Most Viewed Videos

via press release:

NOTICIAS  TELEMUNDO  PRESENTS:

“MURIENDO POR CRUZAR,” AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE INCREASING NUMBER OF IMMIGRANT DEATHS ALONG THE BORDER, THIS SUNDAY, AUGUST 3 AT 6 P.M./5 C

Carmen Dominicci and Neida Sandoval present the Telemundo and The Weather Channel co-production

Miami – July 31, 2014 – Telemundo presents “Muriendo por Cruzar”, a documentary that investigates why increasing numbers of immigrants are dying while trying to cross the US-Mexican border near the city of Falfurrias, Texas, this Sunday, August 3 at 6PM/5 C.  The Telemundo and The Weather Channel co-production, presented by Noticias Telemundo journalists Carmen Dominicci and Neida Sandoval, reveals the obstacles immigrants face once they cross into US territory, including extreme weather conditions, as they try to evade the border patrol.  “Muriendo por Cruzar” is part of Noticias Telemundo’s special coverage of the crisis on the border and immigration reform.

 

“‘Muriendo por Cruzar’” dares to ask questions that reveal the actual conditions undocumented immigrants face as they try to start a new life in the United States,” said Alina Falcón, Telemundo’s Executive Vice President for News and Alternative Programming.  “Our collaboration with The Weather Channel was very productive. They have a unique expertise in covering the impact of weather on people’s lives, as we do in covering immigration reform and the border crisis. The result is a compelling documentary that exposes a harrowing reality.”

“Muriendo por Cruzar” is the first co-production by Telemundo and The Weather Channel.  Both networks are part of NBCUniversal.

Source Article from http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2014/07/31/noticias-telemundo-presents-muriendo-por-cruzar-this-sunday-august-3-at-6pm/289119/

Cyrus Vance Jr., who has been Manhattan’s district attorney since 2010, said Friday that he will not seek reelection. Vance is seen in a photo taken Feb. 24, 2020.

Craig Ruttle/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Craig Ruttle/AP

Cyrus Vance Jr., who has been Manhattan’s district attorney since 2010, said Friday that he will not seek reelection. Vance is seen in a photo taken Feb. 24, 2020.

Craig Ruttle/AP

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. said Friday that he will not seek reelection for a fourth term that would begin next January. He has been investigating former President Donald Trump’s finances, and the Supreme Court last month cleared the way for the prosecutor’s office to receive Trump’s tax returns and other financial records.

“Representing the People of New York during this pivotal era for our city and our justice system has been the privilege of a lifetime,” the 66-year-old Vance said.

He succeeded the late Robert Morgenthau, who held the DA’s post for 35 years. Vance said that when he took office in 2010, he “didn’t aspire to be District Attorney for decades like my predecessors. … I believed then – and I believe now – that change is a fundamentally good thing for any institution.”

Last month, Vance’s office received Trump’s tax returns following a years-long battle with the former president, after the Supreme Court paved the way for a New York grand jury to obtain and review the financial documents. Trump broke decades of precedent when he refused to release his tax returns during and after the 2016 presidential campaign after first pledging to do so.

The grand jury subpoena requested eight years of tax records and related documents as part of a probe into possible insurance or financial fraud by Trump or his business, as well as alleged hush-money payments made to two women who said they had affairs with Trump before he took office.

Trump denounced the case as “political persecution” and a “fishing expedition.”

Even as he prepares to step aside, Vance hinted at the continuing work in the investigation of Trump. “Our investigations and trials – from the high-profile to the ones that never make the newspaper – will proceed,” Vance wrote in a memo to prosecutors and staff.

Vance cited “landmark victories” in 2020, including the Supreme Court’s decision that presidents are not immune under the law in a case involving Trump’s pre-presidential financial records, as well as the conviction of Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein for rape and sexual assault. (Vance faced criticism for declining to prosecute Weinstein years earlier.)

Vance also listed among his office’s memorable accomplishments the 2017 conviction in the long-unsolved murder case of 6-year-old Etan Patz. Vance wrote to his staff that “for each of us, there are cases that speak to us about why we do this work. For me, when I think back on all of the cases of our time together, I keep returning to Etan Patz and his family.”

Source Article from https://www.npr.org/2021/03/12/976389679/manhattan-da-cyrus-vance-jr-who-is-investigating-trump-wont-seek-reelection

Justice Gorsuch rejected that alternative. Nitrogen gas, he wrote, is not authorized by Missouri law and had never been used to carry out an execution in the United States. In dissent, Justice Breyer said that three states have authorized the use of nitrogen gas in executions.

Justice Gorsuch wrote that Mr. Bucklew had also not proved he would suffer less pain from nitrogen gas.

In a concurring opinion, Justice Thomas wrote that the court had made things too complicated. The Eighth Amendment bars only the deliberate infliction of pain, he wrote, and there was no evidence that Missouri had designed its lethal injection protocol to hurt Mr. Bucklew.

In dissent, Justice Breyer, joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, wrote that Mr. Bucklew may face an “excruciating and grotesque” punishment.

“Bucklew cites evidence,” Justice Breyer wrote, “that executing him by lethal injection will cause the tumors that grow in his throat to rupture during his execution, causing him to sputter, choke and suffocate on his own blood for up to several minutes before he dies.”

In a separate dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor criticized the majority’s emphasis on addressing delays in carrying out death sentences.

“There are higher values than ensuring that executions run on time,” she wrote. “If a death sentence or the manner in which it is carried out violates the Constitution, that stain can never come out. Our jurisprudence must remain one of vigilance and care, not one of dismissiveness.”

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/01/us/politics/supreme-court-death-penalty.html


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.

The first collision takes place with the inaugural learning lab series, “Beyond Buckskin: Beyond Online” on March 1 followed by “Protection in All Directions: A Fashion & Resistance Awareness Event” on March 4. The latter will include discussions, multi-media discussions and a fashion show highlighting local Native American designers including Jared Yazzie of OxDX.

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.

Source Article from https://asunow.asu.edu/20170228-univision-arizona-asu-cronkite-school-partner-air-cronkite-noticias

“It is really a pandemic among the unvaccinated, so this is an issue predominantly among the unvaccinated, which is the reason why we’re out there, practically pleading with the unvaccinated people to go out and get vaccinated,” said Fauci, describing the disease as still “in retreat” among vaccinated people.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/07/25/fauci-wrong-direction-covid-unvaccinated/

(Reuters) – Four months before a swarm of drones and missiles crippled the world’s biggest oil processing facility in Saudi Arabia, Iranian security officials gathered at a heavily fortified compound in Tehran.

The group included the top echelons of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, an elite branch of the Iranian military whose portfolio includes missile development and covert operations.

The main topic that day in May: How to punish the United States for pulling out of a landmark nuclear treaty and re-imposing economic sanctions on Iran, moves that have hit the Islamic Republic hard.

With Major General Hossein Salami, leader of the Revolutionary Guards, looking on, a senior commander took the floor.

“It is time to take out our swords and teach them a lesson,” the commander said, according to four people familiar with the meeting.

Hard-liners in the meeting talked of attacking high-value targets, including American military bases.

Yet, what ultimately emerged was a plan that stopped short of direct confrontation that could trigger a devastating U.S. response. Iran opted instead to target oil installations of America’s ally, Saudi Arabia, a proposal discussed by top Iranian military officials in that May meeting and at least four that followed.

This account, described to Reuters by three officials familiar with the meetings and a fourth close to Iran’s decision making, is the first to describe the role of Iran’s leaders in plotting the Sept. 14 attack on Saudi Aramco, Saudi Arabia’s state-controlled oil company.

These people said Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei approved the operation, but with strict conditions: Iranian forces must avoid hitting any civilians or Americans.

Reuters was unable to confirm their version of events with Iran’s leadership. A Revolutionary Guards spokesman declined to comment. Tehran has steadfastly denied involvement.

Alireza Miryousefi, spokesman for the Iranian Mission to the United Nations in New York, rejected the version of events the four people described to Reuters. He said Iran played no part in the strikes, that no meetings of senior security officials took place to discuss such an operation, and that Khamenei did not authorize any attack.

“No, no, no, no, no, and no,” Miryousefi said to detailed questions from Reuters on the alleged gatherings and Khamenei’s purported role.

The Saudi government communications office did not respond to a request for comment.

The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency and Pentagon declined to comment. A senior Trump administration official did not directly comment on Reuters’ findings but said Tehran’s “behavior and its decades-long history of destructive attacks and support for terrorism are why Iran’s economy is in shambles.”

Yemen’s Iran-aligned Houthi rebels, at the center of a civil war against Saudi-backed forces, claimed responsibility for the assault on Saudi oil facilities. That declaration was rebuffed by U.S. and Saudi officials, who said the sophistication of the offensive pointed to Iran.

Saudi Arabia was a strategic target.

The kingdom is Iran’s principal regional rival and a petroleum giant whose production is crucial to the world economy. It is an important U.S. security partner. But its war on Yemen, which has killed thousands of civilians, and the brutal murder of Washington-based journalist Jamal Khashoggi by Saudi agents last year, have strained its relations with U.S. lawmakers. There was no groundswell of support in Congress for military intervention to aid the Saudis after the attack.

The 17-minute strike on two Aramco installations by 18 drones and three low-flying missiles revealed the vulnerability of the Saudi oil company, despite billions spent by the kingdom on security. Fires erupted at the company’s Khurais oil installation and at the Abqaiq oil processing facility, the world’s largest.

The attack temporarily halved Saudi Arabia’s oil production and knocked out 5% of the world’s oil supply. Global crude prices spiked.

The assault prompted U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to accuse Iran of an “act of war.” In the aftermath, Tehran was hit with additional U.S. sanctions. The United States also launched cyber attacks against Iran, U.S. officials told Reuters.

The Islamic Republic has blamed “thugs” linked to the United States and other regional adversaries for orchestrating street demonstrations that have rocked Iran since mid-November, when the government hiked fuel prices.

Speaking at a televised, pro-government rally in Tehran on Monday, Salami, the Revolutionary Guards chief commander, warned Washington against any further escalation of tensions: “We have shown patience towards the hostile moves of America, the Zionist regime (Israel) and Saudi Arabia against Iran… but we will destroy them if they cross our red lines.”

SCOURING TARGETS

The plan by Iranian military leaders to strike Saudi oil installations developed over several months, according to the official close to Iran’s decision making.

“Details were discussed thoroughly in at least five meetings and the final go ahead was given” by early September, the official said.

All of those meetings took place at a secure location inside the southern Tehran compound, three of the officials told Reuters. They said Khamenei, the supreme leader, attended one of the gatherings at his residence, which is also inside that complex.

Other attendees at some of those meetings included Khamenei’s top military advisor, Yahya Rahim-Safavi, and a deputy of Qasem Soleimani, who heads the Revolutionary Guards’ foreign military and clandestine operations, the three officials said. Rahim-Safavi could not be reached for comment.

Among the possible targets initially discussed were a seaport in Saudi Arabia, an airport and U.S. military bases, the official close to Iran’s decision making said. The person would not provide additional details.

Those ideas were ultimately dismissed over concerns about mass casualties that could provoke fierce retaliation by the United States and embolden Israel, potentially pushing the region into war, the four people said.

The official close to Iran’s decision making said the group settled on the plan to attack Saudi Arabia’s oil installations because it could grab big headlines, inflict economic pain on an adversary and still deliver a strong message to Washington.

“Agreement on Aramco was almost reached unanimously,” the official said. “The idea was to display Iran’s deep access and military capabilities.”

The attack was the worst on Middle East oil facilities since Saddam Hussein, the late Iraqi strongman, torched Kuwait’s oil fields during the 1991 Gulf crisis.

U.S. Senator Martha McSally, an Air Force combat veteran and Republican lawmaker who was briefed by U.S. and Saudi officials, and who visited Aramco’s Abqaiq facility days after the attack, said the perpetrators knew precisely where to strike to create as much damage as possible.

“It showed somebody who had a sophisticated understanding of facility operations like theirs, instead of just hitting things off of satellite photos,” she told Reuters. The drones and missiles, she added, “came from Iranian soil, from an Iranian base.”

A Middle East source, who was briefed by a country investigating the attack, said the launch site was the Ahvaz air base in southwest Iran. That account matched those of three U.S. officials and two other people who spoke to Reuters: a Western intelligence official and a Western source based in the Middle East.

Rather than fly directly from Iran to Saudi Arabia over the Gulf, the missiles and drones took different, circuitous paths to the oil installations, part of Iran’s effort to mask its involvement, the people said.

Some of the craft flew over Iraq and Kuwait before landing in Saudi Arabia, according to the Western intelligence source, who said that trajectory provided Iran with plausible deniability.

“That wouldn’t have been the case if missiles and drones had been seen or heard flying into Saudi Arabia over the Gulf from a south flight path” from Iran, the person said.

Revolutionary Guards commanders briefed the supreme leader on the successful operation hours after the attack, according to the official close to the country’s decision making.

Images of fires raging at the Saudi facilities were broadcast worldwide. The country’s stock market swooned. Global oil prices initially surged 20%. Officials at Saudi Aramco gathered in what was referred to internally as the “emergency management room” at the company’s headquarters.

One of the officials who spoke with Reuters said Tehran was delighted with the outcome of the operation: Iran had landed a painful blow on Saudi Arabia and thumbed its nose at the United States.

SIZING UP TRUMP

The Revolutionary Guards and other branches of the Iranian military all ultimately report to Khamenei. The supreme leader has been defiant in response to Trump’s abandonment last year of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, commonly called the Iran nuclear deal.

That 2015 accord with five permanent members of the U.S. Security Council – the United States, Russia, France, China and the United Kingdom – as well as Germany, removed billions of dollars’ worth of sanctions on Iran in exchange for Tehran’s curbing its nuclear program.

Trump’s demand for a better deal has seen Iran launch a two-pronged strategy to win relief from sweeping sanctions reimposed by the United States, penalties that have crippled its oil exports and all but shut it out of the international banking system.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has signaled a willingness to meet with American officials on condition that all sanctions be lifted. Simultaneously, Iran is flaunting its military and technical prowess.

In recent months, Iran has shot down a U.S. surveillance drone and seized a British oil tanker in the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow channel through which about a fifth of the world’s oil moves. And it has announced it has amassed stockpiles of enriched uranium in violation of the U.N agreement, part of its vow to restart its nuclear program.

The Aramco attacks were an escalation that came as Trump had been pursuing his long-stated goal of extricating American forces from the Middle East. Just days after announcing an abrupt pullout of U.S. troops in northern Syria, the Trump administration on Oct. 11 said it would send fighter jets, missile-defense weaponry and 2,800 more troops to Saudi Arabia to bolster the kingdom’s defenses.

“Do not strike another sovereign state, do not threaten American interests, American forces, or we will respond,” U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper warned Tehran during a press briefing.

Still, Iran appears to have calculated that the Trump administration would not risk an all-out assault that could destabilize the region in the service of protecting Saudi oil, said Ali Vaez, director of the Iran Project at the International Crisis Group, a nonprofit working to end global conflict.

In Iran, “hard-liners have come to believe that Trump is a Twitter tiger,” Vaez said. “As such there is little diplomatic or military cost associated with pushing back.”

The senior Trump administration official disputed the suggestion that Iran’s operation has strengthened its hand in working out a deal for sanctions relief from the United States.

“Iran knows exactly what it needs to do to see sanctions lifted,” the official said.

The administration has said Iran must end support for terrorist groups in the Middle East and submit to tougher terms that would permanently snuff its nuclear ambitions. Iran has said it has no ties to terrorist groups.

Slideshow (5 Images)

Whether Tehran accedes to U.S. demands remains to be seen.

In one of the final meetings held ahead of the Saudi oil attack, another Revolutionary Guards commander was already looking ahead, according to the official close to Iran’s decision making who was briefed on that gathering.

“Rest assured Allah almighty will be with us,” the commander told senior security officials. “Start planning for the next one.”

Writing by Michael Georgy; Editing by Marla Dickerson

Source Article from https://www.reuters.com/article/us-saudi-aramco-attacks-iran-special-rep/special-report-time-to-take-out-our-swords-inside-irans-plot-to-attack-saudi-arabia-idUSKBN1XZ16H

The NAACP and Rep. Bennie ThompsonBennie Gordon ThompsonKrebs, other officials urge Congress to take strong action to tamp down cyber threats Katko calls for bipartisanship on cyber issues as threats intensify New cyber panel chair zeros in on election security, SolarWinds hack MORE (D-Miss.) are suing former President TrumpDonald TrumpMichigan Democrat Dingell on violent rhetoric: ‘I’ve had men in front of my house with assault weapons’ McConnell doesn’t rule out getting involved in Republican primaries 75 percent of Republicans want Trump to play prominent role in GOP: poll MORE, alleging that Trump incited the Capitol riot on Jan. 6 in violation of a Reconstruction Era law commonly referred to as the Ku Klux Klan Act.

Filed Tuesday in the federal District Court of Washington, D.C., the civil complaint comes after the former president was acquitted over the weekend by the Senate in his second impeachment trial which was also focused on the events of Jan. 6.

The lawsuit also names Trump lawyer Rudy GiulianiRudy GiulianiBartiromo, Pirro, Dobbs file to dismiss Smartmatic lawsuits Trump DOJ officials sought to block search of Giuliani records: report Lincoln Project unveils mid-impeachment trial ad targeting Republicans over Capitol riot MORE and two white extremist groups, the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers.

“You cannot move forward if you don’t address the illegality of what took place, the treasonous act,” NAACP President Derrick Johnson told The Hill. “If you try to move forward without holding people accountable, you only set yourself up [for] future activity that could possibly be successful in toppling our democracy. For African Americans, we see a long history of people not being held accountable … and if we don’t hold people accountable, there becomes this entitlement that it’s OK to cause harm and violate the law.”

Johnson said that the insurrection of the Capitol was steeped in white supremacy, something that can’t be allowed to fester.

“We also must recognize that if we allow these groups to become mainstream they won’t be extremists anymore, but part of our reality,” Johnson said. “That’s not a reality that this country can survive.”

Thompson, in a statement, described Trump’s support of the rioters as “gleeful.”

Jason Miller, a spokesman for Trump, cited the former president’s recent acquittal in the Senate impeachment trial and said Trump did not incite acts of violence. 

“President Trump has been acquitted in the Democrats’ latest Impeachment Witch Hunt, and the facts are irrefutable. President Trump did not plan, produce or organize the Jan. 6th rally on the Ellipse,” Miller said in a statement. “President Trump did not incite or conspire to incite any violence at the Capitol on Jan. 6th. Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiPelosi says 9/11-style commission to investigate Capitol breach is ‘next step’ Biden calls for ‘commonsense gun law reforms’ on anniversary of Parkland shooting Pelosi rules out censure after Trump acquittal MORE and Washington, D.C., Mayor Muriel BowserMuriel BowserTrump World stunned by move to call witnesses Union alleges safety protocol violations at DC school where teacher died of COVID DC delegate to introduce bill banning permanent fencing around Capitol MORE must answer questions as to why they rejected additional security and National Guard assistance in the run-up to Jan. 6th.”

White extremist and hate group activity spiked during the Trump presidency, a concerning trend that the NAACP and other civil rights organizations have consistently warned against.

The Southern Poverty Law Center said that in the first three years of Trump’s presidency, they noted “historically high hate group numbers.”

“Trump, of course, acts as a partial explanation,” the Southern Poverty Law Center said recently in its annual “Year in Hate and Extremism” report. “He undoubtedly emboldened the far right and, importantly, created heightened expectations.”

The Ku Klux Klan Act, passed in 1871, was the third law in a series of legislation created by Congress to slow the violence against and intimidation of Black Americans at the hands of the white hate group following the Civil War.

While much of the law has since become obsolete, several parts have become codified as a statute, including 42 U.S.C. 1985(1) — the provision listed in the lawsuit.

The statute specifically safeguards against conspiracies meant “to prevent, by force, intimidation, or threat, any person from accepting or holding any office.”

Now a private citizen, Trump faces numerous legal challenges in addition to the newly filed suit.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellMcConnell doesn’t rule out getting involved in Republican primaries McConnell defends acquittal in WSJ op-ed but blasts Trump’s ‘unhinged falsehoods’ Biden pledges action on guns amid resistance MORE (R-Ky.) acknowledged this in a speech Saturday shortly following Trump’s Senate acquittal in his second impeachment trial.

“We have a criminal justice system in this country,” McConnell said. “We have civil litigation. And former presidents are not immune from being accountable by either one.”

According to the NAACP, additional lawmakers, including Reps. Hank JohnsonHenry (Hank) C. JohnsonHouse Judiciary Democrats ask Pence to invoke 25th Amendment to remove Trump Five things to watch during Electoral College battle Hoyer says Trump Georgia call likely criminal, wants ‘serious’ investigation MORE (D-Ga.) and Bonnie Watson ColemanBonnie Watson ColemanFallen Capitol Police officer to lie in honor in Rotunda Over 40 lawmakers sign letter urging Merrick Garland to prioritize abolishing death penalty Biden scolds Republicans for not wearing masks during Capitol attack MORE (D-N.J.), are expected to join the lawsuit in the coming days.

Updated at 12:23 p.m.

Source Article from https://thehill.com/homenews/house/538969-naacp-rep-bennie-thompson-sue-trump-giuliani-over-capitol-riot

As part of her efforts to promote boycotts of Israeli Jews, Rep. Ilhan Omar has introduced a resolution that relies on a bogus free speech argument.

Omar on Wednesday countered a House resolution opposing the efforts to boycott, divest, and sanction Israel with one of her own. In classic Omar style, her resolution not only compared anti-Israel boycotts to the Boston Tea Party, but also to boycotts against Nazi Germany.

The resolution also describes itself as, “Affirming that all Americans have the right to participate in boycotts in pursuit of civil and human rights at home and abroad, as protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution.”

This is a complete straw man. Nobody is arguing that any American be denied the ability to boycott Israel.

The resolution before the House Foreign Affairs committee resolves five points, all of which merely assert the sense of the House, none of which say anything about restricting the right of Americans to protest:

(1) opposes the Global Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions Movement (BDS Movement) targeting Israel, including efforts to target United States companies that are engaged in commercial activities that are legal under United States law, and all efforts to delegitimize the State of Israel;

(2) affirms that the Global Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions Movement undermines the possibility for a negotiated solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by demanding concessions of one party alone and encouraging the Palestinians to reject negotiations in favor of international pressure;

(3) urges Israelis and Palestinians to return to direct negotiations as the only way to achieve an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict;

(4) supports the full implementation of the United States-Israel Strategic Partnership Act of 2014 (
Public Law 113–296; 128 Stat. 4075) and new efforts to enhance government-wide, coordinated United States-Israel scientific and technological cooperation in civilian areas, such as with respect to energy, water, agriculture, alternative fuel technology, civilian space technology, and security, in order to counter the effects of actions to boycott, divest from, or sanction Israel; and

(5) reaffirms its strong support for a negotiated solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict resulting in two states—a democratic Jewish State of Israel, and a viable, democratic Palestinian state—living side-by-side in peace, security, and mutual recognition.

There are state-based laws that go further than this resolution, but still, none of them attempt to make it unlawful for individuals to boycott Israel. David Bernstein has done a great job debunking the myths of state-level anti-BDS laws in two parts. I highly encourage anybody who is interested in a deeper read on the legal issues involved to read them. But here’s the short version.

State-level laws combating BDS prevent states from doing business with entities that boycott Israel. This is an important distinction on several levels. First, it means there are no restrictions on boycotting Israel, the restrictions only apply to entities seeking public money. Second, even then, there are no restrictions on individuals boycotting against Israel — just businesses or other entities. Even if a person works for a company that does business for the state, he or she cannot be barred from boycotting Israel. Third, there is ample precedent. As Bernstein writes, “During the 1980s, many states passed laws banning state contractors from dealings with South Africa. No one at the time suggested that contractors had a First Amendment right to deal with South Africa …” Fourth, the restrictions of state contractors are perfectly consistent with anti-discrimination laws concerning state contractors that are broadly favored by liberals.

The Supreme Court, Bernstein explains, has also drawn a key distinction between economic actions such as boycotts and speech protected by the First Amendment.

Omar is understandably trying to cast her anti-Semitic support for boycotting Israeli Jews as a more universally popular defense of free speech. But it’s incredibly dishonest.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/ilhan-omars-bogus-free-speech-argument-in-favor-of-boycotting-israeli-jews

Media captionA Royal Navy frigate can be heard warning Iranian armed forces, before the oil tanker is seized

The UK government did not take its “eye off the ball” over the seizure of a UK-flagged oil tanker in the Gulf on Friday, the chancellor told the BBC.

Philip Hammond said the UK has been working closely with US and European partners in response to Iran’s actions.

But ex-Tory party leader Iain Duncan Smith said the Stena Impero’s capture was a “major failure” for the UK.

Iran’s foreign minister said only “prudence and foresight” would reduce tensions between Iran and Britain.

The 23 crew members, who are Indian, Russian, Latvian and Filipino, have now been taken off the ship for “questioning”, Iran’s Press TV has reported.

Charts showing the ship was in Omani waters when it was captured prove its seizure was in “clear violation of international law”, the UK Chamber of Shipping said.

The UK has accused Iran of “unacceptable and highly escalatory” action, in a letter to the president of the United Nations Security Council.

What have UK politicians said?

Speaking on the BBC’s Andrew Marr programme, Mr Hammond said the UK would pursue “every possible diplomatic route” to resolve the situation.

He said sanctions, including financial, against Iran are already in place, and it was unclear what more could be done.

Mr Hammond, who announced his intention to resign if Boris Johnson becomes prime minister, added: “We are of course looking at all the options.”

But Mr Duncan Smith told the BBC there are questions to be raised about the British government’s behaviour.

He said the detention of a tanker carrying Iranian oil two weeks earlier ought to have served as a warning British vessels in the Gulf needed protection.

The MP said he understood the US had offered the UK “assets” to support its shipping and they were not taken up.

“This is a major failure and the government has to answer that charge very quickly indeed.”

Defence minister Tobias Ellwood told Sky the Royal Navy was too small to manage the UK’s interests around the globe but had not been negligent in protecting its ships.

Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt earlier said Iran viewed this as a “tit-for-tat situation” but “nothing could be further from the truth”.

Labour shadow justice minister Richard Burgon said the UK should avoid becoming Donald Trump’s “sidekicks” and warned a US-backed conflict with Iran could be worse than the Iraq War.

What happened?

On Friday, the Stena Impero was seized by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard in the Strait of Hormuz after Tehran said it was “violating international maritime rules”.

A second tanker, the British-owned MV Mesdar, was also boarded by armed guards but released.

Video released by Iran’s Revolutionary Guard-affiliated Fars news agency appeared to show the moment the tanker was raided.

Media captionFootage released by Iran’s Revolutionary Guard-affiliated Fars news agency appears to show Stena Impero being seized

HMS Montrose was alerted but it was too far away to stop the seizure.

A recording of radio exchanges between a Royal Navy frigate and Iranian armed forces vessels moments before the tanker was seized was also released.

In the recording, an Iranian vessel tells HMS Montrose it wants to inspect the Stena Impero for security reasons.

Iran’s state-run IRNA news agency said the tanker was captured after it collided with a fishing boat and failed to respond to calls from the smaller craft.

But Mr Hunt said it was seized in Omani waters in “clear contravention of international law” and forced to sail into Bandar Abbas port in Iran.

The tanker’s owner, Stena Bulk, said it has made a formal request to visit the crew members.

A relative of an Indian crew member aboard the Stena Impero told the BBC on Sunday the family was concerned and had not received any messages from him since the vessel was detained.

The seizure of the Stena Impero comes two weeks after Royal Marines helped seize Iranian tanker Grace 1 off Gibraltar, because of evidence it was carrying oil to Syria in breach of EU sanctions.

Mr Hunt said the Grace 1 was detained legally, but Iran said this was “piracy” and threatened to seize a British oil tanker in retaliation

Media captionJeremy Hunt says Iran views the tanker seizure as a ‘tit-for-tat situation’

What has Iran said?

Iran’s foreign minister Javad Zarif tweeted that the UK “must cease being an accessory to #EconomicTerrorism of the US”.

He said Iran guarantees the security of the Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz, and insisted its action were to “uphold international maritime rules”.

Iran’s ambassador to London has warned the UK against escalating tensions.

Hamid Baeidinejad said in a tweet: “This is quite dangerous and unwise at a sensitive time in the region. Iran however is firm and ready for different scenarios.”

Media captionWhy does the Strait of Hormuz matter?

What’s the background to tensions in the Gulf?

Relations have been deteriorating between Iran and the UK and US.

In April, the US tightened sanctions it had re-imposed on Iran after withdrawing from a 2015 nuclear deal.

The US blamed Iran for attacks on tankers since May, which Tehran denies. On Friday, the US claimed to have destroyed an Iranian drone in the Gulf.

The UK government has remained committed to the deal, which curbs Iran’s nuclear activities in return for the lifting of sanctions.

However, the UK’s help in seizing the Iranian tanker Grace 1 infuriated Iran.

Last week, the UK said Iranian boats also attempted to impede a British oil tanker in the region before being warned off by HMS Montrose but Iran denied this.

International reaction

The White House said Friday’s incident was the second time in more than a week the UK had been “the target of escalatory violence” by Iran.

US Central Command said it was developing a multinational maritime effort in response to the situation.

The Pentagon said US troops are being deployed to Saudi Arabia to defend American interests in the region from “emergent credible threats”.

France and Germany called on Iran to release the Stena Impero.

Diplomatic solution ‘will be complicated’

A diplomatic solution to this crisis is going to be complicated, not least because Britain’s relationships with its traditional partners – the US and the Europeans – are under strain.

Diplomatic pressure – action at the UN or tough economic sanctions – requires the building of a coalition.

Think back to the collective action taken against Moscow in the wake of the murder of a British woman by Russian agents in Salisbury.

The US and Britain’s Nato and European allies all expelled Russian diplomats in an impressive show of solidarity.

But will the same solidarity be shown towards Tehran?

France and Germany have given London rhetorical support. President Trump is standing beside his British ally.

But the US and the EU are fundamentally at loggerheads over the fate of the nuclear deal with Iran and what many European capitals see as a thinly disguised US policy that seeks regime change in Tehran.

Read more analysis here.

How ‘British’ is the tanker?

Ships must fly the flag of a nation state but it does not need to be the same nation as its owners.

The Stena Impero is Swedish-owned and those on board are Indian, Russian, Latvian and Filipino.

A relative of a crew member from India, who did not want to be identified, told the BBC the family was being kept well informed by the Swedish company.

They felt reassured about diplomatic efforts to free the ship after a meeting with company officials attended by crew members’ families on Sunday afternoon, he said.

But it is the UK flag that is important symbolically and politically, explained Richard Meade from maritime publication Lloyds List.

“Historically speaking it means that the UK owes protection to the vessel.”

Source Article from https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-49063646

A cut tree stands in a burned area in Prainha, Para state, Brazil. A U.N. report says habitat loss is leading to more animal-to-human transmission of disease.

Leo Correa/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Leo Correa/AP

A cut tree stands in a burned area in Prainha, Para state, Brazil. A U.N. report says habitat loss is leading to more animal-to-human transmission of disease.

Leo Correa/AP

A new United Nations report warns that more diseases that pass from animals to humans, such as COVID-19, are likely to emerge as habitats are ravaged by wildlife exploitation, unsustainable farming practices and climate change.

These pathogens, known as zoonotic diseases, also include Ebola, MERS, HIV/AIDS and West Nile virus. They have increasingly emerged because of stresses humans have placed on animal habitats, according to the U.N. Environment Program report Preventing the Next Pandemic: Zoonotic diseases and how to break the chain of transmission, released on Monday.

“We have intensified agriculture, expanded infrastructure and extracted resources at the expense of our wild spaces,” UNEP Executive Director Inger Andersen said. “The science is clear that if we keep exploiting wildlife and destroying our ecosystems, then we can expect to see a steady stream of these diseases jumping from animals to humans in the years ahead.”

Andersen said that investing in research of zoonotic diseases would allow the world to get “ahead of the game … preventing the type of global shutdown we’ve seen.”

The new report recommends that governments adopt a coordinated “One Health” approach pulling together public health, veterinary and environmental experts to combat these outbreaks of zoonotic diseases.

“People look back to the influenza pandemic of 1918–1919 and think that such disease outbreaks only happen once in a century,” said Maarten Kappelle, the head of scientific assessments at UNEP. “But that’s no longer true. If we don’t restore the balance between the natural world and the human one, these outbreaks will become increasingly prevalent.”

Global demand for animal meat has increased 260% in the past half century, exacerbating the problem, Andersen said.

Some animals, such as rodents, bats, carnivores and nonhuman primates, are most likely to harbor zoonotic diseases, with livestock acting as a bridge for transmission between the animal hosts and humans, according to the report.

Meanwhile, in some of the world’s poorest regions, endemic zoonotic diseases associated with livestock cause more than 2 million human deaths a year, the report says. However, Africa, which has successfully responded to a number of zoonotic epidemics, such as Ebola, could be a place to turn for solutions to controlling outbreaks of human-to-animal diseases in the future, it says.

“To prevent future outbreaks, countries need to conserve wild habitats, promote sustainable agriculture, strengthen food safety standards, monitor and regulate food markets, invest in technology to identify risks, and curb the illegal trade in wildlife,” U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres said.

Source Article from https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/07/06/888077232/u-n-predicts-rise-in-diseases-that-jump-from-animals-to-humans

The White House is seeking to discredit Dr. Anthony Fauci, the country’s leading infectious disease expert, as President Donald Trump works to marginalize him and his dire warnings about the shortcomings of the U.S. coronavirus response.

In a remarkable broadside by the Trump administration against one of its own, a White House official said Sunday that “several White House officials are concerned about the number of times Dr. Fauci has been wrong on things.” The official gave NBC News a list of nearly a dozen past comments by Fauci that the official said had ultimately proven erroneous.

Among them: Fauci’s comments in January that the coronavirus was “not a major threat” and his guidance in March that “people should not be walking around with masks.”

It was a move more characteristic of a political campaign furtively disseminating opposition research about an opponent than of a White House struggling to contain a pandemic that has killed more than 135,000 people, according to an NBC News tally.

Fauci, who runs the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, had been a leading member of the White House coronavirus task force and a key communicator with the public until the president soured on his sober assessments of the situation, which have increasingly conflicted with the more sanguine picture of a virus in retreat that the president has sought to paint.

Full coverage of the coronavirus outbreak

In recent days, Fauci has deviated from Trump by disputing that the U.S. is “doing great” and by faulting the decision in some states to reopen too quickly and to sidestep the task force’s suggested criteria for when it’s safe to loosen restrictions. In a particularly alarming prediction, Fauci said he wouldn’t be surprised if the U.S. was soon adding 100,000 new cases a day — a figure that would reflect an abject failure to slow the spread.

Fauci declined to comment.

The coronavirus is surging nationwide, which Trump has repeatedly downplayed as the result of increased testing rather than growing numbers of infections. Florida on Sunday reported over 15,000 new cases, the most any state has reported in a single day since the pandemic began. The U.S. on Friday also surpassed 70,000 new coronavirus cases nationwide for the first time.

As physicians and scientists have learned more about the coronavirus, the medical consensus on how to treat it and limit its spread has evolved — and not just in the U.S. Many of Fauci’s assertions called into question by the White House official were based on the best available data at the time and were widely echoed by Trump, other members of the task force and senior White House officials.

“When you learn more, you change those recommendations,” Surgeon General Jerome Adams, another member of the task force, told CBS News on Sunday. “Our recommendations have changed.”

The list of Fauci’s comments compiled by the White House, first reported by The Washington Post, includes Fauci’s saying in January— weeks before the first reported COVID-19 death in the U.S. — that the virus was “not a major threat for the people in the U.S.” A month later, Trump told Americans that the virus would simply “disappear” like a “miracle.”

The White House declined to provide further comment. But the signs of its displeasure have been mounting. On Thursday, White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany declined to say whether Trump still has confidence in Fauci, and the president said of him the same day: “He’s made a lot of mistakes.”

“I disagree with him,” Trump said in a separate interview with Gray Television’s Greta Van Susteren last week.

Signs of tension between Fauci and the president are growing. Fauci said last week that he hadn’t seen Trump in person since June 2 and hadn’t briefed him in person in at least two months.

Fauci, who has served in the federal government for decades, can’t be directly fired by the president, and there were no signs that Trump was seeking to get rid of him altogether. Rather, the White House salvo appeared aimed at undermining the public’s trust in the renowned immunologist in hope that Americans will be more inclined to believe Trump’s far more optimistic version of events as the November election marches closer.

Fauci has enjoyed broad support from the public, which got to know the gruff-speaking doctor during his frequent appearances at the task force’s televised briefings — a mainstay of the early response to the pandemic that has since fallen largely by the wayside.

Download the NBC News app for breaking news and politics

A New York Times/Sienna College poll last month found that 2 in 3 registered voters approved of Fauci, including half of Republicans and 4 in 5 Democrats. Trump, by comparison, enjoyed support of his handling of the crisis from only 1 in 4 voters in the same poll, including just 4 percent of Democrats.

Another member of the coronavirus task force, Dr. Brett Giroir, added to the pile-on, saying Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that Fauci hasn’t always been correct.

“I respect Dr. Fauci a lot, but Dr. Fauci is not 100 percent right, and he also doesn’t necessarily, he admits that, have the whole national interest in mind. He looks at it from a very narrow public health point of view,” Giroir said.

Source Article from https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/white-house-seeks-discredit-fauci-amid-coronavirus-surge-n1233612

President Biden admitted during a CNN town hall Thursday night that he has no immediate solution to the problem of spiking gas prices and suggested that Americans would not start seeing relief at the pump until next year.

“My guess is, you’ll start to see gas prices come down as we get by and going into the winter – I mean, excuse me, into next year, 2022,” the president told moderator Anderson Cooper at the Baltimore event.

“I don’t see anything that’s going to happen in the meantime that’s going to significantly reduce gas prices.

“I must tell you, I don’t have a near-term answer,” Biden added before musing on the possibility that he could “go in the [Strategic] Petroleum Reserve and take out and probably reduce the price of gas maybe 18 cents or so per gallon, [but] it’s still gonna be above three bucks.”

According to AAA, the national average price of a gallon of regular gasoline had reached $3.36 Thursday, up four cents from the average on Monday. The organization noted that no state had an average gas price lower than $3 per gallon.

In Gorda, Calif., on the state’s Central Coast, a gallon of unleaded was fetching $7.59, while Fox 5 reported last week that Manhattan motorists were paying nearly $5 per gallon to fill up their tank.

AAA attributed the price spike to high demand, high crude oil prices and a drop in gas stocks –which Biden sought to blame Thursday on OPEC and its oil-producing allies in the Middle East.

High gas prices seen at a station in San Francisco on October 12, 2021.
Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

“Gas prices relate to a foreign policy initiative that is about something that goes beyond the cost of gas … That’s because of the supply being withheld by OPEC,” he said, “and so there’s a lot of negotiation that is … there’s a lot of Middle Eastern folks that want to talk to me. I’m not sure I’m going to talk to them, but the point is, it’s about gas production.”

Republicans have blamed Biden for spiking energy prices, citing his administration’s pursuit of inflationary spending policies as well as the president’s cancellation of the Keystone XL Pipeline on his first day in office.

“Gas prices are at the highest levels since 2014 and Americans’ heating costs could increase as much as 54% this winter,” the Republican National Committee’s @RNCResearch account tweeted in response to Biden’s remarks. “Biden attacked American energy, and now Americans are paying the price!”

“The answer ultimately is, ultimately meaning the next three or four years, is investing in renewable energy,” insisted Biden, who also touted the “Big Three” US automakers’ August announcement that electric vehicles will make up between 40 and 50 percent of their sales by 2030.

“So what will happen is, you’re going to see a dramatic drop, a dramatic drop, in what’s gonna happen in terms of gas prices as we go into the next two or three years,” the president promised.

But in the meantime, Biden acknowledged, “it’s gonna be hard. It’s gonna be hard. There’s a possibility to be able to bring it down. It depends on a little bit on Saudi Arabia and a few other things that are in the offing.”

Source Article from https://nypost.com/2021/10/21/biden-admits-i-dont-have-a-near-term-answer-for-high-gas-prices/

President Donald Trump criticized social media companies after Facebook banned a number of extremist figures, declaring that he was “monitoring and watching, closely!!”

Trump, who tweeted and re-tweeted complaints Friday and Saturday, said he would “monitor the censorship of AMERICAN CITIZENS on social media platforms. ” He has previously asserted that social media companies exhibit bias against conservatives, something the companies have rejected as untrue.

The president’s comments came after Facebook this week banned Louis Farrakhan, Alex Jones and other extremists, saying they violated its ban on “dangerous individuals.” The company also removed right-wing personalities Paul Nehlen, Milo Yiannopoulos, Paul Joseph Watson and Laura Loomer, along with Jones’ site, Infowars, which often posts conspiracy theories. The latest bans apply both to Facebook’s main service and to Instagram and extend to fan pages and other related accounts.

Facebook’s move signaled renewed effort by the social media giant to remove people and groups promoting objectionable material such as hate, racism and anti-Semitism. The company said it has “always banned” people or groups that proclaim a violent or hateful mission or are engaged in acts of hate or violence, regardless of political ideology.

On Twitter, Trump cited a number of individuals he said were being unfairly treated by social media companies, including Watson and actor James Woods. He insisted it was “getting worse and worse for Conservatives on social media!”

Woods, one of Hollywood’s most outspoken conservatives, has had his Twitter account locked. Twitter spokeswoman Katie Rosborough said Woods will need to delete a tweet that violated Twitter rules before he can be reinstated.

“We enforce the Twitter Rules impartially for all users, regardless of their background or political affiliation,” Rosborough said.

Mr. Trump on Saturday lashed out against members of the news media including the New York Times, Washington Post and CNN, suggesting the outlets should also be banned from Facebook and Twitter for their coverage of the Russia investigation. “Much of what they do is FAKE NEWS!,” he asserted. 

Trump, who uses Twitter extensively to push his message, recently met with Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey at the White House after attacking the company and complaining that it was not treating him well because he was a Republican. He later described it as a “great meeting.”

The president had more than social media on his mind Saturday. Trump also tweeted that he was holding out hopes for a deal with North Korea on its nuclear program, as well as improved relations with Russia, now that he feels the special counsel investigation is behind him.

Source Article from https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-lashes-out-against-social-media-sites-after-facebook-ban/

Democratic presidential candidate and former Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper says Democrats need to focus on “kitchen table issues” like jobs in order to beat President Trump in 2020.

Seth Wenig/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Seth Wenig/AP

Democratic presidential candidate and former Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper says Democrats need to focus on “kitchen table issues” like jobs in order to beat President Trump in 2020.

Seth Wenig/AP

Former Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper warned his party of straying too far to the left as it selects a nominee to face President Trump in next year’s election.

Hickenlooper, one of the 23 candidates running for the Democratic Party’s nomination, told NPR why he doesn’t believe in some of the party’s major policy proposals, such as the Green New Deal and “Medicare for All.”

“If we don’t stand up and say that we Democrats don’t stand for socialism, we’re going to end up reelecting the worst president this country’s ever had,” Hickenlooper said.

Hickenlooper spoke with Morning Edition as part of the show’s Opening Arguments conversations, exploring the presidential candidates’ core messages.

Interview Highlights

On the leftward shift in the Democratic Party

I don’t think we’re going to address climate change by guaranteeing every American a federal job, which is what part of the Green New Deal was. I don’t think we’re going to address the spiraling inflation in health care by forcibly telling 150 million people that we’re going to take away their private insurance. These are what a lot of Americans look at as facets or aspects of socialism.

On focusing on economic issues instead of social policies

Certainly we want to address income inequality. Right. Absolutely we want to make sure that women have a right to choose, that civil rights and social justice are addressed aggressively.

But we’ve also got to recognize to win in Ohio and Michigan and North Carolina and Wisconsin, we’re going to have to get more to those kitchen table issues that have to do with somebody’s job, or how many jobs they’re having to work just to balance a household budget.

On the identity fight within the Democratic Party

One of the things I’ve always loved about the Democratic Party is that it is a big-tent party, and it embraces opportunity for all people. I’m running for president because I think my life experience can address this. This Trump-fueled national crisis of division has been moving us backward.

I look at my experience of bringing people together — businesses and nonprofits, and Republicans and Democrats — and to really get things done; to get to near-universal health care, to have the No. 1 economy in the country for three consecutive years, I think that record stands for itself. … I think in some [ways] I’m the only person running who has actually accomplished what everyone else is talking about.

Victoria Whitley-Berry contributed to this story and produced for air.

Source Article from https://www.npr.org/2019/05/27/726330329/former-colorado-governor-and-2020-candidate-urges-distance-from-socialism

Si EE.UU. decide intervenir en Corea del Norte, Washington puede descubrir que Pyongyang es un enemigo más formidable de lo que muchos podrían esperar.

Aparte de sus armas nucleares y misiles balísticos, Corea del Norte cuenta con sistemas de defensa aérea que están más avanzados de lo que muchos podrían darse cuenta, según un artículo publicado este jueves en la revista estadounidense The National Interest.

Pyongyang también, ha tomado medidas para reforzar su defensa ante cualquier ataque aéreo que Estados Unidos podría lanzar en caso de guerra. La República Popular Democrática de Corea (RPDC) no ha olvidado las lecciones de la Guerra de Corea, que técnicamente aún no ha terminado.

“Entre 1950 y 1953, la Fuerza Aérea y la Armada de EE.UU. aplastaron a Corea del Norte, por lo que la RPDC ha tenido 65 años para pensar en cómo asegurarse de que eso no vuelva a suceder y cavar muchos refugios a prueba de bombas”, ha dicho a The National Interest el contralmirante jubilado Mike McDevitt, investigador principal del Centro de Análisis Navales.

Pero aparte de sus sofisticadas instalaciones, Pyongyang posee las defensas aéreas más avanzadas de que uno podría imaginar. Mientras que la inmensa mayoría de las defensas aéreas norcoreanas son sistemas soviéticos más antiguos, este país dispone de armas nativas sorprendentemente capaces.

“Tienen una mezcla de viejos soviéticos SAMs [misiles tierra-aire], incluyendo el S-75, S-125, S-200 y Kvadrat, que están probablemente en más o menos buenas condiciones”, según Vasily Kashin, becario del Centro de Estudios Europeos e Internacionales de la Escuela Superior de Economía de Moscú (Rusia).

“Solían producir el S-75 ellos mismos —y éstos misiles podrían haber recibido algunas mejoras significativas—. Además de ellos, desde principios de los años 2010 están aplicando un moderno sistema nativo SAM, al que Corea del Sur y EE.UU. llaman KN-06”, agrega Kashin.

Entre 1950 y 1953, la Fuerza Aérea y la Armada de EE.UU. aplastaron a Corea del Norte, por lo que la RPDC ha tenido 65 años para pensar en cómo asegurarse de que eso no vuelva a suceder y cavar muchos refugios a prueba de bombas”, ha dicho a The National Interest el contraalmirante jubilado Mike McDevitt, investigador principal del Centro de Análisis Navales.

 

No está claro cuántas baterías KN-06 Pyongyang ha construido, pero el arma norcoreana es un sistema sorprendentemente capaz que es similar a las primeras versiones del S-300 ruso. “Nadie sabe exactamente cuántos sistemas existen”, dice Kashin, y agrega que este sistema es “tal vez equivalente a las primeras versiones S-300P pero con mayor alcance”.

Kashin —especialista en asuntos asiáticos— dice citando a las fuentes surcoreanas que Pyongyang ha probado con éxito su sistema antiaéreo KN-06. Se cree que el arma tiene un alcance de hasta 150 km, hecho que le haría capaz de derribar un avión de guerra agresor.

El analista precisa que una de las razones por las que el KN-06 es a menudo ignorado es que los especialistas militares occidentales frecuentemente subestiman las capacidades industriales de Corea del Norte.

Kashin dice que el país asiático cuenta además con sistemas de defensa aérea de baja altitud bastante robustos. “A bajas altitudes, tienen un gran número de licencias producidas y MANPADs (sistemas de defensa aérea portátiles) y artillería antiaérea de 23-57mm de calibre”, agrega.

Sin embargo, mientras que la tecnología norcoreana es relativamente primitiva, las defensas aéreas de la nación están coordinadas. Kashin explica que “las unidades antiaéreas (de Corea del Norte) están utilizando extensivamente refugios subterráneos para cubrirse”, hecho que dificulta su destrucción.

Aunque la tecnología militar de Pyongyang es vieja, su filosofía de la autosuficiencia significa que puede producir la mayor parte de su propio hardware militar, y que convierte a este país en un objetivo muy difícil para sus enemigos.

ftm/ktg/mjs/hnb

Source Article from http://www.hispantv.com/noticias/coreas/353548/pyongyang-guerra-eeuu-derribar-aviones