O VOO DO CORVO .......
O Voo do Corvo pretende informar e contextualizar .
Assim acompanhará diáriamente diversos temas e acontecimentos, de forma variada e abrangente nas áreas da Opinião e Noticiário. Nacional e Internacional.
O critério Editorial é pluralista e multifacetado embora existam dois “partis/ pris”:
A Defesa do Património e do Ambiente.
António Sérgio Rosa de Carvalho.
Covid-19
cases are climbing – in Germany and beyond. The attempt to return to normalcy
has thwarted social distancing measures. Authorities fear holidaymakers will
bring the virus with them. So there are now tests at airports to help curb that
risk. No one wants a second wave of the coronavirus or another wave of pandemic
lockdowns. But no one can rule them out if the number of cases continues to
rise. So what is a second wave? And what would one look like?
The United
States and Europe have posted their biggest economic decline in decades. Business
investment, exports and consumer spending all dropped as coronavirus lockdowns
put the brakes on economic activity. In both the US and the European cases, the
record dropsin GDP come despite major government spending programs during the
COVID-19 pandemic.
Some of America's biggest tech companies have announced
their financial results for the last quarter. Facebook came out on top,
reporting an almost doubling in profit despite an advertiser boycott during the
quarter. Meanwhile Amazon posted its highest profit ever and Apple beat Wall
Street's revenue expectations. But Google parent Alphabet announced its first
ever decline in overall revenue due to flagging ad sales.
Airbus posted a quarterly loss of 1.9 billion euros. The
airplane maker says the coronavirus has presented the industry with its gravest
crisis ever. The company sold half as many planes during the first six months
of this year as it did during the same period in 2019.
Chinese telecoms giant Huawei has overtaken Samsung as the
largest smartphone maker in the world. That's according to market research
company Canalys. Analysts say China’s early recovery from the coronavirus
pandemic reinvigorated Huawei’s domestic market, where it sells more than 70
percent of its phones.
Plans to
further ease England's coronavirus lockdown have been put on hold, because of a
rise in the rate of infections.
Boris
Johnson has said it's time to "squeeze the brake pedal" on further
relaxation of the rules, warning that the country shouldn't be complacent.
The Prime
Minister now says face coverings should be worn in more places where people can
come into contact with others they don't know.
Bowling
alleys, skating rinks and casinos won't be reopening as planned, and certain
beauty treatments involving the face won't be allowed for at least two weeks.
Wedding
receptions of up to 30 people and indoor musical and theatrical performances
won't be allowed either, and the public will have to wear face coverings in
cinemas, museums and galleries as well as places of worship from August 8th.
England's
Chief Medical Officer, Professor Chris Whitty, says the country has
"probably reached" the limits of what can be done in opening up
society, with infections now rising.
Meanwhile 4
million people living in communities in northern England now have to abide by
strict new measures.People living in
Greater Manchester and parts of East Lancashire and West Yorkshire can no
longer visit another household, in their home or garden.The police will have powers of enforcement..
People can
still go to pubs, restaurants and shops in the affected areas as well as places
of worship but only with members of their own household.
The tougher
rules follow a jump in new infections in the past week in almost every part of
Greater Manchester.
Cases of
coronavirus infection across the UK have been rising slightly. Scientists don't
know whether that's because of more and better testing, or if it's the
beginning of a resurgence in infections, as we've been seeing elsewhere in
Europe.
Two dozen
areas are now on Public Health England's watchlists due to the rise infection
rates.
Clive Myrie
presents BBC News at Ten reporting from political correspondent Leila Nathoo,
Judith Moritz in Manchester, science editor David Shukman and health
correspondent Lauren Moss.
The House
and Senate have adjourned for the weekend without coming to an agreement on a
new economic stimulus package despite the looming deadline for unemployment
benefits that many have relied on during the coronavirus pandemic. CNN's Manu Raju discusses with Jake
Tapper.
Com a extinção do CDS iminente, o PSD vira-se para o que
até hoje era inimaginável. Mas convém acordar e perceber que o “ticket” para as
próximas eleições é Rio/Ventura. Ao abrir esta porta, Rio faz o que na
realidade sempre sonhou: dar um pontapé no “sistema” e enterrar a história do
PSD.
Entre a covid, a
crise financeira, as férias, aconteceu uma grande mudança no mapa político. Foi
ultrapassado um marco que até agora ninguém tinha tido coragem em ultrapassar:
o PSD decidiu fazer aquilo de que nunca o CDS se lembrou (ainda). Admitiu que o
Chega pode ser seu parceiro político “se mudar”. A notícia foi dada por Rui Rio
na entrevista que deu a Vítor Gonçalves, da RTP, e o facto marca um antes e um
depois na política portuguesa. Quebrou-se um consenso forjado em 1974 segundo o
qual a nossa direita era “civilizada” e a que não fosse “civilizada” seria
rejeitada pelo sistema, nomeadamente pelos representantes da própria direita –
isso acabou.
Portanto, o que
se passou agora assinala uma mudança de paradigma e radical. Se o Chega
“mudar”, se passar a ter “uma posição mais moderada”, Rui Rio está ali para os
abraços. Para já, enquanto o partido “continuar numa linha de demagogia e
populismo”, não. Não há memória de um político de direita “do sistema” se ter
entregue nos braços da extrema-direita da forma como Rio o fez. Ah, mas Rio diz
que não é do sistema… Ups. Talvez aqui esteja a explicação para tão grande
corte epistemológico com a história do PSD.
João Miguel
Tavares percebeu isto antes de nós, os que acreditaram que Rui Rio “falava
falava” mas na realidade não queria dizer “aquilo”. João Miguel tem razão:
bastava levar a sério as palavras de Rio contra o sistema, o Parlamento, o
poder judicial ou a comunicação social. Era um exercício simples. E no entanto,
relativamente a Rui Rio e a sua capacidade de acolher Ventura no colo entrámos
em “denial”. Não, o homem era um moderado, aos 20 anos tinha sido apoiante de
Francisco Pinto Balsemão. Pois era.
Escreveu João
Miguel Tavares: “Finalmente, percebi Rui Rio e a sua estratégia. Rio não quer
nenhum Bloco Central. A sua aposta é num governo liderado pelo PSD com André
Ventura à pendura em 2023, ou mesmo um pouco antes disso, se a situação
económica se agravar enormemente e o Governo não aguentar. Se até lá Ventura
galgar para próximos dos 10%, roubando algum eleitorado ao PCP e à abstenção, e
se Rio conquistar sete ou oito pontos percentuais ao PS, bastar-lhe-ia chegar
próximo dos 35% para um governo de direita voltar a ser possível, tendo Rio
como primeiro-ministro”.
Com a extinção do
CDS iminente, o PSD vira-se para o que até hoje era inimaginável. Mas convém
acordar e perceber que o “ticket” para as próximas eleições é Rio/Ventura. Ao
abrir esta porta, Rio faz o que na realidade sempre sonhou: dar um pontapé no
“sistema” e enterrar a história do PSD.
O título deste
texto é uma citação da ministra da Cultura, Graça Fonseca. Vale a pena explicar
o contexto. Na terça-feira, Graça Fonseca organizou uma daquelas cerimónias de
propaganda a que o Governo costuma chamar conferências de imprensa, reunindo os
jornalistas no jardim do Museu Nacional de Arte Antiga para anunciar a
aquisição de 65 obras de arte contemporânea para a colecção do Estado.
Se organizar uma
cerimónia destas numa altura em que as pessoas da cultura sofrem a maior crise
das suas vidas já é bastante obsceno, Graça Fonseca arrebatou o prémio de frase
mais snob do ano ao ser questionada por uma jornalista sobre os profissionais
mais carenciados do sector. A ministra recusou responder à pergunta – “hoje só
falo da colecção de arte contemporânea” – e acrescentou: “muito obrigado, e
vamos beber o drink de fim de tarde.”
O “drink de fim
de tarde” pode parecer apenas o mais recente item na vasta colecção de gafes de
Graça Fonseca. Infelizmente, é bem mais do que isso. Se trago a frase para aqui
não é para relembrar, uma vez mais, a enorme falta de jeito da ministra, mas
sim para sublinhar o quanto essa frase é sintomática do brutal afastamento das
elites políticas em relação às pessoas comuns, cujos problemas é suposto
ajudarem a resolver.
Ao ser
confrontada com uma pergunta sobre gente da área da cultura que está a ser
apoiada com produtos alimentares – ou seja, a pedir ajuda para comer –, a
ministra optou por convidar os jornalistas a deixarem as questões desagradáveis
de lado e juntarem-se ao seu “drink de fim de tarde” num dos mais bonitos
jardins da capital.
Que isto seja
feito por uma ministra que tutela a cultura de um Governo socialista é
significativo. A esquerda chique abandonou a luta de classes e a preocupação
com os mais pobres para se dedicar às “micro-agressões”. Talvez as velhas
macro-agressões se tenham tornado démodé para políticos como Graça Fonseca, mas
seja em 1820, seja em 2020, o grande problema social continua a ser a pobreza,
a falta de oportunidades, a educação desigual, o enclausuramento das elites, o
emperramento do elevador social.
Nem todos os
políticos têm de viver em Massamá. Mas se o mais próximo que estamos desse
mundo é através da senhora que nos limpa a casa, o drink de fim de tarde
transforma-se num labirinto onde a política mais nobre se perde e o país
continua a esbarrar em becos sem saída
É evidente que
qualquer político, seja ele de esquerda ou de direita, vai dizer que sabe tudo
isto muito bem. Pode até saber, tal como eu imagino que sei como é a vida de um
habitante do bairro da Jamaica – sei, mas não sinto. Longe da vista, longe do
coração. É claro que a ministra já falou com o roadie que não trabalha há cinco
meses, com a actriz que ficou sem rendimentos ou com o pessoal que organiza
festivais que só regressam (com sorte) em 2021. E certamente se preocupa com
eles. Mas a galáxia do drink, tão natural em Graça Fonseca, fica a anos-luz
destes problemas.
É assim na
Cultura, e é assim na Educação: quando não se tem filhos, ou se tem os filhos
em escolas privadas (como acontece com a esmagadora maioria dos membros do
Governo), os problemas das escolas públicas não batem da mesma forma. É assim
na Educação, tal como é assim na Saúde: quando se tem um bom seguro, que conduz
directamente ao Hospital dos Lusíadas ou da Luz (como acontece com a esmagadora
maioria dos membros do Governo), os problemas dos hospitais públicos não entram
na pele da mesma maneira. Nem todos os políticos têm de viver em Massamá. Mas
se o mais próximo que estamos desse mundo é através da senhora que nos limpa a
casa, o drink de fim de tarde transforma-se num labirinto onde a política mais
nobre se perde e o país continua a esbarrar em becos sem saída.
Não se creia que o episódio do Novo Banco é só mais um
que o povo português, sereno, submisso, impotente, vai tolerar, porque não tem
capacidade, suscetibilidade, para ser duro. As pessoas estão fartas.
Ao ler o PÚBLICO
do passado dia 28 de Julho, ficámos a conhecer uma certa forma de fazer
negócios. Resumindo a notícia: no dia 10 de Outubro de 2018, o Fundo Anchorage
comprou 13.000 imóveis ao Novo Banco por 364 milhões de euros. A avaliação dos
imóveis nas contas do banco era de 631 milhões de euros. Ou seja, os imóveis
foram vendidos ao Fundo em causa com um “desconto” de 42%. Menos 267 milhões de
euros.
O Novo Banco
considerou, nas suas contas, o valor de 267 milhões de euros como prejuízo. E
pediu ao Fundo de Resolução – um Fundo em que o montante alocado a necessidades
do Novo Banco é constituído, em 80%, por dinheiro do Estado (ou seja, dos
contribuintes) – que pagasse 260 milhões de euros deste prejuízo. O Novo Banco
fez mais: emprestou ao comprador dos referidos imóveis – o Fundo Anchorage – o
dinheiro para os comprar, tendo as casas por garantia. Portanto, qual o risco
do comprador? Comprou por quase metade do preço as casas, com dinheiro
emprestado pelo próprio vendedor para o efeito. Qual o risco do vendedor?
Vendeu por quase a metade do preço e compensou o prejuízo com dinheiro do Fundo
de Resolução, essencialmente, constituído com dinheiro dos contribuintes. Quem
são os compradores? Não fazemos a mínima ideia – podem ser pessoas ligadas ao
Novo Banco, ligadas a empresas que compraram o Novo Banco, pode até ser o Rato
Mickey. É que atrás do nome Fundo Anchorage, pela legislação em vigor, é
impossível saber quem são, no concreto, os seus beneficiários.
Podemos achar que
esta situação é completamente anormal. E é. Mas convém dizer que esta
anormalidade é uma quase normalidade no sistema financeiro. O sistema está
cheio de expedientes deste género: compradores que compram com risco zero ou
próximo do zero; vendedores que vendem com risco zero ou próximo do zero;
contribuintes que pagam a fatura. O sistema financeiro está habituado a
internalizar os lucros e a externalizar os prejuízos. Quando há lucros,
banqueiros, donos de bancos, empresários, milionários, e mesmo espertalhões
recém-chegados, beneficiam. Milhões, não tostões. Quando há prejuízos, Estados
e contribuintes pagam. Milhões, não tostões.
Àqueles de nós
que dependemos do esforço do trabalho e não de rendas, é levado pelo Estado,
diretamente, entre IRS e Segurança Social, todos os anos, 20% a 50% do
rendimento (a que se soma o que se paga de impostos indiretos). Parte
importante do nosso tempo de trabalho, do resultado do nosso esforço, serve
para o Estado pagar a bancos que pagam a milionários para serem ainda mais
ricos.
Só para falar em
episódios recentes, é ver a história da crise financeira internacional que se
iniciou em 2008 (e vale a pena lembrar os esquemas desonestos que o sistema
financeiro praticou e que provocaram essa crise, demonstrando a relação mais
que efetiva entre sistema financeiro e economia real).
É também o que se
passa, provavelmente, com esta lamentável história que a notícia do PÚBLICO
revela. Tudo legal, claro. Porque a lei nem sempre está do lado dos lesados.
Pode até dizer-se que a lei serve, muitas vezes, os infratores – a realidade
dos factos demonstra-o.
Muito do que
disse até agora são generalizações. E, como todas as generalizações, estas pode
provocar uma leitura injusta da realidade.
Quer dizer: há
banqueiros honestos, há milionários honestos, há juristas cuja tarefa na vida
não é andar a fintar o sentido da justiça.
Todavia, pode
haver um sentimento de raiva – é esta a palavra – quando sabemos destas
vergonhas. Raiva, sim, por verificarmos que não nos respeitam, a nós, cidadãos
que não andamos na roda viva das bolsas, dos bancos, dos hedge funds, dos
mercados primários e secundários, etc. Porque nos dizem que vivemos numa
sociedade democrática, concorrencial, socialmente responsável.
Não podemos
continuar a esperar que o sistema de governo e de justiça – sistemas que
representam a soberania que, dizem, reside no povo (!) – demorem anos, dezenas
de anos, a agir, por falhas dos próprios sistemas, por incúria ou por
conivência. Por vezes, estes sistemas parecem máquinas de fazer esquecer. Nas
demoras, delongas, nas esperas, vem o olvido e volta-se ao ramerrão do dia a
dia entre o horário de trabalho, as preocupações com as necessidades da
família, as contas e as tentativas de ter alguns momentos de relaxamento para
lá do esforço excessivo, face a rendimentos manifestamente baixos, para a
maioria da população.
E se partíssemos
tudo? Se agarrássemos em chicotes, se fizéssemos como Jesus Cristo ao expulsar
os vendilhões do Templo? Se em vez de procurar reformar um sistema podre o
destruíssemos? Se em vez de reformas fizéssemos a revolução? Se necessário, uma
revolução sangrenta?
Não, eu não penso
assim. Mas quero salientar este pensamento. Quero salientá-lo porque os
excessos, os abusos do sistema financeiro estão a minar gravemente as
instituições internacionais e nacionais – e a aumentar o número daqueles que
pensam assim. Que encontram até uma certa beleza e entusiasmo ao pensar assim.
A erosão que está a ser provocada nos Estados, nos cidadãos, nas economias, nas
sociedades, está a gerar de forma crescente núcleos de revolta, de raiva, de
extremismo, organizados em torno de projetos políticos alternativos.
Estes núcleos não
são, exclusivamente, alimentados por verdades que revelam atitudes miseráveis.
São, também, alimentados por desinformação, fake news, deepfake, enfim, vários
sistemas de intoxicação na comunicação, promovidos, deliberadamente, por
Estados, entidades e grupos interessados em desestabilizar.
As instituições
estatais têm revelado uma enorme incapacidade em responder à justa demanda dos
cidadãos pelas reformas que possam impedir os desmandos a que temos estado
sujeitos. E é face a esta incapacidade, na qual os partidos dominantes nos
sistemas democráticos têm evidentes responsabilidades, assim como as
instituições privadas mais influentes, é face a esta incapacidade que crescem
organizações que se alimentam do ressentimento, do ódio, da raiva, criando
propostas alternativas.
Ainda por cima, a
crise sanitária que estamos a viver amplia o desânimo e os sentimentos
negativos. Com a Ultra Depressão (sim, é mais que uma Grande Depressão)
associada, nos próximos anos, a insatisfação, frustração, pânico, perda de
emprego, de rendimentos e diante de todos os problemas pessoais e sociais
inerentes.
Mais ou menos
visíveis, andam por aí muitos predadores do bem comum. E os sistemas
democráticos não estão a demonstrar capacidade para proteger os cidadãos das
dinâmicas de predação
Estamos no Verão.
Portugal quer ir a banhos. Mas este é um momento chave para as instituições
democráticas.
O momento em que
se revelam grandes líderes ou a sua ausência. Um momento crítico para evitar a
predação de parte importante dos eleitorados insatisfeitos por forças
extremistas.
O momento em que
tem de haver quem nos convença que não é preciso partir tudo, quem nos convença
que o sistema é reformável, a bem da maioria, da cidadania, da equidade.
Não se creia que
este é só mais um episódio que o povo português, sereno, submisso, impotente,
vai tolerar, porque não tem capacidade, suscetibilidade, para ser duro. As
pessoas estão fartas. E as maiorias (e grandes minorias) não veem nas
discussões palacianas, nos temas fraturantes, nos grandes debates intelectuais,
elementos que correspondam ao seu pensar e sentir, a uma melhoria efetiva das
suas condições de vida e dos sistemas públicos de justiça, de democracia.
Sistemas que impeçam e punam comportamentos lesivos da comunidade, como aquele
exemplo do Novo Banco com que comecei este texto, entre tantos outros.
Mais ou menos visíveis,
andam por aí muitos predadores do bem comum. E os sistemas democráticos não
estão a demonstrar capacidade para proteger os cidadãos das dinâmicas de
predação. É aí que se começa a perguntar: será que a democracia funciona? Isto,
esta confusão em que vivemos, é que é a democracia? E se partíssemos tudo?
Ex-secretário de
Estado da Cultura; professor universitário
Madonna shared the post with her 15 million Instagram
followers.
Dancer,
singer, songwriter, actor, director – Madonna has had quite the career.
But the
queen of pop’s latest reinvention came this week in the form of a video posted
on Instagram that shared a coronavirus conspiracy theory with her 15 million
followers.
Madonna
claimed a vaccine existed but was being concealed. “They would rather let fear
control the people and let the rich get richer and the poor get poorer,” she
said.
Instagram
blurred the video, captioned it “false information” and linked users to a page
debunking the bogus claim. Later, it deleted the post.
So ended
another skirmish between celebrity, truth and the pandemic, an ongoing battle
that pits fame against science and public health.
Days
earlier it was the turn of Lewis Hamilton to skid into trouble by sharing an
anti-vaxxer post, which suggested Bill Gates was lying about coronavirus
vaccine trials.
The clip,
which the Formula One driver shared with 18.3 million Instagram followers,
shows Gates offering reassurance over potential vaccine side-effects and
debunking false claims that any vaccine will be used to implant microchips in
people. The clip is captioned: “I remember when I told my first lie.”
After a
backlash, Hamilton deleted the post and issued a statement praising Gates and
backing a vaccine but expressing concern about “uncertainty” over side-effects
from the potential coronavirus vaccine, which does not yet exist.
Some
celebrities such as John Cusack, Woody Harrelson and Wiz Khalifa have peddled
the myth linking linking 5G technology to coronavirus. Others, such as the
actor Evangeline Lilly, question the need for social physical distancing (she
later apologised).
There is
even a conspiracy theory that celebrities are being paid to say they have
coronavirus. “Such stupidness,” said Idris Elba, who contracted the disease
earlier this year.
Some of
those challenged over spreading misinformation delete posts and plead
misunderstanding. Others refuse to back down. Either way, say public health
experts, messaging about Covid-19 becomes muddied.
“Celebrities
have a platform and when they abuse it it’s incredibly irresponsible,” said
Paul Offit, co-inventor of the rotavirus vaccine and director of the Vaccine
Education Center at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. “They influence
people. Science doesn’t win out, the facts don’t win out. Emotion trumps
scientific evidence every time.”
Samuel
McConkey, an infectious disease expert at RCSI University of Medicine and
Health Sciences in Dublin, said many people turned to prominent names on
Instagram, Facebook, TikTok and other platforms for information about Covid-19.
“Looking to
our singers and actors as sources of information about this disease is daft.
It’s like I was to do the singing and acting – it wouldn’t be entertaining. We
have to work within our own domains and spheres of competence. Anyone who is
turning to Madonna for scientific information has muddled thinking. Maybe we
need primary school courses in epistemology.”
Offit and
McConkey credited some celebrities, such as actors Salma Hayek and Amanda Peet
and boxer Katie Taylor, with using their platforms to echo established medical
advice on vaccinations and other effective public health measures.
A study by
researchers at the Reuters Institute at Oxford University found most engagement
with coronavirus falsehoods came via social media posts by politicians,
celebrities and influencers.
“Rather
than being completely fabricated, much of the misinformation in our sample
involves various forms of reconfiguration where existing and often true
information is spun, twisted, recontextualised or reworked,” said the report.
Baybars
Örsek, director of the International Fact-Checking Network, a unit of the
Poynter Institute, said celebrities should be mindful of their “amplification
capacities” around falsehoods.
“Covid-19
has caused hundreds of thousands of deaths around the world and spreading
misinformation on cures, vaccination and causes of the disease hurts the
public’s trust,” she said.
Orsek also
urged internet companies to be vigilant. “Millions of users are being exposed
to such falsehoods in any given day.”
Frustrations simmer as Congress prepares rare
August work
“I think partisanship and disagreement has locked down
Washington. It’s inexcusable," says one lawmaker of the stalled aid talks.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer stops to talk to
reporters.
“We will not start the August district work period
until we pass appropriate Covid-19 relief to meet the current health and
economic crisis,” said House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer.
Even the
August recess — one of the Congress’s most hallowed traditions — has now been
uprooted by the coronavirus pandemic.
The impasse
between Democrats and Republicans over a massive economic recovery package has
spilled into next month, and shows no sign of ending soon. Hundreds of
lawmakers are being sent home — for now — with a warning they may be called
back with a day’s notice if an agreement is reached. Meanwhile, millions of
out-of-work Americans are set to lose an additional $600 a week in federal
employment benefits in the coming days.
In the
House, lawmakers departed D.C.’s swampy summer heat on Friday filled with
frustration as party leaders in both chambers remained deadlocked over what to
do with the expiring economic relief.
The jet
fumes typically wafting past the chamber on the last day of July has been
replaced by a sense of dread, particularly among Democrats, who passed a nearly
$3.5 trillion bill months ago but now need to explain back home why Congress
allowed a crucial financial lifeline for jobless Americans to lapse.
“People are
feeling a lot of hardship right now. There’s a lot of suffering,” Rep. Ben
McAdams (D-Utah) said in an interview during a final round of votes on Friday.
“I think partisanship and disagreement has locked down Washington. It’s
inexcusable.”
Lawmakers
often look forward to decamping from D.C. in August and returning to their
districts, especially in the critical months before an election when retail
politics can make or break an incumbent. But this year is devastatingly
different.
“It’s even
more difficult to be back in the district because there is a lot of frustration
and anger out there directed towards Congress,” Rep. Anthony Brown (D-Md.)
said. “A lot of people understand where the holdup is — in the Senate — but
most voters just know that hey, Congress isn’t providing relief.”
House
leaders gave their members permission to leave Washington this weekend as long
as they can return within 24 hours to vote on an eventual deal, if one is ever
reached.
“We will
not start the August district work period until we pass appropriate Covid-19
relief to meet the current health and economic crisis,” House Majority Leader
Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) announced on the floor Friday.
Hoyer’s
announcement wasn’t exactly a surprise. But a collective groan could almost be
heard across the Capitol as his words reverberated through the House chamber.
That means members will need to make yet another back-and-forth trek from their
districts amid the raging global pandemic, with coronavirus cases still spiking
in dozens of states and an estimated 1,000 Americans dying a day from Covid-19.
Some
lawmakers said they may not return for the vote — which would put them at
further risk of contracting the virus as cases continue to surge — and would
instead cast their vote by proxy for the next round of relief.
Speaker
Nancy Pelosi and White House negotiators have made little headway on a
bipartisan coronavirus relief deal, despite meeting for several hours over
several days this week.
Instead,
leaders of both parties have continued their public posturing — pointing
fingers at the other side for allowing critical federal unemployment benefits
and a federal evictions moratorium to lapse, even as jobless claims tick up and
experts worry about the economy cratering.
“We don’t
have shared values, that’s just the way it is,” Pelosi declared to reporters
Friday. Meanwhile, White House chief of staff Mark Meadows took to his own
podium at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue to accuse Democrats of causing
the impasse.
In the
Senate — where the House’s nearly $3.5 trillion relief bill has languished for
two months — the fingerpointing intensified Thursday as senators from each
party made opposing procedural motions intended to ramp up the pressure on the
other. In the end, the chamber adjourned with no resolution, and Senate
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has sought only to pin the blame on Pelosi and
Democrats.
But even
some Senate Republicans — who had, for weeks, resisted a deal — told reporters
this week that they felt uncomfortable leaving for the weekend after the Senate
adjourned Thursday with the unemployment aid set to expire. The Senate plans to
begin its lengthy summer recess on Aug. 10, though that date, too, could be
pushed back without a deal.
“I'd prefer
to stay here today and tomorrow and get it done like we did the last time, but
apparently there's just not enough progress to justify that,” Sen. Marco Rubio
(R-Fla.) said before senators left Washington on Thursday.
“I remain
hopeful that at some point next week, you know, people come back and realize
that we're going to have to do this eventually, so might as well do it
now."
Sen. Kevin
Cramer (R-N.D.), too, said lawmakers likely would have stayed the weekend if a
deal were just one or two days away. But that scenario remains unlikely.
"We
can pretend that we're here working, but if we're just here killing time for an
eventuality next week, I think you have to play up those practical things,” he
said.
Tensions in
the Capitol had already been escalating before this week’s standoff in coronavirus
talks. Last week, Rep. Ted Yoho (R-Fla.) was witnessed verbally harassing Rep.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) over her political views just steps from the
House chamber. And some rank-and-file GOP lawmakers tore into one of their own
leaders, Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming, over disagreements on Trump.
Not to
mention it’s been a devastating few weeks in the House with the death of Rep.
John Lewis (D-Ga.) on July 17 and the days of public grieving that followed.
Before that, the nationwide reckoning over race led to the first real
discussions on police reform in years, but ultimately collapsed amid partisan
disputes.
“The
biggest thing going through most of our heads probably right now is still John
Lewis. He was such a good friend to all of us,” Rep. Juan Vargas (D-Calif.)
said. “To have so many inspiring views, thoughts, remembrances of him, and then
to have the drag we’re in. That’s disappointing.”
Anxiety in
the Capitol intensified further this week after Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) —
who is notoriously lax about wearing masks — tested positive for the virus,
raising new questions about safety inside the building.
That all
comes after a brutal year, with the Senate impeachment trial of President
Donald Trump in February that was over just weeks before Congress was forced to
swiftly shutter the Capitol and draft massive legislation dealing with the
coronavirus pandemic and the economic recession that followed.
Since then,
the year has mushroomed into chaos as a Congress established in the 18th
century struggled to respond to a 21st-century pandemic. Not even the August
recess is spared — something lawmakers insist is the furthest thing from their
mind as Congress struggles to reconcile over a coronavirus aid bill with
millions of people struggling to pay their bills and provide food for their
families.
“We have to
stand ready. We know that we’re actually not going to have an August work
period [until it's done],” said Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.).
Acidente com Alfa Pendular: especialista aponta para
“incompetência criminosa da Infra-estruturas de Portugal”
Luís Cabral da Silva diz que “não se programa a viagem de
um comboio pendular por uma linha que tem lá trabalhos de manutenção. Isto não
entra na cabeça de ninguém”. Descarrilamento em Soure fez dois mortos.
O especialista em
Transportes e Vias de Comunicação Luís Cabral da Silva considerou esta
sexta-feira que o acidente com o comboio Alfa Pendular, em Soure, que matou
duas pessoas, foi “criminosamente grave” e “inexplicável”.
“Não se percebe
como é que um comboio Alfa Pendular vá bater numa dresina (máquina) que está a
fazer a manutenção da linha onde o comboio vai passar. Isto é um exemplo da irresponsabilidade
completa”, afirmou o especialista à agência Lusa.
O descarrilamento
de um comboio Alfa Pendular, na Linha do Norte, após colidir com uma máquina de
trabalhos da Infra-estruturas de Portugal (empresa criada em 2015, da fusão
entre a Rede Ferroviária Nacional - Refer e a Estradas de Portugal), provocou
esta sexta-feira dois mortos, seis feridos graves e 36 feridos ligeiros,
segundo o último balanço feito pelo comandante distrital de operações de
Coimbra, Carlos Luís Tavares.
No entender de
Luís Cabral da Silva existem “várias questões técnicas que falharam e que
motivaram este acidente. “Em rigor, o comboio não deveria lá chegar por causa
do controlo de velocidade. Pelos vistos chegou e bateu. Não se programa a
viagem de um comboio pendular por uma linha que tem lá trabalhos de manutenção.
Isto não entra na cabeça de ninguém”, criticou.
O especialista
questionou ainda o facto de o sinal da linha não estar fechado e de não ter
existido “qualquer comunicação” sobre a presença da máquina no local. “Quem é
que a mandou para lá? Acho que isto não se deve fazer durante o dia. Tudo isto
aponta para uma grande incompetência criminosa da Infra-estruturas de
Portugal”, sublinhou.
O Alfa Pendular,
que transportava 212 passageiros, seguia no sentido sul-norte, tendo saído de
Santa Apolónia, em Lisboa, às 14h, e tinha como destino final Braga.
O acidente
ocorreu, pelas 15h30, perto da vila de Soure, mais concretamente junto à
localidade de Matas, na região Centro.
Federal
agents accused of behaving like an 'occupying army' are said to be pulling out
of Portland, Oregon, in an embarrassing climbdown by the White House, but many
protesters are sceptical over whether the agents will actually withdraw from
the city.
The force,
which have been dubbed by some as 'Donald Trump’s troops', were sent in by the
president a month ago to end what he called 'anarchy' during Black Lives Matter
protests sparked after the police killing of George Floyd.
The
Guardian's Chris McGreal looks at what Trump was hoping to gain by sending
paramilitaries into the city, if and how they will leave, and how their presence
has fuelled anger among most residents
Federal
agents show stronger force at Portland protests despite order to withdraw
Bournemouth council asked people to steer
clear of some areas because physical distancing was not possible.
Tens of
thousands of people descended on beaches on the south coast of England on the
hottest day of the year, prompting some local authorities to plead with people
to stay away so that social distancing could be maintained.
While many
parts of the north of England were facing a fresh lockdown, stretches of
beaches at Bournemouth, Poole and Brighton were packed.
At
Bournemouth, where a major incident was declared last month because the beach
was so busy, the council asked people to steer clear of some areas because
physical distancing was not possible.
Despite the
warnings, groups of up to 50 teenagers, and men and women in their early 20s
gathered. Security guards removed some men who were drinking under the pier but
no attempts were made to close the beaches or to to ask people to leave.
One
sun-seeker, 18-year-old Lizzie Jones from Portsmouth, who was on the beach with
a dozen friends, said she felt perfectly safe and didn’t feel she was putting
anyone at risk. “We’re out here in the fresh air. People are a bit close but I
don’t think there’s much of a danger,” she said.
Some car
parks were full, prompting scores of people to abandon their vehicles
illegally.
A digital
sign informed people that the beach was “too busy”. A new app produced by the
local authority, Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole council, urged people to
avoid long stretches of the beaches with the message: “Avoid, safe social
distancing not possible.”
Guardian
Today: the headlines, the analysis, the debate - sent direct to you
Read more
Tom, who
was on the beach with a group of school and college friends aged 17 and 18 who
had travelled to Bournemouth on the train from Southampton, said: “It feels
safe to me. I don’t know anyone who has had coronavirus. Until I do I don’t
think it will feel real to me.”
Local
people were wary. Rod Underhill, 65, was sunbathing outside his beach hut. He
said it was clear that large groups of young people were not social distancing.
But he said: “We’ve worked out our route to and from the beach to make sure
we’ll avoid the worst of it. You just have to be sensible.”
Vikki
Slade, the leader of BCP council, said the resorts were excited to welcome
people. She said Bournemouth and Poole were stretched in June when up to half a
million people arrived at a time when hotels, restaurants and pubs were closed.
“I was
appalled at the resulting littering, illegal parking, anti-social behaviour and
personal abuse that our hard-working teams had to deal with,” she said.
“As a
result of our experiences we have introduced marshals at busy car park
entrances, extended our security provision, enhanced our first-aid provision
and put additional traffic management plans in place.”
The council
and police were ready to set up road blocks and tow cars dangerously parked
away. Police officers were working for extended hours and leave was cancelled
for some.
Further
east, Brighton and Hove city council expressed fears over the number of people
on its beaches. It tweeted: “We’re concerned about the number of people in the
city. If you’re not already here, please don’t travel to the city today. There
is limited capacity on public transport. Large numbers make it impossible to
maintain physical distancing.”
In Kent,
Thanet council said some of its most popular strands were full. It tweeted:
“Please avoid our most popular beaches today as it’s now extremely busy. We
have 19 miles of coastline, so consider all the places you could visit or come
back at a quieter time.”
The Met
Office said the temperature reached 37.8C at Heathrow and 37.3C at Kew Gardens,
making it the third hottest day on the record in UK.
A “yellow
warning” was issued by the Met Office for thunderstorms valid from 4pm on
Friday until midnight across large parts of east and south-east England. Cooler
weather is expected for the weekend.
The sex
offender Jeffrey Epstein allegedly tried to gather incriminating material
against Prince Andrew by forcing an underage girl to have sex with him,
according to newly released court documents.
The papers
released by a court in New York say the alleged encounter took place on the
late US financier’s private island in the US Virgin Islands. A document claims
Epstein instructed the girl, referred to as Jane Doe #3, to “give the prince
whatever he demanded and report back to him on the details of the sexual
abuse”.
Epstein
allegedly sexually trafficked the girl to powerful people to “ingratiate
himself with them for business, personal, political and financial gain, as well
as to obtain potential blackmail information”. They included “numerous
prominent American politicians, powerful business executives, foreign
presidents, a well-known prime minister, and other world leaders.”
The papers,
part of prior litigation, also contain the claim that Andrew tried to lobby the
US on behalf of Epstein to help secure a “favourable plea arrangement”.
The papers
are part of a 2015 civil court battle between Epstein and his former girlfriend
Ghislaine Maxwell, and Virginia Roberts Giuffre, now 36, who accused the couple
of sexual abuse. She also claimed she was forced to have sex with Prince
Andrew, which he vehemently denies.
It is not
clear from the court papers whether Jane Doe #3 is Giuffre.
The papers
were released after a judge rejected an attempt by Maxwell’s lawyers to keep
them secret. A friend of Prince Andrew said: “The US federal appeals court said
in 2019 these allegations should be treated with ‘extreme caution’. Allegations
are not the same as facts, which is the essential premise on which justice
works. Let’s see if these allegations stand up, because precious few about the
duke do – where’s the proof?”
On the
lobbying claim, the friend added: “This allegation is a straightforward
untruth. No ifs, no buts.”
Lawyers for
two other alleged victims in the 2015 civil case, referred to as Jane Doe #1
and #2, requested the release of documents showing the alleged lobbying by the
Prince.
They are
seeking “documents regarding Epstein’s lobbying efforts to persuade the
government to give him a more favourable plea arrangement and/or
non-prosecution agreement, including efforts on his behalf by Prince Andrew and
the former Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz”.
It is
claimed in the unsealed papers that an island orgy was one of three occasions
when Jane Doe #3 was forced to have sex with Andrew. The other locations were
Maxwell’s London flat and and in New York.
No precise
dates are given for the alleged incidents. But it is claimed Jane Doe #3 was
first approached by Maxwell in 1999, when she was 15. Epstein kept her as a
“sex slave” from about 1999 to 2002, before she escaped and fled to another
country, according to a document.
Similar allegations
about Prince Andrew having sex with an underage girl were ordered to be struck
from court records in 2015 in the civil case. At the time the judge did not
rule on the veracity of the claims.
Epstein
killed himself last summer while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges.
Maxwell was
arrested recently on federal charges that she recruited at least three girls,
including one as young as 14, for Epstein to sexually abuse in the 1990s.
Prosecutors said she also joined in the abuse. Maxwell is in jail awaiting
trial in New York.
Ghislaine Maxwell trained underage girls as sex
slaves, documents allege
Unsealed testimony from 2015 case reveals series of
claims about British socialite’s role in Epstein sex-trafficking ring
Ghislaine
Maxwell sexually abused underage girls and joined Jeffrey Epstein in directing
Virginia Roberts Giuffre to be sexually abused by others, Giuffre claimed in a
cache of documents that has been unsealed in the US.
She
“trained me as a sex slave”, Giuffre is quoted as saying.
The
documents were part of now-settled civil litigation against the British
socialite and include claims about her alleged involvement in the
sex-trafficking scheme of Epstein, her longtime confidant and a convicted sex
offender.
The
documents stem from a 2015 civil action brought against Maxwell by Giuffre, who
has claimed Maxwell lured her into Epstein’s orbit as a teenager under the
guise of offering work as a masseuse.
She said
the couple subsequently pressured her into having sex with numerous rich or
notable men, including Prince Andrew, US politicians, wealthy entrepreneurs, a
famous scientist, and a fashion designer.
Maxwell and
all of the accused men have long denied those allegations.
The files
include personal emails between Epstein and Maxwell, as well as information
from a discussion between Giuffre and her lawyer.
“‘It is
your contention that ‘Ghislaine Maxwell had sex with underage girls virtually
every day when I was around her’, correct?” Giuffre was asked during a May 2016
deposition contained in this document cache.
“Yes.”
“All right.
With whom did Ghislaine Maxwell have sex in your presence?” she was asked.
“Well,
there’s a lot of girls that were involved. We weren’t on a first-name basis
with each other. I wouldn’t be able to give you lists of names of girls. It was
continuous,” Giuffre answered.
Shortly
after saying Epstein’s US Virgin Islands estate was “a place where orgies were
a constant thing that took place”, Giuffre said she “had to” perform oral sex
on Maxwell, in Epstein’s presence by the pool.
When asked
whom Maxwell directed her to have sex with, Giuffre said: “I’m going to
continue to tell you that they both directed me to do it. It was part of my
training. They both told me: ‘You’ve got tickets to go here. This is who you’re
meeting, and this is what you’re doing.’
“I’m trying
to tell you that they both did, Ghislaine and Jeffrey both directed me. They
both paid me and they both directed me,” Giuffre said when pressed.
“You have
to understand that Jeffrey and Ghislaine are joined hip by [the] hip, OK? So
they both trafficked me. Ghislaine brought me in for the purpose of being
trafficked. Jeffrey was just as a part of it as she was. She was just as a part
of it as he was,” Giuffre said. “They trafficked me to many people. And to be
honest, there is people I could name, and then there’s people that are just a
blur. There was so much happening.
“Ghislaine
Maxwell brought me into the sex-trafficking industry. She’s the one who abused
me on a regular basis. She’s the one that procured me, told me what to do,
trained me as a sex slave, abused me physically, abused me mentally,” Giuffre
also said.
Many
documents in this case have been subject to an intense legal battle. Maxwell’s
attorneys in the civil suit had argued to keep many records under seal,
maintaining previously that “this series of pleadings concerns [attempts] to
compel Ms Maxwell to answer intrusive questions about her sex life”.
The documents,
they argued, are “extremely personal, confidential and subject to considerable
abuse by the media”.
The
Manhattan federal court judge Loretta Preska ruled on 23 July that they should
be unsealed, however, saying: “The court finds that the countervailing
interests identified fail to rebut the presumption of public access.”
Documents
involving Maxwell’s deposition have not yet been released pending an appeal by
lawyers for Maxwell.
Epstein
killed himself last summer while awaiting trial on sex-trafficking charges.
In a
separate case, federal authorities arrested Maxwell on 2 July and charged her
for allegedly participating in Epstein’s sex-trafficking. Maxwell, the daughter
of the late publisher Robert Maxwell, pleaded not guilty on 14 July, and is in
custody awaiting trial in New York.
Maxwell has
repeatedly denied wrongdoing. Her lawyers have said she “vigorously denies the
charges” and is “entitled to the presumption of innocence”.
Giuffre has
been interviewed by the FBI, but no charges were brought based on her
allegations and she is not one of the three alleged victims in the current
criminal case against Maxwell.
The
documents released on Thursday help shed light on Maxwell and Epstein’s
relationship. In one of the personal emails between Epstein and Maxwell,
Epstein wrote on 25 January 2015: “You have done nothing wrong and i woudl
[sic] urge you to start acting like it. “Go outside, head high, not as an
esacping[sic] convict. go to parties. deal with it.”
The
exchange followed a request from Maxwell, who was romantically linked to
Epstein, to be distanced from his dating life.
These
emails also appear to contradict her lawyers’ claim that Maxwell had not had
contact with Epstein for more than 10 years, which they said in making an
argument for bail.
Some of the
documents also relate to previous claims of Giuffre, such as the former US
president Bill Clinton riding on Epstein’s plane, and allegations about the
lawyer Alan Dershowitz. Dershowitz, who had worked as Epstein’s attorney, has
repeatedly denied misconduct.
“I sought
release of all the documents because they prove that all the allegations
against me are false,” Dershowitz said in an email to the Guardian when asked
for comment.
During
questioning about Bill Clinton, the documents show Giuffre said she saw the
former president on Epstein’s island. Representatives for Clinton did not
immediately respond to a request for comment.
Clinton has
distanced himself from Epstein, and in a 2019 statement a spokesperson said:
“President Clinton knows nothing about the terrible crimes Jeffrey Epstein
pleaded guilty to in Florida some years ago, or those with which he has been
recently charged in New York.”
The
documents also show that Giuffre was asked in an interview whether Epstein ever
bragged about the age of any girls with whom he had sexual relations. “Yes, he
did. He did all the time,” she said. “The worst one that I heard from his own
mouth [were these] pretty 12-year-old girls he had flown in for his birthday.
It was a surprise birthday gift from one of his friends and they were from
France,” she alleged.
Epstein
told Giuffre powerful people owed him favours, according to the documents.
“Lots of people owed him favors from what he told me … That’s why I believe he
does so many favors in the first place.”
Giuffre was
also asked whether Prince Andrew – whom she has claimed she had sex with as a
teenager at Epstein’s behest – would have information about the financier.
“He would
know a lot of the truth,” she said.
In 2015, a
judge struck out the material concerning Prince Andrew as “immaterial and
impertinent”. He has vehemently denied allegations of misconduct.
Maxwell met
Giuffre at Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club in south Florida, where the then
teenager was working as a locker-room attendant.
In the
civil lawsuit, which has since been settled, Giuffre claimed that Maxwell had
defamed her by stating that she was a liar for accusing Epstein and Maxwell of
sexual impropriety.
An
extensive collection of documents in this case was also unsealed in August 2019
that featured claims, since denied, that world leaders participated in
Epstein’s alleged sex ring. These filings were disclosed shortly after
Epstein’s arrest last July.
Sheriffs
around the country are refusing to enforce or are even actively resisting
Covid-19 mask laws and lockdowns, while others have permitted or encouraged
armed vigilantism in response to Black Lives Matter anti-racism protests.
Critics say
both phenomena are related to a far-right “constitutional sheriffs” movement,
which believes that sheriffs are the highest constitutional authority in the
country, with the power – and duty – to resist state and federal governments.
When
Richard K Jones, the sheriff of Butler county, Ohio, said recently that he
wasn’t going to be the “mask police”, and would not be enforcing Governor Mike
DeWine’s mandates for high-risk counties, he became the latest in a wave of
sheriffs either refusing to enforce coronavirus-related public health rules, or
encouraging people to break them in the midst of a worsening pandemic.
At least
eight county sheriffs in Texas have said they will not enforce Governor Greg
Abbott’s mask mandate. Tracy Murphree, the Denton county sheriff, explained to
a local newspaper he believed “the constitution trumps everything”, and, “when
people are told to do something that violates their civil rights, it invites chaos
and protest”.
At least
three sheriffs in Michigan, three in North Carolina, three in California, two
in New Mexico and one in Nevada made similar announcements about state orders.
At least one Tennessee sheriff has questioned the constitutionality of local
government mask orders which the state has made provision for.
In North
Carolina, Jimmy Thornton, the Sampson county sheriff, called Democratic
governor Roy Cooper’s mask order “not only unconstitutional, but unenforceable”
in a Facebook post on 24 June, adding that “my deputies will NOT enforce an
executive order that I feel violates the constitutional liberties of citizens”.
In that
state, earlier in the course of the pandemic, at least 10 sheriffs had said
that they would not enforce the state’s lockdown restrictions.
At least
two sheriffs who refused to enforce lockdown orders – in Arizona and California
– subsequently contracted Covid-19.
In
Washington state last month, meanwhile, at least two sheriffs have gone further
than saying that they won’t enforce the law.
Rob Snaza,
the Lewis county sheriff, said in a speech which became a viral video that
anyone who complied with the instructions was a “sheep”. His counterpart in
nearby Klickitat county, Bob Songer, called the governor, Jay Inslee, an
“idiot” who was “violating the liberties and constitutional rights of the
individual” by making mask-wearing compulsory.
Adam
Fortney, the sheriff of Snohomish county, Washington, wrote on Facebook in
April that he would not be “enforcing an order preventing religious freedoms or
constitutional rights”.
Fortney’s
claim that Inslee’s orders were unconstitutional has inspired a recall effort
against him.
He was one
of at least 60 sheriffs nationwide who had pushed back on lockdown rules by
May, according to a report by the Marshall Project, a criminal justice focussed
non-profit news organization.
In turn,
many of the sheriffs refusing to enforce mask orders have previously resisted
states’ attempts to place further restrictions on firearms.
Songer, the
Klickitat county sheriff, was lauded in conservative media in 2019 when he said
he would not enforce the provisions of a ballot measure that, among other
things, placed age restrictions on the purchase of assault rifles.
Aitor
Narvaiza, the Elko county, Nevada, sheriff who has refused to enforce Governor
Steve Sisolak’s mask order, was involved last year in an attempt to create
“second amendment sanctuaries” in rural counties after state lawmakers sought
to beef up background checks.
Daryle
Wheeler, the sheriff of Bonner county, Idaho, has this year both accused
Governor Brad Little of “suspending the constitution” with lockdown rules, and
filed suit against the city of Sandpoint after it sought to ban guns at a
municipal festival.
According
to Cloee Cooper, a research analyst at Political Research Associates, this is
not coincidental. All of these sheriffs are members of organizations associated
with the constitutional sheriffs movement, or under their growing influence.
With its
origins in ideas of “county supremacy” first pushed by far-right groups opposed
to desegregation, the idea that county sheriffs have a “legal and ethical duty
to refuse to enforce state and federal policies and laws they believe to be
unconstitutional” has become the basis of a nationwide network, the
Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (CSPOA) headed by
Richard Mack.
In an
email, Cooper said that her research had revealed that “Richard Mack was
encouraging sheriffs to defy shelter-in-place orders and support reopen
protests”. While the CSPOA was founded to resist Obama-era firearms
restrictions, they had pivoted to resisting mask and lockdown orders, defining
them as signs of “impending tyranny”.
She added
that constitutional sheriffs had moved to deputize posses in response to Black
Lives Matter protests, or had fueled false rumors about busloads of “Antifa”
activists rolling into rural areas.
While
constitutional sheriffs claim to act in the name of public safety, they may
actually encourage disorder. One research paper suggests that the election of a
constitutionalist sheriff in a county may increase the likelihood of political
violence against federal officials by up to 50%.
Cooper
added that “sheriffs that openly align with the Patriot movement, like
constitutional sheriffs, (pave) the way for a further slide toward
authoritarianism.”
This
article was amended on 31 July 2020 to clarify that Roy Cooper is a Democrat,
not Republican.
