sexta-feira, 30 de abril de 2021

Some Notes on 100 Days of Biden Style

 


Some Notes on 100 Days of Biden Style

 

Though it took Joe Biden decades to reach the presidency, in terms of style and message, every day counted toward the goal.

 

Once he was elected president, the “cool Grandpa” vibe Joe Biden cultivated on the campaign trail metamorphosed into the dignified image of a commander in chief who requires no “power suit” to telegraph authority.Credit...Erin Scott for The New York Times

 


By Guy Trebay

April 28, 2021

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/28/style/biden-100-days-style.html?action=click&module=Features&pgtype=Homepage

 

1. He spent nearly a half-century in rehearsals.

If you want to assess Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s first 100 days in office, it helps to wind back nearly 18,000 days to the beginning. When President Biden was first elected to the United States Senate, in Stone Age 1972, the country was still mired in Vietnam; the Watergate break-in that would tank the Nixon incumbency failed when bungling burglars dressed in business suits and surgical gloves were nabbed by members of the Capitol Police department’s “bum squad” (as their lookout sat in a motel across the street watching “Attack of the Puppet People”); and the first episode of “The Price is Right” was aired on CBS, hosted by Bob Barker.

 

“The Price is Right” is still around after nearly five decades. So, of course, is Mr. Biden. (Mr. Barker, too, it should be noted.) Although now crowding 80, President Biden retains some of the mediagenic qualities that ushered him into the political limelight just as political theater became a daily amusement thanks to a constant — if not yet a 24-hour — news cycle.

 

2. He had a head start in the looks department.

Politicians are, obviously, under no obligation to be comely — male ones, anyway. Still, starting with the Kennedy presidency — the first in American history to be fully televised — it has never hurt any candidate’s prospects to be conventionally good-looking. We’ve seen the young Joe images on Twitter — he of the boyish smile and a short-sleeved button-down red shirt. He looks a bit like a scout leader, something that in those days you could say as a term of approval.

 

The young Biden appears alert, easygoing, guy next door. In “Prime Green,” Robert Stone’s somewhat obscure memoir of a weed-fueled odyssey he took across the United States in the ’60s, he made a stop in Salt Lake City. While the novelist spared little affection for the state’s high desert capital, he indulged in some generalizations about its population, saying of the locals that they were perhaps the best-looking folks in the country, provided you like “the Anglo type.”

 

Mr. Biden is physically cast in that same mold; his was the face of a second lead in a ’40s B-movie. And if anatomy is presidential destiny, Mr. Biden slots easily into the role — somewhere between the reverse-engineered Everyman that was Ronald Reagan and John F. Kennedy, the doomed Camelot princeling.

 

“I think he played to all of that,” the men’s wear designer Billy Reid recently said of Mr. Biden’s ability to capitalize on his natural attributes. “I think he shaped his image in a Kennedy-esque way. He’s cultivated this super-American, East Coast kind of look through the years, and he seems very comfortable with that.”

 

3. He found a formula and refined it.

In fact, there were several formulas that shifted as Mr. Biden went from candidate to president-elect to the inauguration. The man the White House press secretary Jen Psaki referred to early on as looking to project a “cool grandpa” vibe sharpened his message as his campaign evolved. As the writer Geoff Colvin noted in a shrewd analysis for Fortune, candidate Biden followed longstanding management-consulting practice by dressing like the clients but a little bit better.

 

Other than at the debates, candidate Biden’s preferred uniform was a navy jacket, unmatched (often gray flannel) trousers and an open-neck, striped button-down shirt. If you drilled down into the details, his footwear could occasionally be seen as too fancy: Regular Joes tend not to wear driving moccasins. Yet the mirrored shades that caused the longtime political analyst Mark Shields to grouse that the country needed to see “less of aviators Joe and more of Scranton Joe” did not, in the end, seem to bother voters and may even have aided in diverting attention from the glaring fact that, if elected, Mr. Biden would become the oldest man in history to assume the presidency.

 

Then Mr. Biden won. And almost immediately his attire shifted. Even before the pandemic lockdown, the 400-year-old uniform that is a man’s suit was in trouble. (“We hardly see anyone in a suit anymore — other than at a wedding, a funeral, in court or if they’re a politician,” Mr. Reid said.) Still, as Mr. Biden’s advisers are clearly aware, there remains no sartorial marker of authority and status that reads more clearly than a suit. And, from the moment The Associated Press declared Mr. Biden the winner, he has seldom been seen in anything other than dark-colored suits worn with crisp white shirts (button-cuffed) striped ties and dark lace-ups.

 

“The thing I like is that his suits are impeccably tailored,” the men’s wear designer Todd Snyder said. “Where a lot of men typically go too big, Biden is a good example of exactly how a suit should be worn.”

 

“His trousers have the perfect proportion and the right amount of break in the pants,” he added, referring to that point where a trouser hem meets the top of one’s shoes. You have only to observe the style missteps at the Academy Awards to know that even the assistance of the world’s top designers and stylists is no guarantee that guys as advantaged as Brad Pitt or Denzel Washington get this part right.

 

“He cuts such a chic silhouette,” said Michael Sebastian, the editor of Esquire. “And that does several things. It gives him the appearance of being way more youthful than he is. And it communicates something important about his governing style.” That is, Mr. Sebastian said, Mr. Biden looks as if he has come prepared to do business.

 

4. That is, he looks presidential.

If clothing, as Mr. Colvin noted, is a language, the Biden message is one of physical command and taut assurance. While it was easy enough during the campaign for his opponent to snipe about a “Basement Biden” hiding out in his rec room in a Barcalounger, the physical evidence suggests Mr. Biden was likelier to have been putting in miles on a Peloton.

 

“He’s obviously fit for a guy of any age, and that never hurts when it comes to wearing clothes,” Mr. Snyder said.

 

From Inauguration Day onward, the clothes President Biden has worn tend toward formal single-button suits in solid dark colors (designed by Ralph Lauren for the Inauguration and since then by designers the White House declines to identify); ties generally of Democrat blue, though on occasion reverting to stripes but with the stripes usually going from the wearer’s upper right to lower left, in the American manner (Barack Obama’s English-style rep stripes tilted in the other direction); and shoes that are softly buff-polished.

 

Sure, there are elements that can be interpreted as elitist, like the stainless Rolex Datejust that, as my colleague Alex Williams piqued some liberals by noting, Mr. Biden wore to his swearing in. (Presidents Clinton and Bush favored Timex; Mr. Obama’s timepieces came from Shinola.)

 

5. He made history by wearing P.P.E.

The most potent symbol Mr. Biden has worn, of course, has been the protective mask that drew derision on the campaign trail but may have been instrumental in getting him elected.

 

6. Anatomy is still destiny.

Without question it is the body inside the clothes and the president’s carriage that carries the most significance when it comes to looking at President Biden’s style. Through both his ostentatious peppiness and the military uprightness of his bearing, he seems determined to dispel doubts about a man of his years carrying the burden of the presidency while simultaneously telegraphing physical preparedness and an aura of steady authority.

 

“He doesn’t need a power suit to communicate power,” said Valerie Steele, the director and chief curator at the Museum at the Fashion Institute of Technology, recalling Donald Trump’s $6,000 Brioni suits. “He’s old school in the sense that he’s dressing in clothes and in a manner that is respectful of the job and of us as Americans. People of my dad’s generation would have gotten that instinctively.”

 

In that sense, President Biden’s austere wardrobe choices are a throwback. “His clothes are like a uniform telling you that he understands the job and he’s carrying it out in service to you as citizens,” Ms. Steele said. At a time when the boundaries between public and private are badly eroded, and when dressing like an adult baby in public is more rule than exception, it is reassuring to see a presidential figure who is unambiguously adult.

 

7. The Doug.

There is, of course, another man at the center of American political life. That would be Douglas Emhoff, the husband of Vice President Kamala Harris — former entertainment lawyer, adoring husband, adorable dad-bod sex symbol for a fervent and growing #DougHive fan base.

 

Mr. Emhoff is not the first male political spouse, but he is the first second gentleman in history. (Check out the T-shirts.) And while it is too soon to read the runes for cues to the workings of a relationship that breaks so starkly with White House tradition, it is clear at this point in the arc of a Biden administration that Mr. Emhoff is content to tuck himself behind the first female, first African-American and first Indian-American vice president. Aside from a Ralph Lauren suit he wore to the inauguration, he dresses the part of Eve’s Rib in “Kamala” T-shirts and ball caps blazoned with the Bison logo of the football team at Howard University, Ms. Harris’s alma mater.

 

If Prince Philip will be remembered as Queen Elizabeth’s “liegeman of life and limb,” Mr. Emhoff may go down in history as Vice President Harris’s cheerleader in chief.

Biden recovery plan, China population to drop, India Covid, "Cash for curtains" saga

TRUMPOLOGY Trump’s Battle to Win the First 100 Days

 




 

Magazine

TRUMPOLOGY

Trump’s Battle to Win the First 100 Days

 

The former president has been on an increasingly manic crusade to knock his successor and buff his own battered legacy.

 

“In some respects, Donald Trump gains strength by being marginalized, by being underestimated. That’s what gets him up in the morning. That’s what gets his heartbeat going. He is going to fight every battle and ultimately lose every war. That’s just the nature of who he is. And it’s going to happen again in his post-presidency. It’s the one thing you can count on with Donald Trump. He can’t let anything go. He’s going to fight everything to the fullest extent that he’s able. And ultimately he’s going to lose.”

 

Illustrations by Barry Blitt

 

By MICHAEL KRUSE

04/29/2021 04:30 AM EDT

Michael Kruse is a senior staff writer at POLITICO and POLITICO Magazine.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/04/29/donald-trump-100-days-484926

 

There’s not just one 100-day clock that’s reached its peak this week—there are two.

 

First, of course, is Joe Biden’s—the collective assessment of what he’s said and done since his inauguration as the 46th president on January 20.

 

Then, though, there is Trump’s—the 45th president’s first 100 days as the antipope of Mar-a-Lago. On full display has been his guiding, lifelong, zero-sum belief: For there to be a winner, there must also be a loser—and if Biden is the one, then Trump is the other. And as this arbitrary but important and traditional mile-marker has gotten closer and closer—as Biden’s ambitious agenda has continued to elicit higher favorability ratings and polling numbers and early comparisons to some of history’s most effective presidents—Trump’s agitation has gotten only more palpable and pronounced.

 

From the Florida perch he has turned into the unofficial capital of the GOP and the most important address in American politics not in Washington, D.C., Trump’s delivered a crescendoing, double-barreled barrage from his Save America PAC and his post-presidential office in Palm Beach. The statements bear his telltale mix of strange punctuation and catchphrases along with an equally characteristic clamoring for credit and angling for attention by attacking the man who beat him last fall.

 

“We will WIN, and we will WIN BIG!”

 

“Our country is being destroyed by the Democrats!”

 

“Except for massive voter fraud, this was a campaign that was easily won by your favorite Republican President, me!”

 

Trump has hosted at his private club some of the most powerful Republicans plus a spate of aspiring elected officials vying for his approval. He’s deployed his emailed blasts to zero in on targets for vengeance while offering up to loyalists across the country his imprimatur. He’s welcomed well-heeled would-be donors.

 

And it’s not just what he’s doing—it’s what he’s not. He’s not working on a memoir, and he’s not putting into motion a presidential library, after-the-Oval activities that are nothing if not conventional but also acknowledgements of a change in status—to more was than is. Trump, on the other hand, isn’t acting like a has-been—he’s acting like a still-here. Indeed, ramping up of late the volume and frenzy of his declarations, he is trying not only to not fade like any other former leader of the free world but to stoke his considerable remaining political sway—his first 100 days out of office a brazen continuation of his lack of a concession in the wake of his defeat.

 

“Trump is an autobot of predictable behaviors,” Trump biographer Tim O’Brien told me. “He’s moving through his post-presidential days so far the way he’s moved through everything in his life.”

 

“He was an angry insurgent when he campaigned for the presidency. He was an angry insurgent as president. And as a former president, he continues to be an angry insurgent,” presidential historian Mark Updegrove told me.

 

 

 

No sentient soul, obviously, expected Trump to quietly recede from the scene.

 

In the course of my reporting during his waning days in the White House, people predicted “something remarkably new,” “a post-presidency like we’ve never seen,” and a “shadow ex-president.” At times, though, Trump hasn’t been as constant and as omnipresent as many were expecting. Without the use of Air Force One, and his signature 757, too, he’s mostly stayed put, making limited public appearances, staging not a single rally, traveling almost not at all. He’s plainly been hampered by his bans from Facebook and Twitter. He’s at odds with some key leaders of the party he seeks to control. He’s also been stymied, it’s often seemed, by a disciplined successor determined to pay him next to no heed. Even so, Trump stands, stubbornly and sneeringly, as the GOP’s preeminent persona and donor draw. “All Republican roads,” as senior adviser Jason Miller put it this month, “lead to Mar-a-Lago.”

 

“It’s really amazing to me that a one-term president can be the kingmaker in a political party,” Slater Bayliss, a Tallahassee-based Republican strategist who describes himself as “no fan” of Trump, told me.

 

“I’m in awe,” said Alan Marcus, a former Trump publicist and another Trump critic. “I don’t know of any other candidate—any loser—who could have done this.”

 

“It’s just been really skillful the way that he has pulled this off. I mean, I tip my hat to the guy,” Bayliss said. “Other one-term presidents … they were done.”

 

Far from done, Trump’s activity is mounting markedly, as if he’s aware of this looming deadline. Over the past couple of weeks, he’s said more and more about more and more, sat for his first on-camera, hourlong interview and increasingly strayed from the squarely political to fire at fecund, culture-war cracks, lambasting LeBron James and even the Academy Awards.

 

Lurking, though, in Trump’s spiking Florida fever chart, in his intensifying efforts to reestablish himself, to re-insert himself, to reemphasize what he sees as his record of achievement, is an implicit recognition. That his legacy is uncertain. That the scope of his ongoing influence is an open question.

 

Those close to him scoff. “Let me tell you something,” said a former senior administration official who recently met with Trump in his office above the ballroom at Mar-a-Lago. “You ain’t seen nothing yet.”

 

Trump was tired.

 

“He was exhausted,” the former senior administration official said of the immediate aftermath of his tenure as president. “And he just did something he hadn’t done in five years. He just relaxed.”

 

People who’ve watched him closely over the years and even for decades? They noticed. And they were, they told me, surprised. “Quieter than I would have expected,” Trump biographer Michael D’Antonio said. “A slower pace than I had anticipated,” presidential historian Doug Brinkley said.

 

There were, of course, reasons beyond mere overwork. In his last few months in office, Trump fanned the flames of the toxic fiction that November’s election was illegitimate and therefore so, too, was his loss. Supporters of his stormed the Capitol, wanting to reverse the results, leaving five dead. He was impeached for a second time. All of this was in addition to Trump’s already pending legal peril. Regardless of the cause, however, he got off to a sluggish, almost subdued start as a former president, lying low (for him) for weeks after Air Force One dropped him off at PBI.

 

In January, near the end of the month, he “opened the Office of the Former President,” according to a “Statement from the Office of the Former President.” It was the first time he used in that context that word—“former.” Notably, it also was the last. Thereafter, he did away with the moniker evocative of the past and shifted to the number that will always be his—“Donald J. Trump, 45th President of the United States of America.” Trump loves comebacks. Former’s for losers.

 

Beyond practically obligatory, mostly pro forma communications concerning the impeachment proceedings and the trial in the Senate, at the end of which he again was acquitted, Trump endorsed former White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders in her Arkansas gubernatorial bid, highlighted numbers from a friendly pollster saying House Republican Conference Chair Liz Cheney of Wyoming was “extremely vulnerable” to a primary on account of her anti-Trump impeachment vote and crowed about his “very good and cordial” meeting with House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy at Mar-a-Lago. Trump took the opportunity as well to suggest his “endorsement means more than perhaps any endorsement at any time.”

 

In February? Largely similarly languid. He endorsed Kansas Senator Jerry Moran. Ditto Max Miller, a former aide, in his Ohio congressional primary effort against Anthony Gonzalez, another one of the 10 House GOP impeachment dissidents. He hosted Lindsey Graham and Steve Scalise. He did a trio of cable-news phone-ins the day of Rush Limbaugh’s death. He seemed to snap to with a lengthy statement excoriating Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, calling him “a dour, sullen, and unsmiling political hack.” He went to Orlando to speak at the annual gathering of the Conservative Political Action Committee. “Miss me yet?” he said. He listed the names of those who’ve crossed him. He promised retribution. He dropped a tease. “I will be actively working to elect strong, tough and smart Republican leaders,” he said. “We will take back the House. We will win the Senate. And then a Republican president will make a triumphant return to the White House—and I wonder who that will be.”

 

 

In March, though, Trump showed more oomph—much more.

 

Hunkered down at Mar-a-Lago, he rolled out endorsements—Senators Tim Scott of South Carolina, John Kennedy of Louisiana, Mike Crapo of Idaho, John Boozman of Montana, Jody Hice in his run for Secretary of State in Georgia against Trump nemesis Brad Raffensperger, others including a pair of Trump-supporting state party chairs. Never just an endorsement—“my Complete and Total Endorsement!” In an appreciation of sorts of Roy Blunt, the retiring Missouri senator, he introduced a new phrase—“the Impeachment Hoax #2 (IH-2).”

 

He blasted Karl Rove, the former top adviser to George W. Bush. A “pompous fool,” he called him. “If it weren’t for me,” he said in what he said about Rove, “the House would have lost 25 seats instead of gaining 15”—adding characteristic ranting about ratings (“31 million people listened to my CPAC speech online, and it had among the largest television audience of the week”) and working in some old standby epithets (“Liddle’ Bob Corker,” Jeff ‘Flakey’ Flake,” “Sleepy Joe”).

 

He urged former football star Herschel Walker to run for Senate in Georgia. He urged his supporters to give money to him and not to other Republican coffers. “Send your donation to Save America PAC at DonaldJTrump.com,” he said. “If you donate to our Save America PAC at DonaldJTrump.com, you are helping the America First movement and doing it right,” he said.

 

He went back to announcing his pending appearances on TV the way he did when he was tweeting from the residence in the White House.

 

“Enjoy!”

 

He went on Newsmax. He went on Fox News. He talked on the podcast of a Fox News host.

 

He kept calling the election rigged. “Rigged,” he said. “Illegitimate,” he said. “Fraud,” he said. “You saw what happened, 10:30 in the evening, all of a sudden, I said, ‘That’s a strange thing, why are they closing up certain places, right?’” he said in an impromptu speech at a wedding he dropped in on at his club. “It’s an honor to be here. It’s an honor to have you at Mar-a-Lago. You are a great and beautiful couple.”

 

He sent out a statement that read like a late-night tweet: “Where’s Durham? Is he a living, breathing human being? Will there ever be a Durham report?” He flagged Fox flattery from Florida Governor Ron DeSantis. He met with Marjorie Taylor Greene. He castigated public health professionals Drs. Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx. He called them “self-promoters trying to reinvent history.” He called Fauci “the king of ‘flip-flops’” and said he was “moving the goalposts to make himself look as good as possible.” He called Birx “a proven liar with very little credibility left” and “a very negative voice who didn’t have the right answers.”

 

“I was the one to get it done,” he said.

 

“Time has proven me correct,” he said.

 

Most importantly, though, Trump started in earnest, and in utterly unprecedented fashion, to aim his ire at Biden—from the situation at the border with Mexico to changes in tax plans to matters of pandemic response, endeavoring to retrain the spotlight on his legacy while repurposing lines of criticism he once endured as cudgels against his successor.

 

“Our border is now totally out of control thanks to the disastrous leadership of Joe Biden. … He has violated his oath of office to uphold our Constitution and enforce our laws,” he said in a statement on March 5. “All they had to do was keep this smooth-running system on autopilot. Instead, in the span of a just [sic] few weeks, the Biden Administration has turned a national triumph into a national disaster. They are in way over their heads,” he said on March 21. “Joe Biden’s radical plan to implement the largest tax hike in American history is a massive giveaway to China,” he said on March 31, describing it as a “classic globalist betrayal” and a “cruel and heartless attack on the American Dream.”

 

In April, the onslaught only intensified.

 

Along with more endorsements of allies and call-outs of antagonists, an expression of mourning of the passing of Prince Philip of the British royal family and the passing along of links to pro-Trump opinion pieces in the New York Post and the Palm Beach Daily News—“Wow, so nice!”—Trump’s missives this month got particularly manic, beginning around Easter.

 

“Why is it that every time the 2020 ELECTION FRAUD is discussed, the Fake News Media consistently states that such charges are baseless, unfounded, unwarranted, etc.? Sadly, there was massive fraud in the 2020 Presidential Election, and many very angry people understand that. With each passing day, and unfortunately for the Radical Left CRAZIES, more and more facts are coming out,” he said the Friday of the holiday weekend. “Other than that, Happy Easter!”

 

That Saturday, he decried “WOKE CANCEL CULTURE” and then (with no apparent irony) called for boycotts of baseball, Coke, Delta and other major companies after Georgia passed restrictive voting laws Republicans insisted were necessary reforms. “We will not become a Socialist Nation,” he said. “Happy Easter!”

 

“Happy Easter to ALL,” Trump added on actual Easter Sunday, “including the Radical Left CRAZIES who rigged our Presidential Election, and want to destroy our Country!”

 

The next week, donors descended on Palm Beach—“Mecca,” a top GOP operative called it when we talked—shuttle-busing from the Four Seasons to listen to the former president speak at Mar-a-Lago. Immediately leaked were the more incendiary snippets. He railed at the “rigged” election. He called McConnell “a dumb son of a bitch.” He indicated he’s bothered by Biden’s overall popularity relative to his lack thereof. “Saintly Joe Biden,” Trump said.

 

It spurred a renewed round of strikes at Biden—the type of bombardment that (maybe) wouldn’t be out of place in the thick of the stretch of a presidential campaign.

 

“The Biden Administration did a terrible disservice to people throughout the world by allowing the FDA and CDC to call a ‘pause’ in the use of the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine,” Trump said on April 13. “They didn’t like me very much because I pushed them extremely hard,” Trump said of Pfizer. “But if I didn’t, you wouldn’t have a vaccine for 3-5 years, or maybe not at all.”

 

On April 18, he commented on Biden’s stated date of September 11 to withdraw troops from Afghanistan. Trump made it “possible,” he said. “I planned to withdraw on May 1st.”

 

“If Joe Biden wants to keep our Country safe from Radical Islamic Terrorism,” he said before his sitdown with Sean Hannity, “he should reinstitute the foreign country Travel Ban.”

 

Trump’s “nothing without Twitter,” a Florida Democratic operative told me earlier this month, but I don’t know if that’s true. Trump’s nothing without enemies.

 

“He so needs to have an enemy,” biographer Gwenda Blair told me. “If there’s not an enemy, he turns to the shark next to him and says, ‘You’re the enemy.’”

 

Foes are his fuel—it’s a lifelong through line—but Biden’s been a resolutely unwilling combatant.

 

“Trump is a person who thrives on attention and conflict,” said O’Brien, “and he must feel like he’s wallowing in a tar pit when Biden pays him no mind.”

 

It’s hard to keep hammering at somebody who simply doesn’t respond—the strategy in the Biden White House to “never” engage with (as Biden dubbed Trump back in February during a CNN town hall) “the former guy.”

 

Instead of Biden, in the past couple weeks, Trump has targeted Cheney (“polling sooo low”), or Doug Ducey, the Republican governor of Arizona, for what Trump considers his insufficient support for the audit of the 2020 election in the state. LeBron James, too: The NBA superstar, Trump said, “should focus on basketball rather than presiding over the destruction of the NBA, which has just recorded the lowest television RATINGS …” Ratings, ratings, ratings—always with the ratings. “What used to be called The Academy Awards, and now is called the ‘Oscars’—a far less important and elegant name—had the lowest Television Ratings in recorded history,” Trump said earlier this week, pivoting to the semblance of a political point: “These television people spend all their time thinking about how to promote the Democrat Party, which is destroying our Country, and cancel Conservatives and Republicans.”

 

Past this milepost of these “first 100 days,” Biden’s as president, Trump’s as ex-, such statements are certain not to stop—for the rest of this year, into the midterms in 2022 on which the congressional balance of power so precariously teeters, then toward 2024 as Trump works to retain his GOP supremacy with the specter of another candidacy of his own. The most important question in politics is that of the endurance and the extent of his power.

 

“He has less rhetorical power than any ex-president since William Howard Taft,” posited rhetoric expert Jen Mercieca, citing Trump’s social-media de-platforming and referring to Taft’s place as essentially the last pre-mass media president.

 

“In the very red states, his name still means something,” former Trump attorney and fixer Michael Cohen told me. “Everywhere else? Irrelevant.”

 

Perhaps. But irrelevant is a very relative term when there are 74 million people out there who voted for him.

 

“The Republicans are just letting him get away with it,” former Trump Organization executive Barbara Res told me. “I thought, after he left, they would say, ‘OK, good riddance.’”

 

“He’ll never wither away,” said Updegrove, the presidential historian. “In some respects, Donald Trump gains strength by being marginalized, by being underestimated. That’s what gets him up in the morning. That’s what gets his heartbeat going. He is going to fight every battle and ultimately lose every war. That’s just the nature of who he is. And it’s going to happen again in his post-presidency. It’s the one thing you can count on with Donald Trump. He can’t let anything go. He’s going to fight everything to the fullest extent that he’s able. And ultimately he’s going to lose.”

How Donald Trump is pulling the strings from Mar-A-Lago | DW News

Este é o resort Zmar em questão junto a ODEMIRA | Eco Resort

Catarina Furtado revela que foi assediada por três pessoas em cargos superiores hierárquicos

 



RELAÇÕES

Catarina Furtado revela que foi assediada por três pessoas em cargos superiores hierárquicos

 

“Uns fizeram-me convites insinuantes, óbvios, que não davam margem para eu ter dúvidas do que era pretendido, outros eram mais rebuscados”, revela a apresentadora em entrevista ao Expresso.

 

PÚBLICO

30 de Abril de 2021, 11:56 actualizada às 13:01

https://www.publico.pt/2021/04/30/impar/noticia/catarina-furtado-revela-assediada-tres-pessoas-cargos-superiores-hierarquicos-1960620?fbclid=IwAR1YfvHRshu0mKcL53mGOguQcRI02w7Zb49Ble4JIstFZHPyrGzTjcT5Sx4

 

As revelações de que sofreu de assédio não são novas. Em 2018, Catarina Furtado falou abertamente do tema num programa da Rádio Comercial. Agora, e depois de a actriz Sofia Arruda ter assumido não só que foi vítima de assédio sexual, mas também que foi prejudicada profissionalmente por não ter cedido, a apresentadora da RTP volta ao tema, numa entrevista ao Expresso. Catarina Furtado foi vítima e enumera três pessoas com cargos superiores ao seu, não revelando os seus nomes. “A mediatização dos nomes não é o relevante, é só voyeurismo, e não leva a uma alteração daquilo que é importante”, ou seja, a mudança de comportamentos, defende.

 

“Fui alvo de assédio sexual em diferentes situações, por parte de três pessoas com cargos hierárquicos superiores a mim, no início da minha carreira. Uns fizeram-me convites insinuantes, óbvios, que não davam margem para eu ter dúvidas do que era pretendido, outros eram mais rebuscados. Mas percebia-se completamente as suas intenções. Não havia margem para dúvidas. Eu sei distinguir piropos inconsequentes de intenções do foro sexual”, afirma ao Expresso.

 

A actriz e apresentadora, de 48 anos, refere que era “muito nova”, estava no início de carreira e que não tem dúvidas de que foi assediada. Então, fez o que tantas mulheres fazem, fingiu que não era nada consigo, continua. “Fui esquiva, descartando a possibilidade de acontecer alguma coisa. Mas não disse o ‘não’ que hoje em dia diria, com o empoderamento que ganhei para o fazer. Hoje em dia teria dito claramente ‘não’. Na altura não o disse, no entanto não permiti que acontecesse nada”, declara a embaixadora da Boa Vontade do Fundo das Nações Unidas para a População (UNFPA, na sigla inglesa).

 

Um percurso de sucesso

A apresentadora estudou no Conservatório Nacional de Lisboa. Depois de uma lesão e por sugestão do jornalista Adelino Gomes, amigo do pai, ingressou no Cenjor, o centro de formação para jornalista. Fez estágio profissional na Correio da Manhã Rádio. Em 1991, apresentou o programa Top+ , na RTP; e, no ano seguinte mudou-se para a SIC onde apresentou o programa Chuva de Estrelas, um sucesso, tornando-a num dos rostos mais populares da televisão portuguesa. Mais tarde, enveredou pela representação, em filmes e séries, tendo mesmo ido estudar representação para Londres. Voltou à apresentação televisiva em 1999, altura em que foi escolhida para embaixadora da UNFPA — é das mais antigas e mais activas, orgulha-se. Em 2003, regressa à RTP onde está até à actualidade e onde, além dos programas de entretenimento, começou a fazer reportagens e documentários, aproveitando a sua experiência como embaixadora das Nações Unidas, como o Príncipes do Nada. Em 2012, criou a Associação Corações com Coroa, que trabalha com raparigas e mulheres em projectos de apoio e empoderamento feminino. Em 2019 escreveu o livro Adolescer é Fácil #só que não, com dicas e conselhos para os adolescentes.

 

Na altura, conseguiu resolver a questão sozinha, sem sofrer represálias. “Apesar da minha tenra idade, recorri à minha inteligência emocional, ao jogo de cintura, não caí na armadilha, e consegui evitar uma relação de hostilidade, de conflito. Mas é preciso analisar porque é que consegui não cair na armadilha. Apesar de sentir medo de perder alguma coisa que estava a conquistar por mérito próprio, tinha uma retaguarda familiar, sabia perfeitamente que tinha um porto seguro”, continua a fundadora da Associação Corações com Coroa, ao Expresso. Recorde-se que a apresentadora é filha do jornalista Joaquim Furtado, um nome de referência na profissão, e reconhece: “Muitas raparigas e mulheres não têm um porto seguro e vêem os seus empregos ameaçados. É particularmente grave quando o assédio vem de alguém com mais poder e compreende-se o medo que as mulheres sofrem numa situação destas.”

 

Machismo de homens e mulheres

A ascendência das mulheres não é um impedimento para os assediadores. Aos 22 anos, Gwyneth Paltrow foi assediada pelo produtor Harvey Weinstein — que, há um ano, foi condenado a 23 anos de prisão. A actriz não era uma recém-chegada a Hollywood pois é filha do realizador Bruce Paltrow e da actriz Blythe Danner, e, na altura, namorava com Brad Pitt. Quando o escândalo que deu origem ao movimento #MeToo, nos EUA, rebentou em 2017, Gwyneth Paltrow soube que o ex-produtor usava o seu nome e fotografias suas, dizendo que tinha dormido com ela, para convencer outras mulheres a fazê-lo.

 

 

A carreira de Harvey Weinstein foi destruída depois de o New York Times e a New Yorker publicarem artigos sobre o comportamento do produtor, de assédio e abuso sexual, incluindo violação. Em muitos dos alegados casos, mulheres denunciaram que Weinstein as convidava para o seu quarto de hotel sob o pretexto de uma reunião profissional, mas depois pedia-lhes massagens ou sexo. Foi o que aconteceu com Paltrow, declarou a mesma.

 

Catarina Furtado, que fez a sua formação em dança no Conservatório, acredita que o assédio é fruto da desigualdade de género, do machismo — de homens e de mulheres, no caso destas, que tantas vezes atribuem a culpa às vítimas, aponta. “A tónica está sempre muito mais nas vítimas do que nos agressores. É fundamental encontrar as causas, perceber como as combater, dialogar com todos os intervenientes de forma construtiva, com exigente reflexão, apoio da legislação, partilha de informação e urgente prevenção”, escreve na sua conta de Instagram, no sábado passado, onde revela que nos últimos dias foi contactada por vários meios de comunicação social para falar sobre o tema.

 

O vídeo, nessa publicação, é sobre o Relatório Mundial sobre População, das Nações Unidas, e Catarina Furtado testemunha a sua passagem, quer como embaixadora da UNFPA, quer como documentarista, por diversos países onde mulheres vítimas de violência tomaram as rédeas das suas vidas, trabalhando com outras mulheres e sendo agentes de mudança. A responsável acredita que o primeiro direito das raparigas e das mulheres é o da autodeterminação sobre o seu corpo.

 

 

Ao Expresso, Catarina Furtado termina dizendo que deseja que o Governo e as instituições tenham “tolerância zero” para a violência e o assédio sexual, para que as vítimas estejam mais protegidas. “É preciso libertar as vítimas do peso dos segredos monstruosos e os agressores têm de começar a repensar o papel que têm tido e devemos dar-lhes a oportunidade de fazerem diferente.”

France honours woman killed in terror attack against police

Israel: At least 44 killed in stampede

Tim Marshall on the power of geography and the new frontier of geopoliti...

The Daily Beast: Gaetz associate wrote in letter that congressman paid f...

New Body Cam Footage From Jan. 6th Assault On Capitol | MSNBC

'Utter Nonsense': Chuck Rosenberg Blasts Giuliani's Search Warrant Protests |

Florida lawmakers pass new voting restrictions mirroring Georgia and Michigan

 


Florida lawmakers pass new voting restrictions mirroring Georgia and Michigan

 

Bill introduces new hurdles to voting by mail and restrictions on providing water to people waiting in line to cast their ballot

 

Ed Pilkington in New York

@edpilkington

Fri 30 Apr 2021 14.07 BST

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/apr/30/florida-new-voting-restrictions-republicans

 

The Florida legislature has passed tight new voting restrictions, placing the crucial swing state at the forefront of a nationwide wave of Republican efforts to suppress turnout on the back of Donald Trump’s lie that the 2020 election was stolen from him.

 

The bill, which closely mirrors similar Republican ploys in Georgia and Michigan, is likely to make it more difficult for millions of voters to have their democratic say. The new barriers to voting are expected to particularly impact minority communities.

 

The legislation introduces a plethora of new hurdles to voting by mail in the wake of the surge in mail-in voting by Democrats in the 2020 election. It also imposes restrictions on providing water to citizens standing in line to cast their ballot.

 

Black lawmakers expressed dismay when the bill passed on Thursday night. The Democratic representative Angela Nixon said she was “distraught and disheartened”, the Washington Post reported.

 

“You are making policies that are detrimental to our communities,” she told her Republican peers.

 

Fellow Democratic lawmaker Anna Eskamani told the Miami Herald: “We had, as the Republican governor said, one of the best operated elections in the country, and yet today, the majority party through last minute maneuvers passed a voter suppression bill.”

 

As Eskamani highlighted, the move by Florida Republicans to clamp down on voting is especially awkward, even by the contorted logic that the Republican party has deployed in states across the country. The restrictions were passed in the name of “voter integrity”, following the former president’s false claim that there was widespread fraud in the 2020 election.

 

Yet in Florida, Republicans boasted – and continue to boast – about how well the presidential race was conducted. Trump won the traditional battleground state, which commands a critical 29 electoral college votes, by about 3%.

 

Florida’s Republican governor, Ron DeSantis, was caught by his own contradictory rationale when he told Fox News on Thursday night that he would now sign the bill into law. “So we think we led the nation,” he said, referring to how the 2020 ballot went in his state, “but we’re trying to stay ahead of the curve to make sure that these elections are run well.”

 

Florida’s attack on voting rights forms part of a staggering assault by Republicans on the heart of American democracy. According to the Brennan Center, which monitors voting rights, about 361 bills containing restrictive provisions have been introduced in what its analysts call “a backlash to 2020’s historic voter turnout, under the pretense of responding to baseless and racist allegations of voter fraud”.

 

The Florida bill focuses especially on voting by mail. It targets the use of drop boxes in which mail ballots can be deposited, and forces voters to reapply for mail ballots every two years rather than four – a move which critics fear will sow confusion and suppress turnout.

 

The attack on mail-in voting is ironic given that the state has a long track-record of using that electoral method without any notable challenges. In several previous cycles, mail-in voting was used predominantly by Republican voters with no objections raised.

 

But in 2020 there was a steep increase in Democratic voters who turned to casting their ballots by mail as a safety measure in the pandemic. Out of a total of more than 11m Floridians who voted in the presidential race, almost 5m did so by mail – about 44%.

 

Suddenly, the practice of voting by mail has become a threat to voter integrity, according to the Republican party.

Governo decreta cerca sanitária a duas freguesias de Odemira

 


Governo decreta cerca sanitária a duas freguesias de Odemira

 

O Governo decidiu decretar uma cerca sanitária às freguesias de São Teotónio e de Almograve, no concelho de Odemira, devido à elevada incidência de casos de covid-19, sobretudo em trabalhadores do setor agrícola, anunciou hoje o primeiro-ministro.

Governo decreta cerca sanitária a duas freguesias de Odemira

© Lusa

 

Notícias ao Minuto

29/04/21 21:06 HÁ 18 HORAS POR LUSA

https://www.noticiasaominuto.com/pais/1743496/governo-decreta-cerca-sanitaria-a-duas-freguesias-de-odemira

 

As restantes freguesias deste concelho do distrito de Beja evoluirão, a partir de sábado, 01 de maio, com a generalidade de Portugal continental, para uma situação de calamidade devido à pandemia de covid-19, depois de 15 períodos de estado de emergência, 12 dos quais consecutivos desde 09 de novembro.

 

Na conferência de imprensa realizada após um Conselho de Ministros sobre as medidas a adotar no combate à pandemia, ocorrido em Lisboa, António Costa salientou que todos os resultados dos inquéritos de saúde pública realizados neste concelho, do distrito de Beja, permitiram verificar que os casos de covid-19 se concentram nestas duas freguesias "e, claramente, associados à população migrante que trabalha no setor agrícola".

 

"Entendemos, em relação a Odemira, decretar em termos imediatos a cerca sanitária às freguesias de São Teotónio e de Longueira/Almograve, procedendo também à requisição de um conjunto de instalações que estão identificadas e que são suscetíveis de imediatamente permitir o isolamento profilático das pessoas que estão consideradas positivas, das pessoas que estão em risco e também de alguma população que vive em situações de insalubridade habitacional inadmissível, com hipersobrelotação das habitações", disse.

 

O primeiro-ministro destacou que as medidas para este concelho são "absolutamente excecionais" e basearam-se numa avaliação qualitativa do número de casos nestas duas freguesias, porque o problema não está "generalizado ao conjunto do concelho, onde a generalidade das freguesias têm zero casos".

 

A freguesia de São Teotónio registou 1.910 casos por 100 mil habitantes e a de Longueira Almograve 510 casos por 100 mil habitantes em 14 dias, segundo o primeiro-ministro.

 

"Essa situação foi o que nos levou a dizer que não faz sentido manter a medida para o conjunto do concelho. Vamos confinar e concentrar-nos nestas freguesias. Por isso, a cerca sanitária, para que não possa haver uma expansão para fora dessas duas freguesias nessa situação: a proibição de entrada de pessoas nestas freguesias, de forma a evitar a contaminação, e a adoção de medidas" para resolver o problema, acrescentou.

 

Estas medidas, adiantou o governante, implicam a "responsabilização efetiva" das explorações agrícolas, "quer na identificação de quem lá presta serviço, quer da testagem diária".

 

"Essas empresas passam também a ser responsáveis pelo teste diário às pessoas que aí realizam serviço, sejam seus trabalhadores ou sejam trabalhadores das empresas de prestação de serviços que dispensam esta mão-de-obra", acrescentou.

 

António Costa disse ainda que o Conselho de Ministros aprovou hoje um diploma que "obriga as empresas que são beneficiárias do trabalho destas pessoas a proceder ao registo de quem trabalha nas suas explorações agrícolas", para permitir estabelecer rapidamente os seus contactos em caso de necessidade de isolamento e assim quebrar as cadeias de transmissão.

 

Nestas freguesias, o Governo pretende ainda "criar condições para o isolamento efetivo de pessoas que estão contaminadas e que vivem, muitas vezes, às dezenas no mesmo espaço habitacional", sem capacidade de alojamento e onde o risco de transmissibilidade é maior.

 

O primeiro-ministro revelou que o Governo pretende "quebrar essa sobrelotação porque é um risco enorme para a saúde pública, para além de uma violação gritante dos direitos humanos".

 

Além da situação de Odemira, outros sete concelhos em Portugal continental não avançam para a quarta e última fase do atual plano de desconfinamento, a partir de sábado, no âmbito da situação de calamidade devido à pandemia: são eles Miranda do Douro, Paredes e Valongo, que se mantêm no nível em que se encontram, e Aljezur, Resende, Carregal do Sal e Portimão, que recuaram para diferentes etapas, mas que ficam também retidos, ainda que possa ser "por muito pouco tempo", porque o Governo decidiu passar a fazer uma avaliação semanal.

 

António Costa alertou ainda que há 27 concelhos que devem estar alerta, porque registam uma taxa de incidência da covid-19 superior a 120 casos por 100 mil habitantes, pelo se tiverem uma segunda avaliação negativa podem ficar retidos ou recuar no plano de desconfinamento.

 

O resto do Continente avança para a quarta e última fase prevista no plano de desconfinamento do Governo, com o levantamento do estado de emergência.

 

Entre as medidas decididas hoje, a generalidade dos estabelecimentos comerciais e os centros comerciais vão poder ficar abertos até às 19:00 aos fins de semana e feriados e até às 21:00 durante a semana já a partir de sábado.

 

Os restaurantes, cafés, pastelarias e similares poderão estar abertos até às 22:30 todos os dias.

 

Museus, palácios e monumentos regressam aos horários habituais, "espetáculos culturais" passam a ter as 22:30 como horário limite, são permitidas festas de casamentos e batizados com 50% de lotação do espaço onde se realizam e reabrem as fronteiras terrestres com Espanha.

Everyone loves Germany’s Greens (for now)

 


COMMENT

Everyone loves Germany’s Greens (for now)

 

The party is flying high in the polls and beloved by the media, but not all of its policies will likely prove popular.

 

BY MATTHEW KARNITSCHNIG

April 30, 2021 4:06 am

https://www.politico.eu/article/germany-greens-election-polls-annalena-baerbock-chancellor-candidate/

 

BERLIN — Germany’s Greens are riding high, but are they for real?

 

Just a week after choosing their candidate for chancellor — party co-leader Annalena Baerbock — the Greens’ poll numbers are on fire. In some surveys, the party has even supplanted the Christian Democrats, the center-right bloc that has governed Germany under Angela Merkel for the past 16 years.

 

If the Greens can sustain that momentum until election day in September, they will likely lead the next government — a political earthquake that would reverberate across the Continent. 

 

Yet all honeymoons end, sometimes in tears. Why, many ask, should Germans’ infatuation with the Greens be any different? The stock Green response is that their success isn’t a fluke.

 

“Our strength isn’t ephemeral, we’ve built it over months and years,” said Franziska Brantner, a senior Green MP and Baerbock confidante who focuses on European affairs.

 

While that may sound like a hollow boast, it isn’t.

 

A reminder of just how successful the Greens’ long game has been came Thursday when Germany’s highest court threw out the government’s 2019 environmental law for not being ambitious enough. The case was brought by a coalition of environmental groups endorsed by the Greens.

 

The court’s sweeping ruling — which will effectively force the government to rewrite its environmental code — would be considered an audacious attempt to legislate from the bench in many countries; in Germany, the decision was cheered, even by members of government responsible for the original law.

 

The ruling was not just “epoch-making,” but “great and significant,” tweeted Economy Minister Peter Altmaier, a Merkel ally. Altmaier then tussled with Finance Minister Olaf Scholz, a Social Democrat, over which government coalition partner was to blame for the shoddy legislation that the court declared “unconstitutional.”   

 

The decision illustrates just how mainstream Green ideas have become and why the party that has warned against the perils of climate change for decades has become such a political force.

 

And yet, while there’s no question that the Greens have captured the zeitgeist with their core mission, a number of their other priorities remain well outside the political mainstream.

 

For any German who has supported Merkel’s centrist course, the Greens’ new “Manifesto of Principles,” passed at a convention in November, will make for interesting reading. In other parties, such documents are often dismissed as little more than a catalog of empty promises. But the Green base is different — it expects party leaders to deliver.

 

The manifesto calls, among other things, for “a Germany free of nuclear weapons and thus a swift end to nuclear participation.” Translation: the U.S. needs to get its nukes out of Germany.

 

Though Baerbock subsequently made clear she doesn’t expect that to happen overnight, the goal itself is controversial because it would require removing the foundation of the security umbrella that has protected Germany for decades. The 120-page manifesto makes no mention of the United States, the country generally seen as the guarantor of German defense, but it does mention NATO, which it describes as in “deep crisis.”  

 

The solution to NATO’s problems is not, in the Greens’ view, for Germany to meet its obligations to the alliance by fulfilling a pledge that all members have made to spend 2 percent of GDP on defense. Instead, they favor a “European” solution.

 

“We’re not in favor of national goals when it comes to European defense,” Brantner said. “It’s an inherent contradiction to say we want a European security policy and then for everyone to do something on a national basis. That makes no sense.”

 

Instead, Brantner said Germany should follow France’s lead in pursuing President Emmanuel Macron’s vision for “European sovereignty.”

 

“NATO is not the priority,” she added.

 

Defense policy isn’t the only issue on which the Greens are going against the grain.

 

On the politically dicey issue of migration, the party doesn’t just want to end the tough asylum policies implemented by Germany’s current government; it wants rich countries like Germany that have contributed to climate change to compensate poorer countries that are suffering the effects of it, including by easing outward migration.

 

“States that historically and currently emit the majority of climate-damaging gases must participate in a global compensation of climate impacts, damages and losses as well as in the creation of safe and dignified migration routes,” the party program says.

 

As for the EU’s refugee deal with Turkey (under which Ankara agreed to take in millions of refugees in return for billions of euros), the Greens aren’t fans. 

 

“The possibility of fleeing and seeking protection in Germany and Europe must not be made more difficult through cooperation with third countries, and cooperation must not lead to human rights violations,” the manifesto states. 

 

The Greens’ migration policies may be noble in spirit, but it’s far from clear whether they are politically viable in a country where recent battles over migration have redrawn the political landscape, spawning one of the Continent’s most virulent far-right parties.

 

So far, tough questions about how the Greens plan to put their ambitious program into action have been largely missing from the public debate. 

 

That’s mainly because the German press has been too busy praising them.

 

In the days after the Greens gave Baerbock the nod for the chancellor run, she was seemingly everywhere, on magazine covers, on talkshows and the nightly news.

 

While that was to be expected, the gauzy tone of the coverage wasn’t.

 

“Finally something different,” Der Stern declared in green letters under a cover photo of Baerbock in a black leather jacket. “One feels her excitement,” the weekly told readers. The generally more critical Der Spiegel pictured Baerbock, hands on her hips, under the headline “The woman for all contingencies.” 

 

The apex of Baerbock-mania came during her first television interview after her nomination. At the end of the live discussion, the two journalists who peppered her with softball questions for 45 minutes were so excited that they did something one usually only sees on talent shows: They broke into applause.

 

Some of the enthusiasm for the Greens might be driven by exasperation with the center right over its shambolic process to elect a candidate for the chancellor race. That would explain the Greens’ sudden surge in the polls.

 

Whatever the cause, the German media’s love affair with the Greens is bound to wane as the campaign progresses. Political popularity inevitably triggers scrutiny.

 

When it arrives, Baerbock will have to prove her substance runs deeper than a glossy magazine cover.