña electoral en Estados Unidos, miles de historias falsas fueron compartidas en medios sociales sin revisar que la información que se difundía fuera verdadera.
En México, a principios de año, en el marco de las protestas por los aumentos al precio de las gasolinas, algunos mensajes se propagaron por diferentes medios generando una atmósfera de miedo entre la gente que compartió esa información que recibía en sus redes sociales o directamente en sus teléfonos móviles en WhatsApp y que hacía referencias a “toques de queda”, “desalojos” o convocatorias y anuncios de “ataques a comercios”. Muchas de esas informaciones resultaron ser falsas.
Según estadísticas del Centro de Investigaciones Pew, 44% de los norteamericanos considera a Facebook como su principal fuente de noticias. En México, preferimos leer las noticias (47%) a verlas en video (40%) o escucharlas (17%), pero según el Estudio de Consumo de Medios y Dispositivos entre Internautas Mexicanos del IAB (Interactive Advertising Bureau), los mexicanos sigue prefiriendo leer sus noticias de formas “tradicionales” (36%) frente a internet (28%). En ese sentido de los 68 millones de usuarios de internet en México, el 93% están registrados en una red social, siendo Facebook la más común con 97% de los registrados en medios sociales, según el estudio 2016 del IAB. De entre los usuarios activos de Facebook, una de sus actividades principales (38%) es buscar noticias o información de interés, y 42% usa sus redes sociales para consumir noticias.
En Estados Unidos fueron identificadas de octubre del 2016 a enero del 2017 54,000 historias falsas, según la marca de análisis de marketing digital Brandwatch; según Brandwatch al menos 10,000 noticias falsas fueron distribuidas entre octubre del 2016 y enero del 2017 en todo el mundo. Este conteo sólo muestra los resultados de las historias publicadas en inglés.
Un estudio del Centro de Estudios Pew reveló que cuatro de cada 10 estadounidenses se sienten seguros de poder reconocer una noticia falsa cuando se tope con ella. Un 45% se siente menos confiado, pero igual cree que podría reconocerlas.
Aun así los grupos más vulnerables son los más jóvenes. Según una encuesta de la agencia de marketing digital eZanga, los jóvenes tienen menos capacidad para discernir entre una noticia falsa de una verdadera. Cuando se les a los jóvenes de menos de 17 años cuál era el aspecto de los sitios web que les inspiraba más confianza, 56% respondió que el nombre y la fuente, mientras que para 44% lo más importante es la presentación visual del sitio.
Un estudio de la Universidad de Stanford difundido en noviembre pasado, descubrió que los adolescentes no pueden distinguir la veracidad de lo que leen en internet. Según los datos del el estudio, de una muestras de 7,804 estudiantes, 82% no pudo distinguir entre contenidos patrocinados e historias periodísticas reales. Además los estudiantes juzgan la credibilidad de un tuit “noticioso” basado en qué tantos detalles contiene o si tiene una buena foto adjunta, y no en la fuente. Cuatro de cada diez estudiantes de educación media creen, basándose en el título, que una foto de unas margaritas deformes es evidencia creíble de las condiciones tóxicas cerca de la planta nuclear Fukushima en Japón. Incluso si la foto no contienen una fuente o alguna referencia de la ubicación de la foto.
Según datos de Pew, la mayoría de los estadounidenses afirman que las noticias apócrifas confunden a la sociedad. El 64% cree que las noticias falsas confunden mucho, el 24% cree que se crea poca confusión y el 11% no cree que generen confusión. El 23% de los encuestados admitió haber compartido en alguna ocasión alguna historia falsa; 14% admitió que compartió alguna noticia falsa con conocimiento de que no era legítima y 16% compartieron alguna noticia apócrifa, sólo para darse cuenta después de que no era verdad.
En este problema de información apócrifa la responsabilidad parecería que sólo debe recaer en el autor y el medio que difundió dicha información. El problema es que aunque los medios dejaran de difundir información imprecisa, los lectores debemos asumir que nosotros nos convertimos en voceros de esa misma información al reproducirla en nuestros medios sociales sin verificarla. Es importante verificar ya que, al final, es difícil saber quiénes serán los receptores finales de esa información, lo que complica poder dimensionar el impacto que se creará en el lector y así evitar la cadena de desinformación que se genera a partir de las noticias apócrifas.
Para restablecer la confianza en la relación entre medios de comunicación y lectores. Por un lado necesitamos que los consumidores de noticias adapten una conciencia crítica sobre su rol como lectores de medios. Y los medios debemos de hacer énfasis en nuestros procesos de verificación de información.
Según un artículo del Foro Económico Mundial aún hay espacio en la mejora de las habilidades de pensamiento crítico para que los ciudadanos sepan recoger fuentes fidedignas y resistir sus propios sesgos. Cultivar estas habilidades de pensamiento crítico requieren de tiempo y práctica, por lo que es más importante que nunca invertir en educación. La información fidedigna y las habilidades de pensamiento crítico son indispensables para cualquier democracia y no podemos caer en el error de darlas por sentado ya que según el Foro Económico Mundial así es como han triunfado las noticias falsas.
The bank said in a note that chances of a successful deal are now lower, but suggested that an increase in tariffs could still be avoided — especially if the Chinese delegation still attends its meeting with U.S. negotiators this week.
Referring to Trump’s latest gambit, Goldman economists said: “This represents a shift from the optimistic statements from US officials over the last few weeks and suggests that the probability of a near-term agreement is at least slightly lower than it seemed to be recently.”
U.S. officials had claimed in recent weeks that trade talks were going well, and sources had told CNBC that a deal was possible by this Friday. But major sticking points were said to remain, such as intellectual property theft and a disagreement as to whether tariffs should remain in place as a way to ensure Beijing sticks to its commitments.
Trump said in a Sunday afternoon Twitter post that the current 10% tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese goods will rise to 25% on Friday. He also threatened to impose 25% levies on an additional $325 billion of Chinese goods “shortly.”
Yet Goldman said it believes an agreement could still be reached, adding that it is still “slightly” more likely to happen than an increase in duties. It put the odds of a tariff escalation by the end of the week at 40% currently.
Investors will have a very clear signal to monitor, the bank added.
“The most important near-term indicator to watch will be whether the large delegation of Chinese officials comes to Washington on May 8, as scheduled. If they do, this would indicate that they believe a deal is still reasonably likely,” Goldman said.
If both sides end up meeting after all, the tariff rate would rise only if they are unable to reach an agreement by Thursday — before the hike takes effect on Friday, it added.
Chinese Vice Premier Liu He had planned to bring a large delegation to Washington on Wednesday to hash out a trade deal. But two sources briefed on the talks told CNBC the Chinese side may back out of this week’s negotiations.
Goldman warned that could be a sign of an extended trade war: “If the upcoming visit is canceled, an agreement in the coming week would then seem very unlikely. In such a scenario an increase in the tariff rate to 25% would become the base case.”
The U.S. imports goods from China totaling $539.5 billion and the trade deficit stood at $419.2 billion in 2018, according to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. If Trump follows through with his threats, virtually all goods imported from China to the U.S. would face some sort of tariff.
But there is still hope yet, as Trump has the power to “walk the policy back through an executive order if negotiations progress favorably throughout the week,” Goldman said.
— CNBC’s Spencer Kimball contributed to this report.
Humala reconoció este miércoles los audios investigados por Fiscalía, pero rechazó la versión de que estos lo impliquen con situaciones ilícitas. | Fuente: Flickr Congreso
Ollanta Humala desmintió el miércoles que sus más de 100 audios investigados en Fiscalía lo impliquen en la presunta compra de testigos en el caso Madre Mía. Sin embargo, el diario El Comercio publicó este jueves que Jorge Ávila sí se retractó por dinero sobre las acusaciones que en 1992 presentó contra el expresidente.
¿Qué es el caso Madre Mía, quién es Jorge Ávila y qué tiene Humala que ver con esto? RPP Noticias te lo explica.
La base militar. Todo se remonta a 1992. Ollanta Humala era capitán del Ejército y estaba destacado en Huánuco como jefe de la Unidad Contrasubversiva. Su labor era dirigir la base militar Madre Mía (San Martín) para la identificación y captura de terroristas.
El 17 de junio de ese mismo año, sin embargo, un ciudadano lo denunció ante la Fiscalía de Tocache. Este denunciante era Jorge Ávila, quien entonces aseguraba que Humala había ordenado un ataque contra él y sus familiares tras confundirlos con integrantes de Sendero Luminoso. Según dijo en ese momento, fue secuestrado y torturado, pero logró escapar. Su hermana, Natividad Ávila Rivera, y su cuñado, Benigno Sulca Castro, desaparecieron.
La investigación y el proceso quedaron truncos por las contradicciones de los testigos. | Fuente: AFP
Proceso trunco. Este testigo clave explicó, además, que el denunciado había dirigido estas acciones bajo el seudónimo de ‘Capitán Carlos’. El relato de Ávila fue atendido por el Poder Judicial, que abrió proceso en 2006 por los delitos de homicidio calificado, desaparición forzada y lesiones graves.
No obstante, el caso no pasó más allá del análisis y nunca se abrió juicio oral. La Sala Penal Nacional decidió archivarlo en 2009, luego de que varios otros testigos se desdijeron. El propio Ávila también varió su alegato y limpió de responsabilidad a Humala. Con todo esto, en última instancia, la Sala Penal Transitoria de la Corte Suprema ordenó retirar del proceso al principal acusado.
El caso volvió a conocerse cuando Humala era candidato, pero la investigación se archivó nuevamente. | Fuente: Andina
Olvido y reapertura. Con testimonios contradictorios, la investigación se estancó y la Fiscalía optó por archivarla. Sin embargo, en enero de 2011, cuando Humala candidateaba por segunda vez a la presidencia, el caso fue abierto nuevamente.
¿La razón? Se desempolvó otra denuncia hecha años atrás por Gustavo Pacheco, quien era candidato al Congreso por Solidaridad Nacional. Pero la nueva acusación por desaparición forzada no trascendió, pues la Fiscalía de Tocache aplicó la sentencia de la Corte Suprema que desestimaba la acusación contra Humala por inconsistente.
El diario El Comercio reveló este jueves que la víctima y testigo Jorge Ávila recibió 4,500 dólares para cambiar su versión. | Fuente: El Comercio
¿Quién es Amílcar? En su reciente entrevista con El Comercio, Ávila sostuvo que Amílcar Gómez Amasifuén fue el intermediario de los 4,500 dólares que recibió para dejar de acusar al expresidente ante los fiscales. Gómez, suboficial del Ejército, es conocido por su participación en el levantamiento de Locumba.
Esta asonada, realizada en Tacna en el año 2000 contra el régimen de Alberto Fujimori, fue dirigida por Humala y su hermano Antauro. De ahí su cercanía. No obstante, Gómez fue exculpado del soborno. La Sala Penal Liquidadora, que le imputaba haber pagado 4,000 dólares a Ávila, lo absolvió junto a su primo Robinson Gómez Reátegui en agosto de 2011, cuando Humala ya era presidente.
“It is not currently rigged. Last time it was rigged,” Weaver, who as served Sanders’s 2016 White House campaign manager, said on MSNBC as the Iowa caucuses got under way.
Weaver added that Trump’s comments are an attempt to paint the primary as a tool of the political establishment — and himself as the only candidate working outside of the machine.
The comments came after the DNC abruptly announced that it was nixing the donor threshold for a primary debate in Las Vegas later this month. The move could present an opening for Bloomberg, a billionaire businessman self-funding his entire campaign, to reach the debate stage.
For the Nevada debate, Bloomberg and the rest of the candidates need to reach 10 percent support in at least four national polls, or 12 percent support in two sanctioned early-state surveys from Nevada and South Carolina, according to the new criteria. They could also participate in the Feb. 19 debate if they earn at least one pledged delegate at the Iowa caucuses or the New Hampshire primary.
Asked about the allegations in Los Angeles on Sunday, Bloomberg said that Trump “lies about everything” and that it shouldn’t come as a surprise that he’d make a statement such as that one.
“This is what happens when someone like me suddenly rises in the polls. All of a sudden, the other candidates get scared, and I think Donald Trump knows that I can beat him,” Bloomberg said.
But the new criteria have sparked opposition from many of Bloomberg’s primary opponents who have worked hard to build up a base of donors. Weaver said last week that the change is the “definition of a rigged system.”
Sanders, who has predicated his 2016 and 2020 presidential bids around progressive policies such as Medicare For All and college debt cancellation, has emerged as a favorite in the primary contest, according to state and national polls. A Real Clear Politics average of polling shows he leads in Iowa by 3.7 percentage points.
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"
