In media news today, Chris Cuomo stays silent on CNN about the bombshell report on his brother’s sexual harassment charges, and more revelations come to light about the extent of Cuomo’s advising of his brother on the scandal.
In a widely panned “analysis” piece, a CNN White House reporter defended and even praised President Joe Biden Wednesday for finding an admittedly legally dubious way to extend a federal eviction moratorium.
Stephen Collinson, who fumed at what he called President Donald Trump’s “degradation of the rule of law” in another piece last year, noted that not even Biden knows if his administration’s overture to renters during the pandemic will pass muster in courts, but claimed Biden had “no choice but to take a chance.”
The moratorium expired on July 31, so the White House engineered what Collinson called “a classic Washington fudge — not unfamiliar in an era of Capitol Hill gridlock — in which presidents, especially Democrats, have improvised with executive power to shield constituencies from consequences of a malfunctioning political system.”
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention drafted a new eviction moratorium to protect tenants in counties with “substantial and high levels of transmission” of COVID-19, which amounted to almost the entire country. The Supreme Court stipulated last year, though, that the CDC could only be extended if given authority by Congress; Justice Brett Kavanaugh specifically argued unilateral extension by the CDC would be unconstitutional while siding with keeping it in place through its July expiration.
Biden admitted to reporters Tuesday that the “bulk of constitutional scholars” said it wasn’t legal and it was simply a ploy to buy time to allocate monies to renters and leasers. While the Washington Post”s Aaron Blake cringed at Biden’s logic – “a heck of a way to do the country’s business” – Collins said Biden had “averted a humanitarian crisis.”
“Politically, the spectacle of potentially millions of Americans being turned out of their homes would be an impossible one for any White House, let alone a Democratic administration built on the principle of using government power to alleviate the plight of poorer Americans. So, Biden had to do something,” he wrote.
He added it was a “viable political strategy” to pass blame onto Republicans if citizens were eventually booted out of their apartments and complained that the Supreme Court was “specifically constructed to counter the aspirations of an activist liberal government.”
Last year, Collinson fumed that Trump had put “the degradation of the rule of law” at the center of his re-election campaign, which wasn’t lost on critics of his latest piece online. In another article last year, he fretted over Trump’s “assault on constitutional norms.”
Critics lit into CNN for Collinson’s piece that seemingly excused Biden breaking the law because he agreed with the end result.
Journalist Glenn Greenwald, a frequent corporate media critic, tweeted, “Four straight years of corporate media and liberal politicians (excuse the redundancy) pretending to care so deeply about the rule of law above all else — including those who served in past lawless administrations — only to now have headlines like this one above.”
“I don’t think the tone here would be so restrained” if the piece had been about Trump, author Daniel Darling tweeted.
“Bold and decisive lawlessness,” quipped Commentary’s Noah Rothman.
Collinson penned another piece in March saying an infrastructure bill was a “window into Biden’s soul.” Another “analysis” praised Biden’s “moderate radicalism” ahead of his April address to Congress.
Image caption
¿Qué pasará en la Asamblea Nacional, que por primera vez en 17 años acoge una mayoría opositora?
“Choque institucional”, “guerra de poderes”, “ingobernabilidad”: así será el 2016 en Venezuela, según analistas políticos, tanto chavistas como opositores.
Y quienes así lo describen, no están escasos de razones: después de décadas de polarización e incomunicación entre el oficialismo y la oposición, el 5 de enero se instalará una Asamblea Nacional (AN) por primera vez de mayoría opositora en 17 años de Revolución Bolivariana.
Este martes, sesionará por última vez la actual Asamblea Nacional, de mayoría oficialista; al menos de manera ordinaria, porque de acá al 4 de enero podría reunirse por situaciones extraordinarias.
En la sesión del martes, se espera que el oficialismo –al mando del presidente de la AN, Diosdado Cabello– dé detalles sobre el anunciado nombramiento de 12 magistrados del Tribunal Supremo de Justicia (TSJ).
La reestructuración de la cúpula del Poder Judicial ha sido vista por opositores al gobierno de Nicolás Maduro como una forma de limitar la gestión de la nueva asamblea, cuyos dos tercios de mayoría opositora en teoría le atribuyen un gran poder.
¿Hasta qué punto puede Maduro, sin violar la ley, entorpecer ese poder de la oposición mayoritaria en el Parlamento?
Image copyright AFP
Image caption
Diosdado Cabello es el presidente de la actual AN.
La clave, el TSJ
Quizá la forma más directa de reducir el poder de la AN es disolviéndola, una medida que puede tomar el presidente, quien sin embargo se debería enfrentar a las consecuencias sociales y políticas que esto puede generar tanto en Venezuela como el exterior.
La Constitución prevé que si la AN aprueba tres veces en el mismo período la remoción del vcepresidente, el presidente puede disolverla y habría que celebrar elecciones.
Por otro lado, la actual AN puede aprobar una prórroga de seis o 12 meses de la actual ley habilitante, por la que Maduro goza de poderes extraordinarios para aprobar decretos con fuerza de ley, y que expira el 31 de diciembre.
Pero si Maduro decide disolver el Parlamento o si aprueban una ley labilitante, el conflicto entre el Ejecutivo y el Legislativo acabará pasando por el TSJ, la entidad que parece erigirse como una de las grandes protagonistas de las noticias que saldrán de este país en los próximos meses.
Y es que más que disolverla, los voceros opositores han dicho que Maduro busca reducirle poder de la AN a través del TSJ.
Image copyright Getty
Image caption
La AN tiene 167 diputados, de los cuales 112 quedaron en manos de la oposición.
De acuerdo a la Constitución venezolana, el presidente debe promulgar todas las leyes que aprueba la unicameral AN.
Para ello tiene diez días aunque puede, por un lado, devolverla pidiendo que se modifiquen algunos aspectos con el acuerdo del Consejo de Ministros.
La mayoría absoluta de la AN decidirá sobre el asunto y la podrá mandar de vuelta al presidente, quien tendrá cinco días para promulgarla.
O, por otra parte, cuando el presidente considere que la ley aprobada es inconstitucional, tiene la potestad de “solicitar el pronunciamiento de la Sala Constitucional del Tribunal Supremo de Justicia” dentro de esos mismos diez días.
Es por eso, que la TSJ se antoja de importancia clave en lo que pueda o no hacer la nueva AN.
El nombramiento de los magistrados: ¿legal o ilegal?
La pregunta es si la actual asamblea puede aprobar la designación de los magistrados de aquí al 4 de enero.
Según el constitucionalista Jesús Silva, si bien la designación puede ser controversial en lo político, en lo legal está permitido.
“No hay norma que diga que la AN no puede tomar sus decisiones cuando su mandato está próximo a vencer”, le dice a BBC Mundo.
El nombramiento de nuevos magistrados exige ser aprobado por dos tercios de la AN, una mayoría que el oficialismo no posee actualmente.
“Pero si no se alcanzan los dos tercios en varios intentos, se decide por mayoría simple”, dice Silva.
Discrepa el también constitucionalista José Ignacio Hernández, quien le dice a BBC Mundo que el nombramiento sería ilegal por varias razones.
“Primero, el comité de postulaciones judiciales inició el procedimiento de selección de magistrados sin que hubiese vacantes y sin indicar cuáles cargos serían suplidos”, señala.
Image copyright AFP
Image caption
La oposición tendrá que jugar inteligentemente para que la AN, ahora en su poder, no pierda relevancia.
“Segundo, los tiempos en que se produjo la preselección y en que se espera hacer los nombramientos viola los lapsos establecidos en la Ley Orgánica del Tribunal Supremo de Justicia”.
Y por último, “la designación de nuevos magistrados no es un asunto excepcional, así que la actual AN no debería aprobarlo en las sesiones extraordinarias que se esperan del 15 de diciembre al 4 de enero”.
Silva añade, sin embargo, que “si el oficialismo presenta una justificación debidamente expresada para sesionar en el asueto navideño, no habrá ley que se lo impida”.
En 2010, la AN saliente (100% oficialista) siguió legislando hasta el 4 de enero, antes de que se instalara un Parlamento con apenas mayoría simple para el chavismo.
Y en ese periodo aprobaron varias leyes orgánicas y una ley habilitante para el entonces presidente, Hugo Chávez.
Image copyright AFP
Image caption
El parlamento de Venezuela lleva 17 años dominado por el chavismo, y ahora con la mayoría opositora, se avecina un escenario complejo.
La nueva AN, ¿puede responder?
En caso de que el la actual AN designe nuevos magistrados de la Sala Constitucional, la pregunta es si la nueva AN puede revertir los nombramientos.
Los expertos coinciden en que sí, pero tienen al menos dos limitantes.
El primero es que necesita del apoyo del Poder Ciudadano (Defensoría del Pueblo, Fiscalía y Contraloría), una institución que muchos consideran al servicio del Ejecutivo.
Y segundo: “La nueva AN puede revocarlos, anularlos, pero haga lo que haga, cualquiera de sus acciones tendrá que ser aprobada por la misma Sala Constitucional que busca remover”, explica Hernández.
“Y ese escenario de toma y dime entre el TSJ y la AN, donde básicamente estamos rozando la ingobernabilidad, no está contemplado, no tiene solución, desde el marco legal”, dice.
El “choque de trenes” puede aplazar las urgentes soluciones que pide la económica venezolana, han alertado varios analistas.
Y, sin embargo, es para solucionar la crisis económica, sobre todo, que los venezolanos votaron hace una semana.
Image copyright EPA
Image caption
Maduro, ¿permitirá el choque de trenes o dialogará con la oposición?
Image caption
Los estudiantes latinoamericanos requieren avanzar en la obtención de las competencias necesarias para el siglo XXI.
Es un esfuerzo enorme. Exige años y mucho dinero.
En América Latina, un joven requiere de más de una década de estudios formales para culminar la educación secundaria.
En muchos países de la región se trata de un paso importante que los jóvenes y sus padres celebran como un gran logro familiar.
Sin embargo, los miles de días levantándose temprano, los desvelos de padres y niños, los innumerables gastos y sacrificios no parecen estar dando el resultado esperado.
De acuerdo con un informe que acaba de publicar el Instituto de Estadísticas de la UNESCO, más de la mitad de los jóvenes en América Latina y el Caribe no alcanzan los niveles de suficiencia requerida en capacidad lectora para el momento en el que concluyen la educación secundaria.
En total, hay 19 millones de adolescentes en esta situación.
Según el estudio, 36% de los niños y adolescentes de la región no cuentan con los niveles de lectura adecuados.
El balance es un poco mejor cuando se toma en cuenta solo a los niños en edad para cursar la educación primaria: 26% no alcanzan la suficiencia.
Los resultados no son más favorables cuando son evaluados en matemáticas. 52% de los niños y jóvenes de América Latina y el Caribe no alcanzan las competencias básicas.
14%
Norteamérica y Europa
31% Este y sudeste asiático
36% América Latina y el Caribe
57% Asia occidental y norte de África
88% África subsahariana
La situación es peor en secundaria (62%) que en primaria (46%).
Estos indicadores, en los que paradójicamente América Latina y el Caribe aparecen una de las regiones del mundo mejor posicionadas, revelan grandes desafíos para el futuro.
Nuevo analfabetismo
Silvia Montoya, directora del Instituto de Estadísticas de la Unesco, considera que los problemas que tienen los jóvenes en comprensión lectora plantean una situación “dramática”.
Derechos de autor de la imagen Getty Images
Image caption
La comprensión lectora es una competencia básica que permite adquirir nuevas competencias y habilidades.
“Que haya niños que no tengan las competencias básicas cuando se trata de leer párrafos muy sencillos y extraer información de los mismos yo lo consideraría como una nueva definición de analfabetismo. En el mundo de hoy tener un nivel mínimo de alfabetización ya no es poder leer tu nombre y poder escribir algún hecho de la vida cotidiana”, dijo Montoya en una conversación con BBC Mundo.
“Carecer de comprensión lectora es una especie de discapacidad o de incapacidad para poder insertarse en la sociedad, poder votar y entender las propuestas de los candidatos, poder tener entendimiento de los propios derechos y deberes como ciudadano. Me parece que afecta todas las dimensiones”, agregó.
La experta considera la lectura como la habilidad básica, el cimiento sobre el cual se siguen construyendo las demás habilidades.
“El leer para aprender es algo indispensable porque a partir de allí puedes desde ser autodidacta hasta insertarte en el sistema. Sin esa competencia, creo que estamos generando muchos niños y adolescentes que van derecho a muchas frustraciones personales y de integración social y laboral. Sin leer ni entender textos es muy difícil progresar en ningún área”, señaló.
Que haya niños que no tengan las competencias básicas cuando se trata de leer párrafos muy sencillos y extraer información de los mismos es una nueva definición de analfabetismo”
Montoya destacó que en el mundo actual hay una sobreexposición a información presentada en distintas formas y que tiene distintos grados de calidad y confiabilidad, por lo que las personas deben ser capaces de extraer la información y juzgarla por si mismos.
“Ser capaz de leer un aviso de trabajo y entender qué competencias se piden es, por ejemplo, algo básico para cualquier adolescente que está comenzando la vida laboral o que quiera seguir formándose”, dijo.
Una escuela que no funciona
Pero, ¿dónde está la falla?
Hubo una época en la que se pensaba que el problema de la educación en América Latina era que no era inclusiva, que dejaba a muchos niños por fuera.
Según Montoya, ese es un tema en el que la región ha mejorado de forma rotunda y ahora incluso tienen ventajas comparativas en ese aspecto en relación con otras regiones del mundo
“Ahora la realidad es que los niños están en el sistema educativo pero hay una incapacidad de la escuela para dotarles con un nivel de aprendizaje que sea razonable y mínimo para las circunstancias que demanda el mundo de hoy y de mañana”, dijo.
Derechos de autor de la imagen Getty Images
Image caption
El disponer de una infraestructura adecuada es uno de los varios factores que puede estar afectando la formación de los estudiantes latinoamericanos.
Por qué no se logra dar a los estudiantes la formación adecuada obedecen, según explicó, a una combinación de factores.
Entre estos menciona la falta de capacitación de los maestros para ocuparse de niños con determinadas características, problemas de infraestructura, pérdidas de días de clase por paros u otras causas, así como elementos relacionados con los propia situación socioeconómica de los estudiantes, “que pueden venir de hogares con menores ingresos o contar con un menor apoyo familiar”.
“Hay una combinación de factores que pueden variar en cada lugar, pero evidentemente hay una falta de políticas específicas para ocuparse de esta problemática“, indicó Montoya.
Agregó que hace falta mirar los currículos educativos, la formación de los docentes para asegurarse de que sean capaces de trabajar con niños que vienen de contextos sociales complicados, contar con un ambiente y una infraestructura adecuada, así como políticas sociales que adecuadas.
Derechos de autor de la imagen Getty Images
Image caption
Améria Latina logró grandes avances en lo relacionado con aumentar la tasa de escolarización de los niños.
“No hay manera de resolverlo si no hay una visión integral del sistema educativo“, aseguró.
En ese esfuerzo advirtió que también hace falta la aplicación de pruebas de evaluación de la calidad educativa, que no se aplican en la mitad de los países del mundo.
“Si no tenemos un sistema de evaluación de los aprendizajes serio, con credibilidad, tampoco se puede hacer mucho porque la única manera que tienen los padres para reclamar es tener información”, advirtió.
White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders admitted she lied to the media about President Donald Trump’s highly controversial decision to fire FBI Director James Comey in 2017, according to special counsel Robert Mueller’s report.
“Sanders told this Office [of the special counsel] that her reference to hearing from ‘countless members of the FBI’ was a ‘slip of the tongue,’” investigators wrote in the document, which was released with significant redactions by Attorney General William Barr on Thursday.
“She also recalled that her statement in a separate press interview that rank-and-file FBI agents had lost confidence in Comey was a comment she made ‘in the heat of the moment’ that was not founded on anything,” it continued.
White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders calls on reporters during a news conference in the Brady Press Briefing Room at the White House, on August 15, 2018. Sanders admitted she lied about President Donald Trump’s decision to fire FBI Director James Comey in 2017, according to special counsel Robert Mueller’s report.
Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
Sanders told the press following Comey’s firing in May 2017 that “countless” FBI agents had lost confidence in his leadership. Critics quickly raised concerns that Trump’s decision to fire Comey was an attempt to obstruct justice and hinder the investigation into his campaign’s alleged collusion with Russia during the 2016 campaign.
Comey “was not doing a good job,” Trump said at the time. “Very simply, he was not doing a good job.”
Later, in an interview with NBC News, the president specifically said the ongoing investigation into his campaign led to his decision to fire Comey. “And, in fact, when I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said: ‘You know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story, it’s an excuse by the Democrats for having lost an election that they should’ve won,” the president said.
Trump’s decision to fire Comey was one of ten events Mueller’s team investigated and considered when looking into the possibility that the president had obstructed justice by interfering in the investigation. Ultimately, Mueller’s report opted not to draw a conclusion on these obstruction allegations. However, Attorney General William Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein subsequently determined that they believed the president’s actions did not amount to a crime.
“After carefully reviewing the facts and legal theories outlined in the report, and in consultation with the Office of Legal Counsel and other Department lawyers, the Deputy Attorney General and I concluded that the evidence developed by the Special Counsel is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense,” Barr reiterated in a press conference Thursday ahead of the redacted report’s public release.
Attorney General William Barr takes questions about the release of the redacted version of the Mueller report at the Department of Justice, in Washington, D.C., on April 18. Win McNamee/Getty Images
Many Democrats have criticized Barr’s decision to rule out the possibility that the president obstructed justice. Following Thursday’s press conference and the Mueller report’s release, Democratic lawmakers quickly called out the attorney general for acting in a manner they viewed as partisan.
“We cannot take Attorney General Barr’s word for it. We must read the full Mueller report, and the underlying evidence,” House Judiciary Chair Jerrold Nadler of New York wrote on Twitter.
Senator Kamala Harris of California, who is also seeking her party’s nomination to take on Trump in 2020, accused Barr of “acting more like Trump’s defense attorney than the nation’s Attorney General. His press conference was a stunt, filled with political spin and propaganda,” she wrote in a tweet.
Even some at traditionally conservative media outlets questioned Barr’s actions. Fox News host Chris Wallace voiced a sentiment similar to Harris’ on Thursday morning when he stated the “attorney general seemed to be almost acting as the counselor for the defense, or the counselor for the president, rather than the attorney general; talking about his motives, talking about his anger, his feeling that this was unfair and he was being—there were leaks.”
President Joe Biden “is comfortable” with demands by some Senate Democrats to cut the thresholds for receiving direct payments under the $1.9 trillion coronavirus stimulus bill, his spokeswoman said Wednesday.
Under the proposal that could reach the Senate floor as early as Thursday, individuals earning up to $75,000 and couples earning up to $150,000 still would get a full $1,400 per person payment. But unlike the House-passed bill, the amounts would quickly phase out to where individuals making more than $80,000 and couples making more than $160,000 would not get any money.
The first two rounds of stimulus checks phased out at $100,000 for individuals and $200,000 for couples, meaning that many households who received two rounds of financial help would not get a third.
Biden was fine with the lower thresholds, White House press secretary Jen Psaki said during her daily press briefing Wednesday.
“He is comfortable with where the negotiations stand,” Psaki said. “Of course, there are going to be ongoing discussions. We don’t have a final bill, as you know. There will be ongoing discussions. He is comfortable and knows there will be tweaks at the margin.”
But the numbers weren’t final yet as negotiations continued, scuttling plans to try to bring the legislation to the floor on Wednesday. The bill then would go back to the House with eye toward getting it to Biden by March 14, when the current extension of unemployment insurance ends.
“I am confident that the Senate will ultimately reach a compromise that delivers direct stimulus checks to most hardworking New Jerseyans and billions more in aid our state and residents desperately need to get people vaccinated, keep essential workers on the job, safely reopen schools, provide assistance to the unemployed and hungry, support our struggling restaurants and small businesses, and protect renters and homeowners from eviction and foreclosure,” said Democratic U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez.
While progressives may have lost on the higher thresholds, they apparently did win on unemployment insurance, where Senate Democrats planned to keep the additional payments at $400 a week, rejecting calls to reduce them to the current level of $300.
“We have to pay attention to the entire package,” said Rep. Donald Norcross, D-1st Dist., a vice chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. “I’m going to reserve judgment until the final draft. Im going to bite my tongue for a little bit and see what they come up with.”
While Republicans remain unified against the legislation, a Monmouth University Poll released Wednesday said the stimulus remained popular with the public.
The bill was supported by 62% of Americans. including one-third of self-identified Republicans, with 34% in opposition. And the $400 unemployment insurance benefits were backed by 67%-30%.
The poll of 802 adults was conducted Feb. 25-March 1 and had a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said he wanted to have Republican support.
“We had always hoped that this very important work would be bipartisan,” Schumer, D-N.Y., said on the Senate floor. “Regrettably, it seems that too many of our Republican colleagues are resorting to the same, predictable objections they raise about nearly every proposal supported by a Democrat. It almost doesn’t matter what’s in the bill, everything my colleagues oppose is ‘a liberal wish list.’”
But Rep. Kevin Brady, the top Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee, said there has been no effort to reach across the aisle.
“There has not been a moment of discussion with Republicans,” said Brady, R-Texas, who used the same procedures in 2017 to cut taxes and to try to repeal the Affordable Care Act with no Democratic support. “I challenge anyone to claim with a straight face that this has bipartisan input or consensus at all.”
The legislation includes a massive expansion of the child tax credit and earned income tax credit for lower-income Americans. That would benefit 1.6 million children in New Jersey under age 18 and 354,000 workers without children, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a progressive research group.
“I don’t think it’s possible to overstate the sweeping potential impact,” Democratic U.S. Sen. Cory Booker said on a conference call to highlight the proposals. “When these two changes are passed, it really will be one of the most transformative economic policies ever to come out of Washington, D.C., in decades. This will be the greatest cut in child poverty in American history.”
Our journalism needs your support. Pleasesubscribe todayto NJ.com.
Former Hawaii congresswoman tells ‘Watters’ World’ that Biden’s remarks about Border Patrol will prevent a fair investigation
Former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard called on President Biden to “apologize” after his vow to punish Border Patrol officers over false “whipping” claims Saturday night on “Watters’ World.”
Gabbard warned that Biden’s hasty actions to chastise the officers are the antithesis of “innocent unless proven guilty” – undermining the country’s democratic process. “How can they expect to have any kind of fair outcome to an investigation when the president of the United States has already declared their guilt and that they will be punished?” she asked.
The former congresswoman and presidential candidate expressed concern over the direction of the country after the president quickly laid down the gavel on his own agents.
“What he essentially did was act as judge, jury and executioner for these Customs and Border Patrol agents on horseback,” she said.
Gabbard went on to say that the failure to enforce laws could have dire consequences for the country.
“If we are no longer a country of laws, the increasing feeling that a lot of us have, is that we are losing our democracy and moving closer and closer to what essentially is an autocracy,” she warned.
“They have no business being in positions of leadership at any level in our society because who suffers as a result of this? It’s the American people. It’s our democracy. And they don’t care about the cost and the toll that that takes.”
Gabbard concluded by pointing out what she believes is essential for the country right now: “leadership that puts service above self, that puts the interest of the American people in our country first.”
‘);
if (custF) {
if (!eplArgs.custom) { eplArgs.custom = {}; }
eplArgs.custom[eID] = custF;
}
eplSetAdM(eID, custF?true:false);
}
}
function schemeLocal() {
if (document.location.protocol) {
protocol = document.location.protocol;
} else {
protocol = window.top.location.protocol;
}
if (protocol) {
if (protocol.indexOf(‘https’) !== -1) {
return ‘https’;
} else {
return ‘http’;
}
}
}
//–>
Ana Isabel Rodríguez Salazar, abogada, atropelló a tres policías y una motocicleta al tratar de escapar de una intervención en San Isidro. Estaba completamente ebria. (El Comercio / Hugo Pérez)
Un repaso a las noticias que tuvieron como escenario Lima y que causaron impacto durante la semana en esta galería.
ABOGADA EBRIA ATROPELLÓ A TRES POLICÍAS
El Poder Judicial dispuso nueve meses de prisión preventiva para Ana Isabel Rodríguez Salazar, la abogada que en estado de ebriedad atropelló a tres policías enSan Isidro en su intento por evitar ser intervenida.
ÁRBOLES DE EL OLIVAR EN ESTADO CRÍTICO
Los 1.675 árboles que se encuentran dentro del bosque de El Olivar en San Isidro serán rescatados a través de un programa de recuperación de la Municipalidad de San Isidro.
La clausura definitiva de imprentas que funcionaban sin licencia en el Centro Histórico de Limageneró actos de violencia por un grupo de comerciantes que se oponen a esa medida.
(CNN)School bells were replaced by police sirens Tuesday after a mass shooting at Oxford High School in Oxford, Michigan, left three students dead, officials said.
“El Chavo del Ocho”, su programa más célebre, fue el que dio la mayor popularidad a Gómez Bolaños, uno de los más grandes comediantes que ha tenido la región. Esa serie de televisión, que empezó a emitirse en 1971, traspasó no sólo fronteras, sino generaciones. Las historias de la vecindad de “El Chavo del Ocho” siguen vivas en la versión original, en caricatura y en videojuegos.
Gómez Bolaños nació en Ciudad de México el 21 de febrero de 1929. Estudió sin concluir ingeniería en la Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM) y comenzó a dedicarse a la producción, la actuación y la dirección. El director de cine Agustín Delgado le puso el apodo de “Chespirito” (Shakespeare chiquito, por su baja estatura), en una comparación españolizada con el dramaturgo inglés William Shakespeare.
“El Chapulín Colorado” fue otra de las series más populares de Gómez Bolaños. Entre sus personajes están también Chaparrón Bonaparte, el doctor Chapatín y el Chómpiras.
Dos de los compañeros de set con los que Gómez Bolaños conservó una buena amistad fueron Rubén Aguirre, El profesor Jirafales, y Édgar Vivar, el Señor Barriga, que encabezó el gran homenaje que se le hizo a nivel regional a principios de 2012 y en el que ambos actores participaron. En cambio, era mala su relación con el actor Carlos Villagrán, que encarnó a Quico en “El Chavo del Ocho”, y con María Antonieta de las Nieves, que dio vida a La Chilindrina y con la que tuvo una pelea legal por los derechos del personaje.
Florinda Meza, Doña Florinda, la emblemática actriz de sus programas, fue el gran amor de su vida. Gómez Bolaños, que era 19 años mayor, se casó con ella en 2004 después de 27 años de vida en común.
La popularidad de “Chespirito” fue tal que cuando abrió la cuenta de Twitter @ChespiritoRGB en 2011 para comunicarse con sus fans empezó a recibir miles de mensajes desde toda América Latina. Actualmente, la cuenta tiene seis millones de seguidores. “Hola. Soy Chespirito. Tengo 82 años, y ésta es la primera vez que tuiteo. Estoy debutando. ¡Síganme los buenos!”, escribió en el primer mensaje. Y en su perfi ratificó su sentido del humor: “Para qué quieren mi perfil si soy más guapo de frente”.
ON IRAN … WSJ’S MIKE BENDER and GORDON LUBOLD: “Trump Bucked National-Security Aides on Proposed Iran Attack”: “President Trump bucked most of his top national-security advisers by abandoning retaliatory strikes in Iran on Thursday. In private conversations Friday, Mr. Trump reveled in his judgment, certain about his decision to call off the attacks while speaking of his administration as if removed from the center of it. ‘These people want to push us into a war, and it’s so disgusting,’ Mr. Trump told one confidant about his own inner circle of advisers. ‘We don’t need any more wars.’” WSJ
— NYT’S ED WONG and MICHAEL CROWLEY: “Pompeo, a Steadfast Hawk, Coaxes a Hesitant Trump on Iran”: “[A]s the debate over the strike showed, the uncompromisingly hawkish views Mr. Pompeo holds on Iran are starting to clash with the perspective of a president deeply skeptical of military entanglements, especially in the Middle East. Mr. Pompeo is unlikely to publicly signal frustration with the president.
“Some officials say he would work through the bureaucracy to push his policy goals while on the surface sticking to the role of loyal soldier, if only because he harbors political ambitions for which Mr. Trump’s support would be invaluable. Despite Mr. Pompeo’s insistence that he has ‘ruled out’ a Senate run next year in Kansas, many Trump administration officials expect him to enter the race.” NYT
VP MIKE PENCE told JAKE TAPPER on CNN’S “STATE OF THE UNION” that the president will announce additional sanctions on Iran tomorrow.
CHRIS WALLACE spoke to SEN. TOM COTTON (R-ARK.) on “FOX NEWS SUNDAY”: COTTON: “I think retaliatory strikes were warranted when we’re talking about foreign vessels on the high seas, I think they were warranted against an American unmanned aircraft. What I see is Iran steadily marching up the escalation chain it started out with threats then went to attack on vessels and ports, went to attack on vessels at sea now it’s an unmanned American aircraft. I fear that if Iran doesn’t have a firm set of boundaries drawn around its behavior were going to see an attack on a U.S. ship or U.S. manned aircraft.”
— WAPO’S SIMON DENYER in Tokyo: “North Korea’s Kim receives ‘excellent letter’ from Trump, state media says”: “North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has received an ‘excellent’ letter from President Trump and is seriously considering what his American counterpart had to say, North Korean state media reported Sunday. Earlier this month, Trump announced he had received a ‘beautiful letter’ from Kim, breaking the silence between the two men since a summit in Hanoi in February ended in failure. Now, Trump appears to have written back and received a similarly warm response. Kim ‘said with satisfaction that the letter is of excellent content,’ the Korean Central News Agency reported.
“‘Appreciating the political judging faculty and extraordinary courage of President Trump, Kim Jong Un said that he would seriously contemplate the interesting content,’ the agency said. The White House has not commented, but there will inevitably be speculation that the letters could pave the way for a third summit between the two leaders.” WaPo
CNN’S JAKE TAPPER: “Nancy Pelosi called Trump Friday night asking him to call off ICE raids”: “Trump and Pelosi spoke at 7:20 p.m. ET Friday night for about 12 minutes, according to the source. White House deputy press secretary Judd Deere confirmed a phone call took place Friday night between Trump and Pelosi. A senior Democratic aide said Trump is ‘trying to create leverage in a situation where he has none,’ adding that ‘it won’t work.’ ‘Democrats aren’t going to compromise their values,’ the aide said. ‘He’s walked away from several deals on immigration. We have no illusions here.’” CNN
— TAPPER got Pence to say toothbrushes, blankets and medicine should be given to children at the border — something DOJ’s attorney did not agree to in court. Clip
BUZZFEED’s HAMED ALEAZIZ and ADOLFO FLORES: “[T]wo senior administration officials told BuzzFeed News that those within the administration believe acting Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kevin McAleenan, or his staff, leaked operational details and that is what ultimately put the ICE operation in jeopardy. ‘Leaking the locations and details to stop the operation from happening not only harmed operational integrity, but it put the safety and well-being of his own officers in jeopardy,’ said one senior administration official.
“‘The ICE mission is enforcing the nation’s laws and ensuring those who are unlawfully present in the country are removed if ordered by a judge; this will leave an un-erasable mark on his tenure.’ DHS officials did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the matter.” BuzzFeed
— @Haleaziz: “!!! Former ICE dir. Tom Homan accused acting DHS Sec. McAleenan of ‘resisting what ICE is trying to do’ in this operation and heavily implies that McAleenan leaked operation details to the Washington Post. Homan was picked by Trump to be ‘border czar.’” Video
NYT’S JONATHAN MARTIN and ASTEAD W. HERNDON: “‘The Black Vote Is Not Monolithic’: 2020 Democrats Find Split Preferences in South Carolina”: “Recent polls have shown [Biden] with support from about 50 percent of African-American voters in the state. It is what elevates Mr. Biden above his 22 Democratic rivals; though he is often portrayed as a champion of the white working class, he is viewed by many black voters as the play-it-safe choice who could best recreate the multiracial Obama coalition.
“But many young black voters are drawn to Elizabeth Warren and her plan to cancel student debt, while others prefer Bernie Sanders and his calls for systemic change. Some black women like Kamala Harris’s leadership style and her personal story as a graduate of Howard University. And some black men are sizing up Cory Booker, who employs the cadences of the black church in his stump speech.” NYT
— MARTHA RADDATZ spoke to SEN. CORY BOOKER on CBS’ “FACE THE NATION”: RADDATZ: “And Sen. Booker, I want to turn back to politics and to Vice President Biden’s comments. He said he worked along segregationists in congress in order to get things done. You called the comments deeply disappointing, but the two of you spoke privately on Wednesday evening. What was your takeaway from that conversation?”
BOOKER: “Well I’ve said my peace. I have a lot of respect for Joe Biden and a gratitude towards him, and has even more of a responsibility than I have to have — be candid with him, to speak truth to power. He is a presidential nominee and to say something — and again it’s not about working across the aisle, if anything I’ve made that a hallmark of my time in the Senate to get big things done and legislation passed.
“This is about him evoking a terrible power dynamic that he showed a lack of understanding or insensitivity to by invoking this idea that he was called son by white segregationists who — yes, they see him — in him, their son.”
— CBS’S ED O’KEEFE interviewed SEN. KAMALA HARRIS for “FACE THE NATION” (also will run on “CBS This Morning” tomorrow): “2020 Democratic hopeful Sen. Kamala Harris of California reiterated her support for impeachment proceedings against President Trump but admitted there is tension within the Democratic party over moving forward. In an interview with CBS News political correspondent Ed O’Keefe, Harris said that she believes impeachment is ‘the existential question.’
“‘This is the tension which is, do you stand to fight for these principles that were part of the — the spirit behind the design of our democracy, checks and balances, accountability?’ Harris asked. ‘Or do you stand with strategy, which is what is the ultimate goal and if it’s saying that this guy should not be in office and if this could hurt the chances of winning an election, should you hold off?’” CBS
REALITY INTERVENES AGAIN FOR BUTTIGIEG … SOUTH BEND TRIBUNE: “One person dead, up to 10 others injured in shootings early Sunday at South Bend bar”: “One person is dead and as many as 10 others are injured after shootings at an east side bar early today.” South Bend Tribune
BORDER TALES — “‘Stop Repeating History’: Plan to Keep Migrant Children at Former Internment Camp Draws Outrage,” by Ben Fenwick in the NYT in Fort Sill, Okla.: “For Satsuki Ina, who was born in a Japanese-American internment camp during World War II, the news that the United States would detain undocumented migrant children at this Army base in Oklahoma felt like an unwelcome wallop from the past. The base, Fort Sill, Okla., once held 700 Japanese-Americans who lived in tents in desertlike heat, surrounded by barbed wire and guards. They were among the more than 100,000 residents of Japanese ancestry who were rounded up by the government during the war and placed in detention camps around the country.
“Ms. Ina and more than 200 demonstrators arrived at FortSill on Saturday to protest the government’s latest plan for the base: to house 1,400 undocumented children who arrived in the United States without a parent or a legal guardian. The protesters called the plan, which was announced this month, a return to one of the nation’s great shames. ‘We are here to say, “Stop repeating history,”’ Ms. Ina, 75, said at a news conference on Saturday, standing in front of a howitzer display outside the base.” NYT
GABE DEBENEDETTI in NY Mag, “‘That’s Hell’: Democrats’ Debate Prep Gets Real”: “Biden debated well during the 2008 cycle and as the vice-president in 2012, but it’s been seven years, and now he knows he’s everyone’s top target. Multiple candidates who are set to debate him next week are expecting both Kirsten Gillibrand and Kamala Harris to go after his flip-flop on the Hyde Amendment, Harris to attack him on his criminal-justice record, Bernie Sanders to criticize his ‘middle-ground’ plans, and Pete Buttigieg to knock him in his signature generational terms. On both nights, they suspect, candidates will bring up Biden’s recent comments about working with segregationist senators. And Biden is preparing for all of it.”NY Mag
— “What the 2020 Democrats Are Like Behind the Scenes,” by NYT’s Alex Burns: “[S]ome of the most telling — and in some cases, jarring or endearing — moments with the candidates happened off camera, or outside the context of the interview. [John] Hickenlooper, for instance, showed up at our office flustered because he had lost his wallet, and confessed sheepishly that it had been a long time since he had dealt with certain indignities of being a private citizen. Learning after the interview that his flight home had been canceled, Mr. Hickenlooper took the development in stride; he lingered in the newsroom, bantering with our colleague Stephanie Saul about Teddy Roosevelt’s relationship with the muckraking reporters of his day.
“Ms. Harris arrived at the newspaper with a complaint and a request. She asked Patrick Healy, our politics editor, if The New York Times could make it easier to read articles offline on the paper’s smartphone app — an important consideration for a West Coast lawmaker who is regularly confined to transcontinental flights with spotty Wi-Fi. Ms. Harris — who was at her most animated in the interview when discussing her passion for cooking — also asked to meet Sam Sifton, the food editor.
“Soon, the two were kibitzing about recipes amid a maze of desks and a gathering crowd of onlookers. (Ms. Harris was less excited when Carolyn Ryan, a masthead editor, approached to ask her about a blossoming late-March crisis for Mr. Biden, involving his physical behavior with women.)” NYT
HMM … THE STAR TRIBUNE — “New documents revisit questions about Rep. Ilhan Omar’s marriage history,” by J. Patrick Coolican and Stephen Montemayor: “New investigative documents released by a state agency have given fresh life to lingering questions about the marital history of Rep. Ilhan Omar and whether she once married a man — possibly her own brother — to skirt immigration laws. Omar has denied the allegations in the past, dismissing them as ‘baseless rumors’ first raised in an online Somali politics forum and championed by conservative bloggers during her 2016 campaign for the Minnesota House. But she said little then or since about Ahmed Nur Said Elmi, the former husband who swept into her life in 2009 before a 2011 separation.
“The questions surfaced again this month in a state probe of campaign finance violations showing that Omar filed federal taxes in 2014 and 2015 with her current husband, Ahmed Hirsi, while she was still legally married to but separated from Elmi. Although she has legally corrected the discrepancy, she has declined to say anything about how or why it happened.” Star Tribune
BONUS GREAT WEEKEND READS, curated by Daniel Lippman, filing from Aspen, Colorado:
— “The Problem With HR,” by Caitlin Flanagan in The Atlantic’s July issue: “For 30 years, we’ve trusted human-resources departments to prevent and address workplace sexual harassment. How’s that working out?” The Atlantic
— “What Abortion Access Looks Like in Mississippi: One Person at a Time,” by Zoë Beery in the N.Y. Times Magazine: “With state legislatures passing new abortion restrictions, the Mississippi Reproductive Freedom Fund follows its own compass on how to best help clients.” NYT
— “What Really Happened to Malaysia’s Missing Airplane,” by William Langewiesche on the cover of July’s Atlantic: “It is easy to imagine Zaharie [Ahmed Shah] toward the end, strapped into an ultra-comfortable seat in the cockpit, inhabiting his cocoon in the glow of familiar instruments, knowing that there could be no return from what he had done, and feeling no need to hurry. Around 7 a.m. the sun rose over the eastern horizon, to the left. A few minutes later it lit the ocean far below.” The Atlantic
— “The Birth and Death of a Bike Company: What Happened to SpeedX,” by Iain Treloar in Cycling Tips – per TheBrowser.com’s description: “Gripping account of the rise and fall of SpeedX, a Chinese start-up which promised to build a better bicycle, raised $15 million, pivoted into bike-sharing, raised and spent another $100 million, then made arguably most catastrophic blunder in the history of marketing. On June 4th 2017, anniversary of the Tiananmen massacre, the bike avatars on SpeedX’s bike-sharing app were replaced by avatars of tiny tanks rolling through the centre of Beijing. Literally overnight, the business was doomed.” Cycling Tips
— “Who Gets to Own the West?” by NYT’s Julie Turkewitz in Idaho City, Idaho: “A new group of billionaires is shaking up the landscape.” NYT
– “Hideous Men,” by E. Jean Carroll on the cover of NY Mag: “Donald Trump assaulted me in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room 23 years ago. But he’s not alone on the list of awful men in my life.” NY Mag
— “Building the Wind Turbines Was Easy. The Hard Part Was Plugging Them In,” by WSJ’s Russell Gold in an adaptation of “Superpower: One Man’s Quest to Transform American Energy”: “In the Oklahoma panhandle, one entrepreneur saw a future fueled by cheap and clean energy. But there was a big snag.” WSJ … $17.70 on Amazon
— “Goodbye, Chrome: Google’s web browser has become spy software,” by WaPo’s Geoffrey A. Fowler: “Our latest privacy experiment found Chrome ushered more than 11,000 tracker cookies into our browser — in a single week. Here’s why Firefox is better.” WaPo
— “Joe Exotic Built a Wild Animal Kingdom. He Was the Most Dangerous Predator of Them All,” by Sean Williams in The Daily Beast: “A cunning and cuddly persona created an empire. A murder plot brought it crashing down.” The Daily Beast
— “The Land Where the Internet Ends,” by Pagan Kennedy in the NYT in Green Bank, W.Va.: “To find real solitude, you have to go out of range. But every year that’s harder to do, as America’s off-the-grid places disappear.” NYT
— “The Unsolved Mystery of the Malibu Creek Murder,” by Zach Baron in GQ: “When a man was killed in Malibu Creek State Park last summer while camping with his two young daughters, it sent the placid Southern California community into hysterics—spawning amateur sleuths, conspiracy theories, and public paranoia. Was it related to a rash of unsolved incidents in the area? But while the tragedy’s aftermath publicly played out like a new season of Serial, there was also a family left picking up the pieces after a seemingly random act of violence. This is a story about what happens when lightning strikes in the most chilling manner imaginable.” GQ (h/t Longform.org)
— “Something Borrowed, Something Blue,” by Dan Nosowitz in BuzzFeed in Sept. 2014: “In 1937, my great-grandfather started a workwear company in New England called Madewell. In 2006, 17 years after the last factory shut down, J.Crew relaunched a women’s clothing company with the same name and logo, based on a 50-year history in which it had no part.” BuzzFeed (h/t Longform.org)
SPOTTED at a joint book party at Juleanna Glover’s house last night for Jim Sciutto’s “The Shadow War: Inside Russia’s and China’s Secret Operations to Defeat America” ($18.98 on Amazon) and Winston Lord’s “Kissinger on Kissinger” ($17.10 on Amazon): Norah O’Donnell and Geoff Tracy, Tom Nides and Virginia Moseley, Tammy Haddad, Suzanne Kianpour, Kaitlan Collins, Melanne Verveer, Mike Abramowitz, Gloria Riviera, Dan Yergin, Indira Lakshmanan, Karin Tanabe, Shayna Estulin, Jeff and Mary Zients, Eric Lipton, Mike Allen, Mike Pillsbury and Paula Dobriansky.
WEEKEND WEDDING — “Bryana Turner, Robert Jackson Jr.” – N.Y. Times: “Mrs. Jackson, 31, is the founder and principal of Turner Divorce Mediation … Mr. Jackson, 42, is a commissioner on the United States Securities and Exchange Commission in Washington. He is currently on public service leave from the faculty of the N.Y.U. School of Law, where he specializes in corporate law and financial regulation. He previously served in the Obama administration as a counselor to senior Treasury Department officials during the financial crisis.” With a pic.NYT
BIRTHDAYS: Sylvia Burwell, president of AU, is 54 … Chasten Buttigieg is 3-0 (h/t Marina McCarthy) … Steven Cheung (h/t Janae Garcia) … Kaelan Dorr of Sinclair Broadcast Group (h/ts Andy Hemming) … Aaron Cutler, partner at Hogan Lovells (h/t Boris Epshteyn) … Paul Tewes … Amber Moon, director of external comms at BAE Systems … POLITICO Europe’s Kate Day, Etienne Bauvir and Ali Walker … State’s Robert Palladino … J.P. Fielder … Josh Lauder … Jeremy Katz, president and COO of D1 Capital Partners and a Trump WH alum (h/t Tevi Troy) … Robert D. Kaplan, CNAS senior fellow and senior adviser at Eurasia Group, is 67 … Pelosi alum Judy Lemons … Ryan Woodbury … POLITICO’s Ryan Kohl …
… Suzanne Clark, president of the U.S. Chamber … former Rep. Baron Hill (D-Ind.) is 66 … former Rep. Robert Dold (R-Ill.) is 5-0 … former Rep. Cresent Hardy (R-Nev.) is 62 … Atanu Chakravarty … Adam Lerner … Louisa Tavlas, director of comms at the Niskanen Center … Bradley Engle … Rick Reynolds … Chris Spanos … Steven Stombres, partner at Harbinger Strategies … political consultant Joe Duffy … Emma Whitestone of Blueprint Interactive (h/t dad Randy) … Sivan Ya’ari is 41 … Jerry Speyer is 79 … Patrick Morris … Brian Pomper is 3-0 … Caitlin Dorman … Mark Leder … Bronagh Finnegan … Tom Frechette … Tina Karalekas … Robin Strongin … Greg Hale is 44 … Andrew Roos (h/ts Teresa Vilmain)
WASHINGTON — When some of President Donald Trump’s top national security advisers gathered at the White House Tuesday night to talk about the surge of immigrants across the southern border, they discussed increasing the U.S. military’s involvement in the border mission, including whether the military could be used to build tent city detention camps for migrants, according to three U.S. officials familiar with the conversations.
During the meeting, the officials also discussed whether the U.S. military could legally run the camps once the migrants are housed there, a move the three officials said was very unlikely since U.S. law prohibits the military from directly interacting with migrants. The law has been a major limitation for Trump, who wants to engage troops in his mission to get tougher on immigration.
Acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan was at the White House meeting Tuesday night and was open to sending more U.S. troops to support the border mission, so long as their assigned mission is within the law, according to the three U.S. officials.
Thousands of troops are currently deployed along the southern border, and are mainly used for reinforcing existing fencing with barbed wire.
Potential new projects for the troops that were mentioned Tuesday, according to the three officials — two from the Pentagon and one from Homeland Security — also included conducting assessments of the land before the construction of new tent cities in El Paso and Donna, Texas. They would also be used in assessments before construction of a new central processing center for migrants in El Paso, said the DHS official.
The creation of the processing center was announced last month. It is being designed to temporarily detain arriving immigrants, many of whom are being released in El Paso due to the lack of detention space.
The processing center will be similar to one currently used in McAllen, Texas, where children were kept in chain-link areas, which some called “cages,” while the Trump administration’s family separation policy was in effect last summer, according to two Customs and Border Protection officials.
The tent cities would hold immigrants while Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention facilities continue to be at capacity. The Obama administration also used tents to hold immigrants in Donna, Texas, in 2016.
The idea has trickled down into planning meetings held this week at DHS, one of the officials said.
Discussions this week, at the White House meeting and afterward, have included the suggestion that troops may be needed to run the tent city detention camps once immigrants are being housed there, according to the U.S. officials familiar with the conversations.
The Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the use of federal troops for domestic law enforcement inside the U.S. This prevents them from direct interaction with immigrants crossing into the country. One U.S. official said recent meetings have included discussions about whether using active duty troops to run a detention camp would be a violation of Posse Comitatus.
While there has been discussion of an increase in troops, no specific numbers have been mentioned, and officials do not expect a large number of additional troops to be needed for any new mission.
A U.S. border patrol official speaking on the condition of anonymity said the military allows for faster construction than private contractors, who can protest decisions and slow down the process.
“The importance of DOD is that they are able to mobilize quickly because we face an immediate crisis now,” said the border patrol official.
Download the NBC News app for breaking news and politics
As an example of the crisis, the border patrol official said on Tuesday, 253 Central Americans, mainly families were stopped in Santa Teresa, New Mexico. Large groups present a challenge for border agents who must process, shelter and often find medical care for immigrants.
The border patrol official said he is not aware of plans to use troops to run detention facilities for migrants and noted it would be in violation of U.S. law.
The White House meeting came just two days after Trump tweeted that his secretary of Homeland Security, Kirstjen Nielsen, was leaving and that Kevin McAleenan, the CBP commissioner, would replace her as acting secretary. DHS Acting Deputy Secretary Claire Grady has also resigned.
On Wednesday, during a visit to Texas, Trump spoke about increasing the number of U.S. troops assigned to the border mission and alluded to the limitations to using active duty troops there.
“I’m going to have to call up more military. Our military, don’t forget, can’t act like a military would act. Because if they got a little rough, everybody would go crazy. … Our military can’t act like they would normally act. … They have all these horrible laws that the Democrats won’t change. They will not change them.”
DHS did not immediately respond to a request for comment. In a statement, Defense Department spokesperson Lt. Col. Jamie Davis, said: “As we said last year when we were looking at possible facilities at Fort Bliss and Goodfellow Air Force Base, DOD could be involved in the possible construction of facilities to house immigrants. There are currently no new requests for assistance.”
Courtney Kube
Courtney Kube is a national security and military reporter for the NBC News Investigative Unit.
Julia Ainsley
Julia Ainsley is a national security reporter for NBC News.
El 13 de abril, cuando Cristina Kirchner, tras declarar ante el juez Claudio Bonadio, habló frente a una multitud en los Tribunales de Comodoro Py, Lázaro Báez la miraba por el televisor que le instalaron en la cárcel de Ezeiza. “Esta hija de puta los verduguea en la cara y yo me voy a quedar acá adentro de por vida”, decía Báez mientras señalaba la tele. Se quería morir. Hasta ese momento era uno de los pocos integrantes del clan K que habían caído presos.
En base a fuentes del servicio penitenciario federal, abogados y otros presos ex compañeros de Báez, NOTICIAS pudo reconstruir cómo es la vida del empresario K en el pabellón para transexuales del Complejo Penitenciario Federal de Ezeiza.
La llegada de Báez obligó a reorganizar algunos pabellones. Los funcionarios carcelarios, conscientes de la sensibilidad del flamante reo, no querían tener problemas. El pabellón de transexuales, con lugar para 15 presos en celdas individuales, fue vaciado para Báez. De a poco, se fueron agregando otros detenidos con pocos antencedentes, y en su mayoría, mayores de 50 años. Fueron seleccionados especialmente para acompañar a Báez. Al principio eran cinco o seis, includo el contador Daniel Pérez Gadín, con quien más interactuaba Báez, y luego se sumó más gente hasta completar la capacidad del pabellón.
Tras la llegada de Báez, el servicio penitenciario decidió instalar un sistema de cámaras de seguridad para controlar a los internos de ese pabellón. El día que fueron los técnicos, encerraron a todos los presos en sus celdas y se realizó la instalación de las cámaras. Al ser uno de los presos más famosos del país, nadie quería correr riesgos sobre la seguridad de Báez. Muy pocos pabellones tienen cámaras de seguridad.
Comodidades. El pabellón donde está alojado Báez tiene televisor, heladera y hasta un horno eléctrico. Este último fue provisto por la familia del empresario. Según las reglas del servicio penitenciario no está prohibido estar equipado dentro de la cárcel, siempre y cuando venga de la familia o de allegados y cumpla con las normas de seguridad de la cárcel. Báez, con una vasta experiencia como empleador, logró convencer a un par de compañeros para que sean sus empledos, le limpiaran la celda, lavaran su ropa y le cocinaran. A cambio, el empresario les pagaba, mediante un intermediario, a las familias de los presos, fuera del cárcel. Ante la alta población de reos con bajos recursos, este tipo de beneficios solo lo tienen personajes con poder adquisitivo. Pérez Gadín también contaba con su mayordomo “tumbero”. Otro que accedía a este tipo de lujos era el narco colombiano Alejandro “Gato Seco” Álvarez, también compañero de Báez, que cayó preso a mediados de abril.
Desde el entorno de Báez dicen que tampoco es un bacán. “Le ha tocado limpiar los baños o lavar los platos”. Algunos testigo afirman que hasta enceró los pisos.
Bon vivant. Gracias al dinero amasado durante la última década, Báez puede tener un pasar relativamente cómodo dentro del penal de Ezeiza. Su familia le envía todas las semanas unos $ 4.000 en comida. El servicio penitenciario tiene un sistema de buffet llamado “La Cantina” que sirve para que los familiares de los presos en vez de llevar comida se la compren ahí. Eso sí, no se pueden comprar bebidas de colores oscuro, por ejemplo sabor cola, porque pueden camuflar algún objeto no declarado. La mayoría de los compañeros de pabellón de Báez están contentos: comen asado, pastas, pizza y hasta tienen postre. Todo pagado por el empresario. “Yo comía mejor adentro que afuera”, bromea uno de los ex compañeros de Báez. La comida que tenían eran tanta que la heladera siempre estaba llena. Tal es así que, por ejemplo, la comida que provee la cárcel no se come en el pabellón de Báez.
Los compañeros de Báez también tienen otros beneficios, las medialunas que le llevan al empresario. La cárcel tiene reglas. Por ejemplo, no se puede ingresar con facturas. Solo medialunas.
Otro de los servicios carcelarios que consume el empresario K es el de peluquería. Tres compañeros cortan el pelo y ya debutó como cliente. ¿Cómo se paga? Con víveres.
No todos están tan felices con tener a Báez de compañero. Algunos lo resisten y le fruncen el ceño cuando cruzan la mirada. “Éste se robó todo. No queremos su comida”, respondieron el día que les llevaron un plato enviado por Lázaro. Ante la tensa situación, se decidió hacer una reunión entre todos los presos, se pusieron en ronda y acordaron no generar problemas. “Muchachos, todos los que estamos acá estamos por buena conducta, no somos reincidentes y si cumplimos nuestra condena con buena conducta nos vamos tranquilos. Así que no hagamos lío”, alzó la voz uno de los compañeros de Báez. Detrás de ese discurso se evidenciaba una defensa a Lázaro, el benefactor del pabellón.
El lugar tiene un patio interno propio, por lo que Báez no tiene contacto con otros presos más que sus compañeros. No interactua con nadie más. Sus tardes las pasa jugando al truco con sus compañeros. También juega al dominó, ve la tele y lee libros. Una vez jugó al fútbol, pero le recomendaron abandonar esa actividad, debido a la arritmia que tiene. Es por eso que desde entonces solo mira los partidos.
Sus lecturas varían entre ensayos de historia y ciencia política, y también mechó novelas como “Doña Flor y sus dos maridos”, del escritor brasileño Jorge Amado. Pero la mayor parte del tiempo hace lo que hacen la mayoría de los presos: lee su causa.
Báez habla poco de sus situación judicial con el resto de los compañeros, solo repite que es un preso político y que podría pasar la investigación tranquilamente en libertad. “Siempre estuve a derecho”, relata.
Con el que más habla es con Pérez Gadín, con quien a veces discute. Perez Gadín también aclara entre los compañeros de pabellón que nunca fue el contador de Báez, sino que era un profesor de la facultad de Ciencias Económicas de la UBA. Solo le falta decir que no le gustan los habanos ni el whisky.
De Cristina habla muy poco. Dice que no es su amiga y que lo dejaron solo. En cambio de Néstor habla maravillas. “Él sí era mi amigo”, contó una vez.
Visita. El sábado 11 de junio, y a más de dos meses de su detención, Lázaro decidió recibir a su hijo Martín Báez. El mayor de los varones había intentado verlo el día que el empresario tuvo una audiencia con la Cámara Federal. Esa tarde, Martín esperó durante una hora y media, pero al final no lo dejaron encontrarse con su padre. Cinco días después, Martín se apersonó en Ezeiza durante el horario de visitas y dijo: “Vengo a ver a Lázaro Báez”. Pasó todos los controles penitenciarios y se dirigió al sector de visitas. Cuando Báez apareció, ambos se fundieron en un abrazo. Para ese momento, Lázaro ya tenía entre manos una nueva movida en su estrategia para recusar al juez Sebastián Casanello. Dos días antes lo había visitado Santiago Viola, el abogado de su otro hijo, Leandro. El más joven de los hijos varones había llamado a su letrado para que fuera a ver a su padre.
Allí Lázaro le contó sobre la supuesta reunión en Olivos entre el juez y la ex presidenta de la que él habría sido testigo. El abogado de Leandro le pidió que lo escribiera y lo presentara en el expediente. Báez tomó un papel y una lapicera y comenzó a escribir: “A la Sala II de la Cámara Federal. Me dirijo a ustedes a los efectos de ponerlos en conocimiento, en el marco del incidente de recusación del doctor Casanello, que aproximadamente a mediados del 2015, con anterioridad a las elecciones generales, vi al mismo en la Quinta de Olivos, cuando estaba esperando para entrevistarse con la entonces presidente doctora Fernández. Ustedes tienen todos los medios para corroborar lo dicho, espero esto a los fines de ser tenido en cuenta al momento de resolver el incidente, lo manifestado es por el firme convencimiento de que la causa está direccionada hacia mi persona, mis hijos y mi familia. No he manifestado esto con anterioridad dado que no me fue preguntado en la audiencia mantenida con ustedes por el temor que siento, tal cual se lo expresara”.
El contenido de la carta fue ratificado por los abogados de Báez, Rafael Sal Lari y Daniel Rubinovich, quienes se desmarcaron de la acción: “Fue autónoma e inconsulta”. Ya no se esconden los celos entre las distintas defensas de los Báez. Lázaro se queja de que sus defensores también cuidan los intereses de Cristina Kirchner. El manuscrito provocó que la Sala II de la Cámara Federal, integrada por los jueces Martín Irurzun, Horacio Cattani y Eduardo Farah, volviera llamar a Lázaro Báez el viernes 24 de junio para que diera detalles acerca de ese encuentro. El inconveniente que se le presenta a Báez en esta estrategia es que los demas actores niegan haberse encontrado en Olivos. Cristina, a través de su Facebook, escribió que nunca vio en su vida a Casanello y hasta aprovechó para tirarle la oreja por haber sobreseido al presidente Macri en una causa por escuchas ilegales. Por su lado, dos días después, Casanello también escribió un comunicado. “Nunca me he reunido con la Presidenta Cristina Fernández de Kirchner en ninguna circunstancia. Nunca estuve en la Quinta Presidencial de Olivos”, afirmó.
Mientras, desde Ezeiza, Lázaro habla con su ex eposa Norma Calismonte para preguntarle como están sus hijos y también por la salud de la madre de él, quien por la diabetes y el avance de la edad está senil en Río Gallegos. Calismonte, a pesar del divorcio, cuida de ella.
Según la ley, el tiempo máximo para una prisión preventiva es de dos años, mientras avanza la investigación. Lázaro lleva casi tres meses. Quisiera estar libre, pero tampoco la pasa tan mal.
Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif in 2018. He was interviewed by NPR on Tuesday.
Elias Williams for NPR
hide caption
toggle caption
Elias Williams for NPR
Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif in 2018. He was interviewed by NPR on Tuesday.
Elias Williams for NPR
Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif talks to All Things Considered’s Mary Louise Kellyin Iran about heightened tensions between Tehran and Washington after the U.S. killing of Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani.Here’s the full transcript of their conversation.
Mary Louise Kelly: Foreign Minister, thank you. Our time is short, so I will be direct. Does Iran consider the U.S. killing of Qassem Soleimani an act of war?
Mohammad Javad Zarif: It’s an act of terrorism and an act of war.
It is both —
Both.
Terrorism and war, you believe, on behalf of the U.S.?
Yes. But it has three basically characteristics. One against Iraq. It violated territorial integrity and sovereignty of Iraq. And it also violated the agreement that they had with the Iraqis. And that is why the Iraqis decided to kick them out.
It hurt the feeling of many people across Iran and the rest of the world. And the reaction to that would be to make it almost impossible for the U.S. to continue to stay in this region. That is why I say the days of the United States in our region are numbered.
Third is they attacked a citizen and a senior official of Iran. We’re responsibleunder international law for protection of our citizens. This was an act of aggression, an armed attack, albeit a cowardly armed attack, against an Iranian official in foreign territory. It amounts to war, and we will respond according to our own timing and choice.
But we were on the streets in Tehran yesterday, we saw flags, banners with the words deep revenge written across them.
Yes.
What does that look like?
Well, that looks like the United States has committed a grave error. A grave error. And it will pay for that grave error.
Can you be specific?
Well, I was very specific. The Parliament of Iraq asked them to leave. The people of the region are asking them to leave. And the people of Iran are asking their government to do what it takes for the United States to pay for its crimes.
But what would Iran’s response look like?
Well, we will decide. We will decide. The United States, you see —
There’s nothing on or off the table?
Well, you see, in exercising our right to self-defense, we are only bound by international law, unlike the United States, which is not bound by international law.
The U.S. would differ. But go on.
U.S. would differ? Well, tell them to explain how they want to attack cultural sites. That’s a war crime. How do they want to — I mean, these are not off the record. These are statements made by the president of the United States. Disproportionate manner.
The defense secretary, as you well know, Mark Esper has said in the United States, the U.S. will not be attacking cultural sites.
Well, I’ve heard that the president in the United States is the commander in chief. And as you say, the buck stops here. So, unless President Trump changes his own threats, I don’t think that. … The defense secretary works on behalf of the president, not as a as an independent entity. But the point is, the United — the secretary of state, of all people, has said if Iran wants its people to eat, it has to listen to the United States. That’s a crime against humanity. Starvation is a crime against humanity, creating individual responsibility before the International Criminal Court. These are the statements that are being made. I’m not making them up. I mean, the Newsweek headlines — they’re, I mean, they’re headlines in the United States.
You were supposed to have —
They can differ with me. But I don’t think they have any grounds to differ with me.
You were supposed to be able to make this case in New York, at the United Nations this week, you were set to address the United Nations Security Council.
Not this case. Actually, the president of the Security Council invited me over 20 days ago. The current president.
Will you be able to go?
No, unfortunately, because Mike Pompeo decided that I was too dangerous for the United States.
How did — has he communicated that directly to you? How did you find out?
Not to us, to the secretary-general of the United States [sic]. He has said we didn’t have enough time to issue a visa. I don’t know how terrible bureaucracy the State Department has that in 25 days, they couldn’t issue a visa for a foreign minister. I’m not an unknown entity.
But you are — this is final, this is definite? Because I know there has been confusion in past about visas.
From his point of view it is. And I’m not that crazy about going to the United States anyway.
You’re just, just happy to skip this trip.
Well, I’m not happy to skip this trip because that was part of my obligation as the foreign minister of Iran to go to that session of the Security Council and talk about the need to respect international law, because that’s the title: the need to respect the principles of the U.N. Charter.
Secretary Pompeo, in past, when this has been an issue with Iranian diplomats such as yourself coming to the United Nations in New York and visa issues have been difficult, has said a nation that has killed U.S. citizens, that has knowingly killed hundreds of Americans — why should they be allowed to come to the U.S.? Why should a nation that knowingly supports international terrorist groups, why should they be allowed to come address the United Nations?
Well, now, I mean, these allegations are easy to make. But when we see who is killing and who is maiming and who has killed a thousand Iraqi scientists —
Iran has sent weapons that have killed hundreds of Americans in Iraq. You know this.
Who killed — who killed 290 Iranians, civilians in a civil airliner?
You’re referring to an airplane bombing.
Yes. The record is clear. The record of the United States in this region is clear. They have killed a lot of Iraqis. They’ve killed a lot of Afghanis. They’ve killed a lot of people elsewhere in this region. They are killing a lot of people in Yemen. The weapons that the United States provides to Saudi Arabia is killing and maiming people.
Many sides are killing a lot of people in Yemen, unfortunately.
Unfortunately, it’s a war that the United States —
Including the Houthis, who Iran backs.
The Houthis have always asked — they didn’t start a war. They’re defending themselves. You cannot equate somebody who’s defending themselves, but with somebody who’s attacking them.
May I turn you to the nuclear deal? We have heard from Iran that Iran will suspend compliance with the remaining limits in the nuclear deal. Is this the end of the deal?
No, we didn’t say we will suspend complying with the remaining limits. We said that we have taken four steps. Our fifth step would be to suspend compliance with the limit on the number of centrifuges. That means effectively that all limits on our centrifuge program are now suspended.
Why do this now?
Huh?
Why?
Because it’s it’s at the two-month period that we have said before that if the Europeans do not comply with their own obligations, we will take measures.
You see, JCPOA was negotiated not in an —
You’re using the formal name for the nuclear deal. Go on.
Yeah. Not in an atmosphere of trust, but in an atmosphere of mistrust. That is why we put in place the mechanisms for dealing with violations. And that mechanism was triggered by Iran after U.S. withdrawal. And in November of 2018, we informed that we have exhausted that mechanism, and we have no other choice but to start reducing our level of compliance. But we made it very clear that we are ready to go back to full compliance the minute they start complying with their own. Doesn’t mean that the United States should comply. Means that Europe should comply.
MLK: Still, it’s not good news for the nuclear deal which you personally negotiated.
Well, it’s not good news. Certainly not. And we’re not happy about this, but it’s a remedy. When you execute somebody or you imprison somebody for committing an offense, you certainly are not happy for depriving somebody of their life or their liberty. But you have to do it because it’s a remedy that the law has provided in order to prevent lawlessness. This is a remedy provided in the deal.
So this is not —
Unpleasant.
— Iran racing to build a nuclear bomb.
No. If we wanted to build a nuclear bomb, we would have to be, would have done it a long time ago. Iran does not want a nuclear bomb, does not believe that nuclear bombs create security for anybody. And we believe it’s time for everybody to disarm rather than to arm.
Last question. There’s something like five U.S. citizens still being detained in Iran, including the aging Baquer Namazi, who is in ill health.
He’s not detained.
He’s here.
He’s here, yet he —
He would probably prefer not to be.
Well, he’s an Iranian citizen.
Is there hope for future exchanges?
Well, I don’t think that this action by the United States helped. We had proposed a universal exchange of all prisoners and we were doing that in good faith. We released an American citizen for an Iranian citizen. That could have continued. But now —
You’re talking about the recent exchange of a Princeton graduate student who is an American held here.
And an Iranian professor —
Yes.
— who had been held without —
And those channels are still open?
I don’t think at this time we can discuss those issues. We have to deal with the present issue at hand, unfortunately.
If I’m hearing you correctly, you’re saying there will not be future exchanges while the situation is so tense between Washington —
Well I think those talks are certainly suspended now.
Foreign Minister Zarif, thank you for your time.
Thank you for being here.
Thank you.
Editor’s note: NPR’s Mary Louise Kelly described a 1988 attack on an Iranian civil airplane as a bombing. The U.S. Navy actually fired missiles at Iran Air Flight 655. Earlier in the conversation, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif mentioned the secretary-general of the United States. He was referring to the United Nations secretary-general.
“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.
LOS ANGELES —
Con el objetivo de tener información fiable y en tiempo real sobre la crisis en Venezuela, un grupo de profesionales desarrolla un proyecto a través de las redes sociales que ofrece noticias y datos objetivos sobre la situación en el país suramericano.
El sitio Venezuela Decoded busca recopilar la información presentada en Twitter en tiempo real agrupándola según las fuentes, ya sean del gobierno o de la oposición y separando la información en inglés y en español.
“Lo que empujó este proyecto es que hubo un aumento en la censura y la autocensura de los medios informativos en Venezuela desde las marchas de febrero”, explicó el miércoles en entrevista con Efe, Ana María Carrano, periodista, editora venezolana y actual miembro del prestigioso programa Knight Fellowships de la Universidad de Stanford.
Ante casos presentados como el bloqueo de la señal de la emisora colombiana Noticias 24 que se recibía en Venezuela o la detención del político opositor Leopoldo López, , varios periodistas venezolanos decidieron buscar una forma para presentar la información tanto de las fuentes oficiales como de la oposición para que los lectores pudieran formar sus propios criterios.
Igualmente, las fuertes restricciones a la importación de papel establecidas por el gobierno venezolano han llevado a varios medios impresos a cerrar y a otros a reducir sus páginas teniendo que autocensurarse para poder subsistir, según explicó Carrano.
Por ello, agregó, el objetivo del proyecto es “aprovechar el valor protagónico de la información que se encuentra en Twitter y tratar de darle un marco organizativo”.
Todavía en desarrollo y con nuevas funciones en proceso que serán agregadas en las próximas semanas, venezueladecoded.com ofrece a través de un “timeline” los hechos más importantes de cada día y organiza la información más confiable y preponderante que se publica en Twitter.
Para los filtros iniciales, se hizo una evaluación de quiénes eran los periodistas que estaban haciendo seguimiento de los procesos con más regularidad y más confiabilidad, tanto en sus propios mensajes como en la repetición de mensajes de otras fuentes, destacó la periodista venezolana.
Posiblemente para la próxima semana, la página añadirá un nuevo canal denominado “Quién es quién” donde se presentará a los principales protagonistas del conflicto político venezolano, tanto del gobierno como de la oposición y se les relacionará con información complementaria.
Según comentó a Efe Martín Quiroga, también miembro actual del Knight Fellowships y arquitecto de sistemas, otra nueva adición del sitio incluirá la posibilidad de “mantenerse al tanto de una historia”.
Kuwait City – The United Nations (UN) hopes to raise more than US$ 1.5 billion at the Second International Humanitarian Pledging Conference for Syria, to be held this Wednesday (15) in Kuwait City. For the second year in a row, government representatives and humanitarian help organizations are meeting in the Arab country with the aim of raising awareness among the international community and pledge resources for those affected by the Syrian civil conflict, which has been going on for almost three years.
In 2013, the sum raised in the first conference, also held in Kuwait, was of US$ 1.5 billion. “How much are we raising? At least that, but we hope for more,” said to ANBA the spokesperson of the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), Jens Laerke. “It depends on the generosity of donors,” he added.
The UN has informed that this year it needs US$ 6.5 billion to help 9.3 million Syrians affected by the conflict, among them 2.3 million refugees in neighboring countries and 6.5 million who are homeless inside Syria itself. “We don’t expect to raise all this on Wednesday, but there will be other opportunities,” stated Laerke.
He emphasized, however, that the organizations involved in helping Syrians count on the generosity of donors, mostly governments. “The Gulf countries have been very generous, not only in donations to Syria, but also for other nations, such as Yemen and Palestine, and even places outside the Middle East, such as Haiti,” he declared. Kuwait alone has announced the donation of US$ 300 million in last year’s conference. “We hope they will be generous again,” said the OCHA spokesperson.
The State Minister of Cabinet Affairs of Kuwait, Mohammed Al-Abdullah Al-Sabah, who inaugurated this Monday (13) the conference’s press center at the Jumeirah Messilah Beach hotel, in the Kuwaiti capital city, told journalists that part of the money granted by the country in the 2013 event was used to provide shelter for 70,000 Syrians who have taken refuge in Jordan, US$ 40 million were used to buy food for 1 million refugees during four months and another sum was directed to 83,000 Syrians left without homes inside Syria itself, helped by the International Organization for Migration (IOM), one of the various UN agencies involved in helping those affected by the conflict.
“We are confident that the conference will be a success,” said minister Mohammed. “We are confident that the international community will contribute to provide humanitarian help for Syrians. We shall reach this objective, ‘inchallah’ (God willing),” added the Kuwaiti minister of Information, Salman Al-Humoud Al-Sabah, who also participated at the press center inauguration.
According to Laerke, resources are necessary to meet the basic needs of the affected population, such as food, clean water, medication, vaccination and shelter. “Syria is [currently] going through a harsh winter, and they need adequate homes, with thermal insulation, they need fuel [for heating], blankets and also clothes,” he stated. “There are children who don’t even have shoes,” he alerted.
Last week, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the United Nations Children’s Fund (Unicef), another two UN agencies that are helping with the Syrian crisis, launched a campaign with the purpose of raising US$ 1 billion for the children affected by the conflict, named “No lost generation”. The agencies have calculated that there are more than 4 million youngsters at risk, of which one million refugees and more than 3 million inside the country.
Minister Mohammed Al-Sabah has informed that 69 countries shall be represented on Wednesday’s conference, as well as 24 international organizations. The event shall be hosted by the emir of Kuwait, Sabah Al Ahmed Al Jaber Al Sabah, and shall be presided by the United Nations secretary-general, Ban Ki-moon. Brazil shall be represented at the meeting, which also counts on the participation of the secretary of State for the United States, John Kerry.
The Kuwaiti meeting precedes the Second Syria Peace Conference, scheduled for the January 22 in Montreux, in Switzerland. The first edition took place in June 2012, in Geneva, so this one has been named “Geneva 2”, although it shall take place in another city. The 2012 meeting did not have practical effects on the civil war, but the idea this time is to have representatives from both the Syrian president Bashar Al-Assad regime and the opposition, standing face to face.
Since the conflict started in 2011, after popular manifestations which took place in the wake of the Arab Spring were harshly repressed by the Syrian government, more than 100,000 people have died. This figure, the latest confirmed by the UN, dates to July 2013. Last week, the organization announced that it has stopped counting the dead due to the difficulties in obtaining reliable data from the country.
Derechos de autor de la imagen Oficina del Alguacil del condado de Hillsborough
Image caption
Mowry enfrenta cargos de abuso sexual.
Cuando tenía 22 años, en enero de 2014, Marissa Ashley Mowry tuvo relaciones sexuales con un menor de 11 años en una casa cerca de la ciudad de Tampa, Florida, en el sureste de Estados Unidos, según las autoridades.
Mowry quedó embarazada y en octubre de 2014 dio a luz a su hijo.
La mujer y el joven padre siguieron teniendo relaciones sexuales “múltiples veces” hasta que este cumplió 14 años, según la Oficina del Alguacil del Condado de Hillsborough, Florida.
Debido a estos hechos, Mowry, ahora de 25 años, fue arrestada el martes, informó la Oficina del Alguacil.
Fue detenida a la salida del parque temático Busch & Gardens, en Tampa, donde trabajaba en un puesto de comida, según los medios estadounidenses.
3 años después
La joven enfrenta cargos de abuso sexual contra una víctima menor de 12 años, de acuerdo con la Oficina del Alguacil.
El menor, que ahora tiene 15 años, “cooperó” con la investigación, le dijo la Oficina del Alguacil a BBC Mundo.
La mujer ha sido acusada recién ahora, tres años después de que supuestamente cometiera el delito, “porque el caso no fue reportado en 2014”, añadió la entidad.
El Registro Estatal de Abuso de Florida recibió un reporte anónimo en abril de 2017 y lo transmitió a las autoridades de Hillsborough, según le contó a BBC Mundo Larry Mckinnon, vocero de la Oficina del Alguacil.
Según le comentó la policía a la prensa, Mowry no tiene abogado por el momento. De ser hallada culpable, podría ir a prisión de por vida, indicó McKinnon.
Por su parte el hijo, que ahora tiene 3 años, vivirá “con un adulto responsable”.
La División de Protección Infantil del condado está colaborando en la investigación del caso, según las autoridades de Hillsborough.
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"
Un repaso a las noticias que tuvieron como escenario Lima y que causaron impacto durante la semana en esta galería.
ABOGADA EBRIA ATROPELLÓ A TRES POLICÍAS
El Poder Judicial dispuso nueve meses de prisión preventiva para Ana Isabel Rodríguez Salazar, la abogada que en estado de ebriedad atropelló a tres policías en San Isidro en su intento por evitar ser intervenida.
ÁRBOLES DE EL OLIVAR EN ESTADO CRÍTICO
Los 1.675 árboles que se encuentran dentro del bosque de El Olivar en San Isidro serán rescatados a través de un programa de recuperación de la Municipalidad de San Isidro.
CONTRALORÍA EMITIÓ INFORME SOBRE POLÉMICO BY-PASS
La Contraloría General de la Republica identificó una serie de hechos que podrían afectar la ejecución y operación de la obra que actualmente realiza la Municipalidad de Lima en la avenida 28 de julio, la cual consta de tres by pass y una nueva alameda
COMERCIANTES DE IMPRENTAS SE ENFRENTARON A PNP
La clausura definitiva de imprentas que funcionaban sin licencia en el Centro Histórico de Lima generó actos de violencia por un grupo de comerciantes que se oponen a esa medida.