sábado, 29 de outubro de 2016

Entraves. As (várias) pedras no caminho das obras que prometem mudar Lisboa


.Entraves. As (várias) pedras no caminho das obras que prometem mudar Lisboa
MARIANA MADRINHA E MARTA CERQUEIRA
29/10/2016 13:38
JORNAL I

Desde cordões humanos para proteger árvores em risco de ser abatidas, conflitos de interesses e metro e autocarros que mais parecem sardinhas em lata a muitas horas passadas no trânsito, os lisboetas têm sofrido nos últimos meses em prol de uma nova cidade. Nem tudo é mau: pelo meio das obras já foram descobertos vestígios arqueológicos, o que é sempre uma boa notícia.

Roma e Pavia não se fizeram num dia e, claramente, as obras de Lisboa também não. À partida não esperamos um desfecho desta epopeia de empreitadas tão moroso como o das obras de Santa Engrácia, mas os longos meses já contados têm tido um custo diário elevado para os lisboetas. Um preço que vai além dos muitos milhões de euros que custam os projetos. Desde atrasos até embargos – na Segunda Circular, provocados por um mau motivo; no Campo das Cebolas, por uma descoberta simpática –, deixamos-lhe as pedras encontradas nos caminhos destas empreitadas.

Segunda circular

Por esta altura já devia estar a ser criada uma Segunda Circular renovada, com espaços arborizados, novos pavimentos, uma solução de iluminação mais eficiente e onde se passaria a circular a um máximo de 60 km/hora. No entanto, em setembro, um anúncio da câmara municipal apanhou todos de surpresa: as obras ficariam suspensas devido a conflitos de interesses. O autor do projeto de pavimentos fabricava e vendia um dos componentes utilizados nos trabalhos. A decisão suspendeu a empreitada já em curso no troço entre o nó do Regimento de Artilharia de Lisboa [RALIS] e a Avenida de Berlim, e cancelou todas as restantes obras previstas.

Transportes

São um dano colateral das obras, mas têm um impacto brutal no dia-a-dia de muitos lisboetas. Com vários locais praticamente proibidos devido ao trânsito [saltar para o último ponto], a afluência dos transportes públicos aumentou. Como aumentou também o número de turistas. Com estes dois reforços de utentes de peso, seria de esperar uma resposta à altura. Pelo contrário, há 20 carruagens de metro paradas.

A Comissão de Utentes de Transportes de Lisboa iniciou na segunda-feira um ciclo de protestos contra a degradação do serviço sob o mote “20 carruagens paradas, 20 dias de luta”. Assim, nos próximos dias, os organizadores da manifestação estarão presentes em várias estações de metro onde recolherão as queixas dos utentes. Os tempos de espera entre as composições, os elevadores e escadas rolantes avariadas e a sobrelotação de carruagens – o que faz com que, nas redes sociais, muitos utentes descrevam a experiência de andar de metro como a de uma “sardinha em lata” – são alguns problemas apontados pelos manifestantes. Já nos autocarros, os utilizadores descrevem igualmente situações de sobrelotação – também causada pelo crescimento do turismo – e tempos de espera mais longos entre as viaturas.

Campo das Cebolas

São 12 os milhões de euros adjudicados ao novo Campo das Cebolas, a obra mais cara (se excluirmos a Feira Popular) deste leque. As escavações têm revelado tesouros arqueológicos escondidos pela poeira (e terra, e calçada, e alcatrão) dos anos. Até agora, já foi descoberta uma escadaria pombalina que daria acesso ao rio, um paredão da mesma época e restos de um poço pós-pombalino. Foram ainda encontradas duas embarcações de pequena dimensão do século xix e um cais da mesma época. As descobertas fazem com que arqueólogos e empreiteiros trabalhem lado a lado para dar vida ao projeto de Carrilho da Graça. E os achados arqueológicos poderão dar uma graça extra à nova praça: os responsáveis pelo projeto equacionam usar a escadaria pombalina como um dos acessos ao parque de estacionamento. Apesar dos (bons) percalços, a obra acabará dentro do tempo previsto, garantiu Fernando Medina na assembleia municipal, na passada terça-feira.

Árvores do campo grande

O projeto do Eixo Central não contempla o Campo Grande, recentemente renovado, mas as obras também chegaram aqui. Nomeadamente para criar um novo parque de estacionamento. Estava tudo bem até, este mês, os “irredutíveis” moradores perceberem que, no projeto do novo parque em frente aos números 35 e 37 – e onde vão ser igualmente criados um corredor para transportes públicos e duas novas vias de circulação –, cerca de 30 árvores iriam ser arrancadas. Um grupo de residentes que se autointitulou “Os irredutíveis do Campo Grande” uniu-se contra o abate das árvores e organizou uma manifestação na passada segunda-feira em frente à câmara. Aos moradores juntaram-se membros do Fórum Cidadania LX e da Plataforma em Defesa das Árvores. O cordão humano foi o suficiente para que a autarquia recuasse: com o protesto, os manifestantes conseguiram impedir o abate de 28 árvores. Serão apenas abatidas três árvores e transplantadas cinco. Na quarta-feira, Medina reagiu ao caso. “Acho que não estivemos bem. [O projeto inicial] não se enquadra na nossa orientação política”, admitiu o autarca. “Só posso lamentar a solução original”, disse, citado pelo “Público”.

Trânsito

O dia 3 de maio marcou o início de nove meses de obras no chamado Eixo Central de Lisboa. Nesse dia, a câmara avisou que os trabalhos iriam inevitavelmente afetar o tráfego em algumas das principais vias da cidade.

As obras começaram na Fontes Pereira de Melo, em direção ao Saldanha, e em Entrecampos, em direção à Avenida da República. As seis faixas da Avenida Fontes Pereira de Melo passaram a quatro e enquanto assim se mantiverem será possível os carros particulares circularem nos corredores Bus.

Apesar dos avisos e do cuidado da autarquia em garantir vias alternativas, a insatisfação de quem lá passa diariamente fez-se sentir logo uma semana após o arranque dos trabalhos. Um buzinão organizado por um grupo de lisboetas marcou o protesto contra as obras que, em simultâneo, afetam a circulação, principalmente em hora de ponta. Isto porque às obras no Eixo Central se juntam as da zona ribeirinha, que afetam as ruas entre o Cais do Sodré e o Campo das Cebolas.

Na altura do protesto estavam ainda previstos os trabalhos na Segunda Circular que acabaram suspensos por anulação do concurso público para a requalificação desta via.

Obras Lisboa

Atualidade
Centeno acredita em mais receita
Entraves. As (várias) pedras no caminho das obras que prometem mudar Lisboa

MARIANA MADRINHA E MARTA CERQUEIRA
29/10/2016 13:38

Desde cordões humanos para proteger árvores em risco de ser abatidas, conflitos de interesses e metro e autocarros que mais parecem sardinhas em lata a muitas horas passadas no trânsito, os lisboetas têm sofrido nos últimos meses em prol de uma nova cidade. Nem tudo é mau: pelo meio das obras já foram descobertos vestígios arqueológicos, o que é sempre uma boa notícia.

Roma e Pavia não se fizeram num dia e, claramente, as obras de Lisboa também não. À partida não esperamos um desfecho desta epopeia de empreitadas tão moroso como o das obras de Santa Engrácia, mas os longos meses já contados têm tido um custo diário elevado para os lisboetas. Um preço que vai além dos muitos milhões de euros que custam os projetos. Desde atrasos até embargos – na Segunda Circular, provocados por um mau motivo; no Campo das Cebolas, por uma descoberta simpática –, deixamos-lhe as pedras encontradas nos caminhos destas empreitadas.

Segunda circular

Por esta altura já devia estar a ser criada uma Segunda Circular renovada, com espaços arborizados, novos pavimentos, uma solução de iluminação mais eficiente e onde se passaria a circular a um máximo de 60 km/hora. No entanto, em setembro, um anúncio da câmara municipal apanhou todos de surpresa: as obras ficariam suspensas devido a conflitos de interesses. O autor do projeto de pavimentos fabricava e vendia um dos componentes utilizados nos trabalhos. A decisão suspendeu a empreitada já em curso no troço entre o nó do Regimento de Artilharia de Lisboa [RALIS] e a Avenida de Berlim, e cancelou todas as restantes obras previstas.

Transportes

São um dano colateral das obras, mas têm um impacto brutal no dia-a-dia de muitos lisboetas. Com vários locais praticamente proibidos devido ao trânsito [saltar para o último ponto], a afluência dos transportes públicos aumentou. Como aumentou também o número de turistas. Com estes dois reforços de utentes de peso, seria de esperar uma resposta à altura. Pelo contrário, há 20 carruagens de metro paradas.

A Comissão de Utentes de Transportes de Lisboa iniciou na segunda-feira um ciclo de protestos contra a degradação do serviço sob o mote “20 carruagens paradas, 20 dias de luta”. Assim, nos próximos dias, os organizadores da manifestação estarão presentes em várias estações de metro onde recolherão as queixas dos utentes. Os tempos de espera entre as composições, os elevadores e escadas rolantes avariadas e a sobrelotação de carruagens – o que faz com que, nas redes sociais, muitos utentes descrevam a experiência de andar de metro como a de uma “sardinha em lata” – são alguns problemas apontados pelos manifestantes. Já nos autocarros, os utilizadores descrevem igualmente situações de sobrelotação – também causada pelo crescimento do turismo – e tempos de espera mais longos entre as viaturas.

Campo das Cebolas

São 12 os milhões de euros adjudicados ao novo Campo das Cebolas, a obra mais cara (se excluirmos a Feira Popular) deste leque. As escavações têm revelado tesouros arqueológicos escondidos pela poeira (e terra, e calçada, e alcatrão) dos anos. Até agora, já foi descoberta uma escadaria pombalina que daria acesso ao rio, um paredão da mesma época e restos de um poço pós-pombalino. Foram ainda encontradas duas embarcações de pequena dimensão do século xix e um cais da mesma época. As descobertas fazem com que arqueólogos e empreiteiros trabalhem lado a lado para dar vida ao projeto de Carrilho da Graça. E os achados arqueológicos poderão dar uma graça extra à nova praça: os responsáveis pelo projeto equacionam usar a escadaria pombalina como um dos acessos ao parque de estacionamento. Apesar dos (bons) percalços, a obra acabará dentro do tempo previsto, garantiu Fernando Medina na assembleia municipal, na passada terça-feira.

Árvores do campo grande

O projeto do Eixo Central não contempla o Campo Grande, recentemente renovado, mas as obras também chegaram aqui. Nomeadamente para criar um novo parque de estacionamento. Estava tudo bem até, este mês, os “irredutíveis” moradores perceberem que, no projeto do novo parque em frente aos números 35 e 37 – e onde vão ser igualmente criados um corredor para transportes públicos e duas novas vias de circulação –, cerca de 30 árvores iriam ser arrancadas. Um grupo de residentes que se autointitulou “Os irredutíveis do Campo Grande” uniu-se contra o abate das árvores e organizou uma manifestação na passada segunda-feira em frente à câmara. Aos moradores juntaram-se membros do Fórum Cidadania LX e da Plataforma em Defesa das Árvores. O cordão humano foi o suficiente para que a autarquia recuasse: com o protesto, os manifestantes conseguiram impedir o abate de 28 árvores. Serão apenas abatidas três árvores e transplantadas cinco. Na quarta-feira, Medina reagiu ao caso. “Acho que não estivemos bem. [O projeto inicial] não se enquadra na nossa orientação política”, admitiu o autarca. “Só posso lamentar a solução original”, disse, citado pelo “Público”.

Trânsito

O dia 3 de maio marcou o início de nove meses de obras no chamado Eixo Central de Lisboa. Nesse dia, a câmara avisou que os trabalhos iriam inevitavelmente afetar o tráfego em algumas das principais vias da cidade.

As obras começaram na Fontes Pereira de Melo, em direção ao Saldanha, e em Entrecampos, em direção à Avenida da República. As seis faixas da Avenida Fontes Pereira de Melo passaram a quatro e enquanto assim se mantiverem será possível os carros particulares circularem nos corredores Bus.

Apesar dos avisos e do cuidado da autarquia em garantir vias alternativas, a insatisfação de quem lá passa diariamente fez-se sentir logo uma semana após o arranque dos trabalhos. Um buzinão organizado por um grupo de lisboetas marcou o protesto contra as obras que, em simultâneo, afetam a circulação, principalmente em hora de ponta. Isto porque às obras no Eixo Central se juntam as da zona ribeirinha, que afetam as ruas entre o Cais do Sodré e o Campo das Cebolas.

Na altura do protesto estavam ainda previstos os trabalhos na Segunda Circular que acabaram suspensos por anulação do concurso público para a requalificação desta via.

Mariano Rajoy governará em minoria mas com trunfos perante a oposição


Mariano Rajoy governará em minoria mas com trunfos perante a oposição

JORGE ALMEIDA FERNANDES 29/10/2016 – 20:03

Ao fim de 315 dias de impasse institucional, o Congresso viabilizou o novo Governo, graças à abstenção de 68 deputados socialistas. A grande incógnita passa a ser a “governabilidade”.

Graças à abstenção dos socialistas, Mariano Rajoy, líder do Partido Popular, foi eleito presidente do Governo espanhol, pondo termo a 315 dias de “Governo em funções” e ao mais longo bloqueio institucional da história recente da Espanha. Foi eleito por 170 votos a favor e 111 contra. A grande maioria dos deputados socialistas, 68, seguiu a directiva do Comité Federal e absteve-se, mas 15, incluindo todos os deputados do Partido Socialista da Catalunha, votarão “não”. A bancada do Cidadãos votou a favor. O rei Felipe VI dará posse a Rajoy no domingo e o elenco ministerial deverá ser anunciado na quinta-feira.

No exterior do Congresso, alguns poucos milhares de manifestantes, vigiados por um forte contingente policial, denunciavam a legitimidade do novo Governo, com palavras de ordem como “Não à Máfia golpista” e “Não à investidura ilegítima”.

Horas antes da sessão, Pedro Sánchez, ex-secretário-geral do PSOE, renunciava ao mandato parlamentar, anunciando ir liderar um processo de reconstrução do partido. É um dado importante para as perspectivas de “governabilidade” da Espanha.

A experiência de um Governo minoritário — agora num quadro agora multipartidário — exige a disponibilidade de cooperação entre três partidos: PP, PSOE e Cidadãos. Neste esquema triangular, a peça decisiva é o PSOE, pois só ele pode dar maiorias pontuais ao Governo. A lista de reformas reclamadas é infinda e não cabe aqui enunciá-la. O primeiro teste será o debate do orçamento e as negociações com Bruxelas sobre o défice. O mais envenenado dossier, é a questão catalã.

Mais difícil do que ao PP fazer concessões à oposição, será ao PSOE fazer acordos com o PP. Todos os pactos que faça com Rajoy terão uma implacável denúncia por parte do Podemos, cuja linha de propaganda é assimilar o PSOE ao PP, de modo a facilitar a conquista da hegemonia na esquerda. Pablo Iglesias tudo fará para ser o porta-voz da oposição parlamentar.

Esta oposição não seria um problema de maior se não atravessasse uma parte do PSOE. É por isso que a iniciativa de Sánchez não diz apenas respeito ao partido. Um PSOE em “campanha eleitoral permanente” será o elo fraco da “governabilidade”, pois os seus dirigentes interinos estarão sempre debaixo de fogo.

O jornalista Enric Juliana, do La Vanguardia, comentava que a mais importante instância deste Governo será o “Ministério do Tempo”, cujo titular será Mariano Rajoy. Porquê? O presidente do Governo poderá dissolver o parlamento e provocar eleições a partir de Maio de 2017, o mais temido cenário pelo PSOE e por o Cidadãos. É a mais poderosa arma de Rajoy.

Os discursos
Mariano Rajoy declarou: “Não peço um cheque em branco, não peço a lua, peço um Governo previsível. (...) Não peço o voto para um Governo multiusos ou carente de orientação”. Disse-se disposto a fazer “melhorias” na legislação e nas reformas mas avisou: “Não estou disposto a derrubar o construído.”

Lembrou sibilinamente as regras do jogo, advertindo o PSOE de que é contraditório dizer “não gostamos deste Governo mas temos de o aprovar pela Espanha” e depois bloquear tudo o que o executivo proponha. Pediu um “compromisso de futuro”, pois “não poderíamos sobreviver a um Governo que não governe porque lhe faltam apoios e sobram os obstáculos”.

O líder parlamentar socialista, Antonio Hernando, prometeu uma oposição “firme, séria e rigorosa”. Não afastou a possibilidade de o PSOE aprovar o orçamento de Rajoy. Com condições ao Governo: “Não tem a maioria absoluta que simulou durante todo este ano. Está em clara minoria e sob estreita vigilância de todo este Congresso.” Exigiu uma urgente abertura do diálogo com a Catalunha.

Depois, falando para sua esquerda, disse: “Nem o senhor nem o seu projecto contam com a nossa confiança. Não é o presidente que a Espanha merece.” Denunciou a corrupção e a ruptura da coesão social e territorial em Espanha. E fez uma denúncia severa do Podemos.

Pablo Iglesias, líder da coligação Unidos Podemos, fez um discurso “suave”, em contraste com a postura agressiva das últimas semanas. Denunciou a governação do PP mas falou sobretudo do futuro: “Mais tarde ou mais cedo vamos ganhar e aspiramos ser um instrumento político [para governar] uma nova Espanha”. O que importa é que “a Espanha mudou numa direccão oposta à vossa. Há um novo país, uma nova Espanha, jovem, moderna e sem medo.”

Albert Rivera, líder do Cidadãos, lembrou que o seu partido foi “o único” a trabalhar desde o primeiro dia para tornar possível um Governo. “Os espanhóis não podem continuar a esperar.” Exigiu o cumprimento das 150 reformas acordadas com o PP. E exortou Rajoy “a não ter medo de governar em minoria”.

“Rodea el Congresso”
Há uma outra Espanha que fora do parlamento se manifestou, em grande medida por iniciativa não assumida do Podemos: “Cerca o Congresso”. Não teria relevo de maior no quadro da liberdade de expressão. Outra coisa é o sinal que envia em relação ao Podemos. Iglesias começou a teorizar uma linha dúplice: combater agressivamente o governo na rua e no parlamento, denunciando-o como ilegítimo, de modo a levar ao seu derrube e a novas eleições, em que vislumbra destruir o PSOE. Iglesias não ignora que tal conduziria a uma provável maioria absoluta de Rajoy.


Esta estratégia divide o Podemos. Iglesias tinha previsto juntar-se ao “cerco” antes do voto, mas à última hora mudou de ideias. Foram outros por ele.

FBI director Comey faces fury for cryptic letter about Clinton email inquiry / The FBI's email inquiry is a fitting end to this dumpster fire of an election


The FBI's email inquiry is a fitting end to this dumpster fire of an election
Richard Wolffe
Saturday 29 October 2016 22.40 BST

The latest pseudo-scandal to hit Clinton is unlikely to rob her of the presidency. But it sure isn’t going to impress voters already sickened by a shocking campaign

If it looks and sounds like a scandal, is it really a scandal?

The latest Clinton email flap has all the trappings. With evasive answers, shady characters and FBI investigations, there must be something going on. Right?

Rather like Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction, we may not know what’s hidden or where, but it sure looks like the Clintons have been hiding something.

Sadly this reasoning is enough for most Republican voters and a good chunk of independents. It may be enough to depress support among Democrats just at the moment the party needs to drive a high turnout among voters.

But it’s not at all clear what the FBI is talking about in terms of Clinton emails. Some reports suggest they are neither to nor from Clinton herself, in which case we have just consumed a giant nothing-burger. After all, we already know that the FBI has no idea whether the emails amount to anything of any significance.

This raises the obvious question: what on earth was the FBI director thinking when he dropped his letter on Friday making it crystal clear that he knew nothing? As a rule, law enforcement agencies generally don’t publicize the fact that they are clueless.

Beyond James Comey’s extraordinary intervention in the late stages of a presidential election, his letter raises another, more familiar question about the Clintons: why do they attract pseudo-scandals with such alarming ease and frequency?

From the Clinton Foundation to the private email server, from Benghazi to Weiner, from Whitewater to Monica, the list is as long as it is utterly spurious. Whatever crumbs of wrongdoing there may be, they don’t amount to something worthy of Watergate, or even the myriad gate-suffixed scandals since. Questionable behavior is not the same as criminal or even impeachable conduct.

Perhaps the pseudo-scandals say more about the Clinton haters than they do about the Clintons themselves. But it remains true that there is a remarkable contrast between the clouds that hang over the Clintons and those over the Obamas.

President Obama has not exactly luxuriated in eight years of hate-free politics. The haters have thrown their best at him: questioning his citizenship and his secret sympathies for Isis. They even accused him of wanting to pull the plug on grandma.

And yet there have been no pseudo-scandals about his personal life, his friends and donors, or even open microphone moments. As a candidate he was accused of palling around with terrorists, cutting a sweetheart deal for his home, and following the lead of an anti-American preacher. Inside the White House, not so much. The integrity and self-discipline over the last eight years has almost driven the scandal-mongers out of business.

All that’s left are the obvious problems posed by a radical Islamist from Kenya looking to foment a socialist revolution from the Oval Office. Given that he has only two months left in the White House, President Obama needs to speed up his secret plans or else he’ll turn into an even greater disappointment to the right-wingnuts.

The good news for the scandal-mongers is the next Clinton administration appears to be just around the corner. House Republicans are already prepping their subpoenas in case they can launch another several dozen investigations into the newly-elected President Clinton.

In that context, it doesn’t much matter whether the FBI’s Clinton emails amount to anything more than political gossip. The Hunting of Hillary has only just begun.

What does matter is the impact on voters in these final frenetic days of the 2016 election. Recent polling suggests that most voters have already made up their minds about whether Clinton is honest and trustworthy: they don’t believe her. To be sure, they also think the same about Donald Trump, albeit in slightly lower numbers.

But those poll numbers mean that the email pseudo-scandal is unlikely to change anyone’s mind about the candidate. In the same way, it’s highly unlikely that Bill Clinton’s money-making schemes at the Clinton Foundation will affect his wife’s honesty numbers.

For many voters, this email story comes too late. More than 12 million votes have already been cast across the country in early voting, representing around 10% of the likely total votes in this election.

In any case, the polls were already tightening, as Republicans inevitably rally to their candidate, no matter how catastrophically compromised he is with the voting demographic commonly known as “women”.

Clinton’s post-debate highs were unlikely to hold. In fact, numerous studies have shown that elections tend to end where the polls stand two weeks after the conventions, despite all the fluctuations back and forth. That suggests this election will end up as a race in the mid-single digits as a margin of victory for Clinton.

Of course we don’t know what the FBI emails may yet uncover, and we certainly don’t know what turnout will look like on election day.

But we do know that the closing days of a presidential election are anxious times. Campaign staffers are exhausted and fear failure. The media is desperate for one more fix of adrenaline, one more turn of the story to up-end the likely outcome. Supporters on both sides become obsessive consumers of any snippet of information that might tip the balance.

Into this gasoline-soaked period, the FBI director just threw a burning match and walked away. But the dumpster fire was already raging in this shocking election, and the voters who find the whole scene disgusting will likely stay away.

Never mind the emails. This election was already in flames.

FBI director Comey faces fury for cryptic letter about Clinton email inquiry
Podesta: Comey ‘allowed partisans to distort and exaggerate’
Trump campaign seizes on news of review of newly discovered emails
Weiner takes center stage in presidential race about men’s sex lives

David Smith in Washington
Saturday 29 October 2016 19.56 BST

Hillary Clinton’s campaign chair on Saturday led a chorus of Democratic party fury over the FBI’s decision to review a new batch of her staff’s emails, which was announced just 11 days before the presidential election in a striking break with law enforcement tradition.

The Clinton campaign launched an extraordinary criticism of James Comey, the director of the FBI, who faced anger for his dramatic and late intervention in the race, which deviated from FBI protocol. Comey stood accused of betraying the bureau’s political neutrality, and came under growing pressure to make public everything he knows.

The latest twist in a topsy turvy election arrived on Friday afternoon, when Comey said in a letter to Congress the FBI would review whether there was any classified information in new “emails that appear to be pertinent to the investigation”. In a carefully worded letter, the director said he wanted to “supplement my previous testimony” about the original Clinton email investigation, which he told Congress had closed this summer, and said: “The FBI cannot yet assess whether or not this material may be significant.”

On Saturday, Clinton campaign chair John Podesta said: “By providing selective information, he’s allowed partisans to distort and exaggerate in order to inflict maximum political damage and no one can separate what is true from what is not because Comey has not been forthcoming with the facts.

“What little Comey has told us makes it hard to understand why this step was warranted at all.”

It is “entirely possible” that the emails are duplicates of those already studied by the FBI in its earlier investigation into Clinton’s use of a private server while secretary of state, Podesta told reporters on a conference call, adding that Clinton would not be distracted in the final days of the campaign.

In July, the FBI closed that investigation. Comey said at the time that Clinton and her aides had been “extremely careless” but not criminal with their email practices.

“Director Comey was the one who decided to take this unprecedented step,” Podesta said, “we now learn, against the advice of senior justice department officials who told him it was against longstanding department policy of both Democratic and Republican administrations.

“Director Comey was the one that wrote a letter that was light on facts, heavy on innuendo, knowing full well what Republicans in Congress would do with it.

“It’s now up to him, who owes the public answers to the questions that are now on the table, and we’re calling on him to come forward and give those answers to the American public.”

Law enforcement sources speaking anonymously told news outlets the new emails came from devices belonging to Anthony Weiner, the disgraced former congressman and estranged husband of Huma Abedin, one of Clinton’s closest aides. Agents uncovered the emails during an investigation into whether Weiner sent sexually explicit text messages to a teenage girl.

Podesta said Abedin had fully cooperated with the FBI investigation from the start. “She’s been fully cooperative. We of course stand behind her.”

Robby Mook, Clinton’s campaign manager, said: “The more information that comes out, the more overblown this entire situation seems to be. That in turn has raised more questions about director Comey from his colleagues in law enforcement circles, to take this extraordinary step just 11 days out from a presidential election.”

Mook highlighted a “startling” Washington Post report that senior officials in the justice department had warned Comey not to go public but he ignored their advice. He also claimed that, based on anecdotes from the ground, Clinton’s supporters were intensifying their efforts to get out the vote.

“Our volunteers are rallying behind Hillary,” he said. “They know what a fighter she is … They’re as upset and concerned as we are here … This has only increased the momentum that we’re feeling among our activists on the ground.”

A jubilant Donald Trump, meanwhile, seized on a potential lifeline for his faltering campaign – on Friday describing Clinton’s handling of classified information as a scandal “bigger than Watergate”.

With barely disguised anger, Clinton herself demanded the FBI explain itself on Friday. “The American people deserve to get the full and complete facts immediately,” she told reporters in Des Moines, Iowa. “The director himself has said he doesn’t know whether the emails referenced in his letter are significant or not.”

The content of the messages is unknown – and may well remain so beyond election day. “Right now, your guess is as good as mine, and I don’t think that’s good enough,” Clinton said.

Comey is a Barack Obama appointee who was deputy attorney general for George W Bush. As well as the Washington Post, the New Yorker reported officials speaking on condition of anonymity saying that Comey was warned by the justice department before sending his letter to Congress.

“He is operating independently of the justice department. And he knows it,” one official told the Post. “It violates decades of practice,” another told the New Yorker. “It’s aberrational.”

Matthew Miller, who served at the department under attorney general Eric Holder, told the Guardian: “I think it was an unacceptable breach of years of department of justice practice and precedent.

“The department goes out of its way not to take any action close to an election that could influence the outcome of that election. The FBI’s reputation for independence and integrity is really at the core to their ability to do their job effectively.”

Miller described Comey’s decision to provide an unprecedented televised statement at the end of the Clinton investigation in July as “the original sin here”. The director then felt able to answer questions from Congress in more detail than usual, but this is “by far the most serious breach of all”, Miller added.

The former justice department staffer said J Edgar Hoover, the original and controversial FBI director, had done worse than Comey, “but not even Hoover did anything publicly in the closing day of an election that could be seen as tipping the scales.”

Republicans and Democrats alike expressed bafflement at Comey’s timing and ambiguous letter. Senator Dianne Feinstein, a senior Democrat with a history of support for the security agencies, condemned Comey’s conduct. “The FBI has a history of extreme caution near election day so as not to influence the results,” she said. “Today’s break from that tradition is appalling.”

Charles Grassley, the Republican chairman of the Senate judiciary committee, said Comey’s letter to Congress “was unsolicited and, quite honestly, surprising”. He too said it created more questions than answers.

“Congress and the public deserve more context to properly assess what evidence the FBI has discovered and what it plans to do with it,” Grassley said.

Some analysts speculated that Comey felt caught in a bind: if he waited until after the election, or if the new review leaked through back channels, he would have been accused of a cover-up. In an internal email sent to FBI employees, he said he was concerned about balance: the need to inform Congress and the American people versus the danger of a misleading impression about emails.

“In trying to strike that balance, in a brief letter and in the middle of an election season, there is significant risk of being misunderstood, but I wanted you to hear directly from me about it,” he wrote.

Early voting is under way in 37 states, nearly 17m votes have been cast, and Clinton has a healthy lead in most polls. “I think people a long time ago made up their minds about the emails,” she said at her press conference. “And now they are choosing a president.”

Though his own campaign has been plagued by one scandal after another, Trump has regularly berated Clinton over the emails, and his supporters at rallies frequently chant: “Lock her up! Lock her up!” On Friday he accused Clinton of corruption “on a scale we have never seen before”.

“We must not let her take her criminal scheme into the oval office,” he told a rally in New Hampshire. “Perhaps, finally, justice will be done.”

On Saturday, campaigning in Colorado, Trump made an about-face from his months of criticising the FBI and justice department. “You have amazing people at the Department of Justice, and you have amazing people at the FBI,” he said. “I’ll bet you, without any knowledge, that there was a revolt in the FBI.”

The FBI began investigating Weiner in September, after a Daily Mail report that a 15-year-old girl had exchanged explicit messages with him. By then, Abedin had already announced a separation from her husband.


Trump himself has been accused by several women of sexual assault or inappropriate conduct. He has argued that Clinton “enabled” her husband’s infidelities, and brought three women who accused the former president of wrongdoing to a presidential debate.

Kristalina Georgieva to quit Commission for World Bank job


Kristalina Georgieva to quit Commission for World Bank job
A source said the Bulgarian was frustrated with the ‘poisonous’ influence of Jean-Claude Juncker’s chief of staff.

By RYAN HEATH 10/28/16, 4:30 PM CET Updated 10/28/16, 5:55 PM CET

Kristalina Georgieva resigned Friday as vice president of the European Commission to take a job as CEO of the World Bank, after becoming frustrated by the workings at the highest level of the Commission, and fresh off a failed bid to lead the United Nations.

Commission sources said the Bulgarian commissioner, who has been in charge of the budget and administrative portfolio since 2014, has offered to remain in her Brussels post through to the end of December, before starting her newly created position in Washington on January 2, 2017.


Günther Oettinger, the European commissioner from Germany who currently holds the digital portfolio, will take over Georgieva’s responsibilities, according to a statement from the Commission.

“The work of the European Commission must go on,” Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker said Friday in a written statement, adding that he accepted Georgieva’s resignation “with great regret.”

“Kristalina Georgieva is an experienced politician for whom I have great respect and I want to thank her for her loyal and committed work as vice president of the European Commission,” Juncker said.

A further reshuffling of Commission portfolios may follow in coming days, adding additional pressure on an EU institution already beset by crises ranging from migration to Brexit to the economy.

While not the first member of the Juncker Commission to resign — Jonathan Hill quit his post in the wake of the U.K.’s vote to leave the EU — Georgieva’s departure is the first to be tied to a grievance with how the Commission operates.

Georgieva, effectively the Commission’s chief operating officer, has grown increasingly frustrated with how the institution has handled such challenges as migration, Brexit and senior appointments, according to a Commission source close to her. In particular, the source said, Georgieva objects to the working methods of Martin Selmayr, Juncker’s chief of staff, and what she perceives a failure to adequately consult on important decisions.

European Commissioner for Budget and Human Resources Kristalina Georgieva
In her current Commission role, Georgieva manages a €161 billion annual budget and more than 30,000 staff | Dominick Reuter/AFP via Getty Images
The source said Georgieva considers Selmayr to be a “poisonous” influence on the Commission, and that she had already reached the limits of her patience before the United Nations vote occurred.

One European commissioner POLITICO spoke to said that while Georgieva did not openly express criticism of Juncker or Selmayr, “from her body language” it was clear that frustrations existed.

Georgieva’s frustrations with Selmayr date back to spring 2015 when, according to a senior Commission source, she accused him of interfering in her efforts to shepherd the €315 billion Juncker Investment Plan through the European Parliament and Council, and took a heavy-handed role in the appointment of senior Commission officials.

In a Twitter exchange on Friday afternoon, Georgieva responded to a congratulatory message from Selmayr by calling him “a great partner to work with over the last two years.”

Faced with the prospect of another three years working for Juncker and Selmayr after her failed U.N. bid, Georgieva decided to complete her work on the Commission’s mid-term budget review and leave, the source said.

Georgieva has long previous experience at the World Bank, where she rose to the rank of vice president during a 17-year stint before her Commission job.

“Global development is her absolute passion,” said a Commission source. “She thought long and hard about this decision. In the end she decided to go back to her passion. She joined the Commission in 2010 when her country needed her, but global development is her abiding passion,” the source said, dismissing the idea that the move was motivated by frustration with the Commission’s leadership.

“Kristalina is a globally recognized leader with a proven track record in improving the lives of those most in need,” said World Bank Group President Jim Yong Kim in a written statement. A World Bank source described Kim as ecstatic about landing Georgieva for the role.

Georgieva’s job title will be chief executive officer of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the International Development Association, entities that focus on lending to middle-income and poor countries. She will be based in Washington, and report directly to Kim.

Oettinger is “one of the few commissioners with an interest in budget talks at the College (of Commissioners),” said a Commission source.
In her current Commission role, Georgieva manages a €161 billion annual budget and more than 30,000 staff.

Oettinger, who managed the budget dossier earlier in October while Georgieva campaigned for the U.N. post, would be the first Western European to hold the post since 2004. It is expected that Oettinger will also gain the title of vice president.

Oettinger is “one of the few commissioners with an interest in budget talks at the College (of Commissioners),” said a Commission source.

Whatever the title, Oettinger’s new job implies a significant change from a single-policy-focused responsibility towards a broader portfolio that would allow him to get involved in and speak publicly on many issues.

“Oettinger looks into his files before he speaks about an issue. That is what the president appreciates,” a Commission source said in September, when Oettinger temporarily took over Georgieva’s beat while she campaigned to become U.N. secretary-general. “He spoke competently about the EU budget during an orientation debate in College [of Commissioners]”, the source said.

Florian Eder contributed to this article.

Authors:


Ryan Heath  

Five takeaways from Hillary Clinton’s bad Friday


Five takeaways from Hillary Clinton’s bad Friday
Clinton doesn’t believe in good luck, and latest bombshell shows why.

By GLENN THRUSH 10/29/16, 4:29 PM CET Updated 10/29/16, 4:35 PM CET

Hillary Clinton has never met a sunny day she completely trusted, and Friday proved why.

The front-running Democrat has always been weakest when protecting a lead, and, according to the people around her, chronically suspicious of any overlong stretches of good fortune or blue-sky forecasting. She needn’t have worried. The last 10 days of her historic campaign are now socked in by a lowering overcast of suspicion, and a depressingly familiar threat.


Friday started off brightly enough in Des Moines, as a cheerful Clinton rallied her supporters during the first round of early voting in a state she wants, but doesn’t need to win. She seemed chilled-out in an aqua-blue suit that suggested marine tranquility, and was buoyed by the presence of her childhood friend Betsy Ebeling and the superstar photographer Annie Leibovitz.

But by the afternoon, a candidate and campaign that thrives on preparation were blind-sided by a bombshell (that might ultimately prove to be a blank): FBI Director James Comey – who declared her handling of classified information “careless” but not criminal in July – has begun looking into what are said to be thousands of new emails for possible violations of the classification laws.

Then, the elect-ile dysfunction: The source of the new controversy, Clinton’s surrogate daughter Huma Abedin and her estranged husband Anthony Weiner, package-proud proof that not every horny narcissist with bad judgment is named Donald Trump.

How much the latest email eruption affects the race depends on how both campaigns handle it over the next few days – and how much voters give a damn. Still, it’s a drag. The best peppy self-talk one Clinton ally could muster today was: “People don’t trust her already, so that’s baked in the cake. But she’s better than Trump.”

Here are five takeaways from Clinton’s very bad Friday – that could turn into something much worse.

Blame Huma and Tony – for now. According to numerous published reports, thousands of potentially sensitive (and possibly classified) government emails from Abedin’s account were discovered on devices owned by Weiner – seized by the FBI in connection with their probe into the former congressman’s alleged social media lewdness with a 15-year-old girl.

How the emails got into Abedin’s possession isn’t clear (though Clinton often emailed her aide-de-camp documents to print out). But the fact that the material being examined didn’t come from Clinton’s account gives the candidate a degree of separation she didn’t have in Comey’s prior investigation – and the correspondence being looked at, according to some reports, come from Abedin’s account, and not the “homebrew” server that has been the source of so much controversy and reputational damage. That helps, if only a bit.

Donald Trump and Republicans – giddy to get the old email band back together — wanted to keep the focus squarely on Clinton and, for an hour before Weiner connection was known, they succeeded. But the sexting angle, the Huma angle, the tabloid marriage-gone-sour angle made it seem a lot less sinister — and more the continuation of a political soap opera in which Clinton has played a starring but supporting role.

The CNN, MSNBC and FOX screens at POLITICO world headquarters said it all – they split-screened between dour, preoccupied snapshots of Clinton and more whimsical images of the once happy Weiner-Abedin glamour couple. Clinton will ultimately bear responsibility for whatever happened to her emails – and Comey made it clear that the new messages “appear to be pertinent” to his earlier look at the former secretary’s handling of classified and secret missives.

But unlike the first go-around – when Clinton stood alone — she now shares the stage with Anthony and Huma.

It takes the focus off of Trump. We are in the final stretch of a psoriasis-vs.-eczema election – and whichever candidate gets the greatest scrutiny tends to make the voters the most itchy.

Trump has had them scratching for a month – what with his 2005 hot-mic admission that he committed what sounded like sexual assault, followed by a procession of a dozen or so women who accused him of being a cad, groper and commando kisser. He denied it, but compounded his problem by attacking regular, non-famous-type people who had the gall to criticize him — and washed it all down with three of the rottenest debate performances in the history of people moving their lips to emit sound. Trump capped it all with a threat to destabilize 240 years of American democracy by claiming any vote against him was automatically rigged.

Clinton, who hates everything about campaigning except reading briefing books and debating her opponents, has been happy to coast in Trump’s turbulent wake – tsk-tsk-tsk-ing him and deploying a Hall of Fame roster of surrogates from the Obamas to Bernie Sanders to Elizabeth Warren to Katy Perry. But gradually, inevitably, the focus has turned back on the second-most detested candidate running for president – in part because of the drip-drip of WikiLeaks, in part because voters are now forced to grapple with the reality that she’s likely to be the country’s next leader.

She doesn’t fare especially well alone in the spotlight – while she’s held her own in most polls, and retains a commanding advantage in many battleground states (and the Electoral College) – Trump has begun to finally consolidate support among core Republicans, which has brought him as high as 44 percent in one national poll and to par with her in Florida and Nevada.

So look for a new oppo dump on Trump — and a new line of attack — or anything, really, that will turn the race back into a referendum on his fitness to serve, not hers.

Never underestimate Trump’s ability to misplay a winning hand. Trump is about as good a political poker player as he was a casino owner. Case in point: His first comments about Clinton’s new email problems were aimed not at wider audience of Donald-skeptical conservatives and persuadable voters but the cheering throng at his most recent rally in New Hampshire, where he trails in most polls.

Weinergate, he declared, “is bigger than Watergate.”

It totally isn’t, at least not yet – and there isn’t a voter not already committed to Trump who believes the hype. No, the target for his message now needs to be higher-educated Republican voters (and, perish the thought, GOP women) who are considering defecting to vote for Clinton. They aren’t looking for another Trump body slam, but a little reason and rhetorical subtlety – a permission structure to accept him as an alternative to hated-but-tolerated Hillary.

There are smarter ways to do this, obviously. Take Paul Ryan, Trump’s intra-party nemesis, who offered a more targeted and legalistic attack on Clinton that undermined her legitimacy as a potential commander-in-chief by calling for the suspension of her national security briefings. “Yet again, Hillary Clinton has nobody but herself to blame,” the House speaker said in his statement. “She was entrusted with some of our nation’s most important secrets, and she betrayed that trust by carelessly mishandling highly classified information.”

Clinton vs. Comey. It wasn’t so very long ago when Trump and his surrogates were hammering Comey and the once-sacrosanct bureau for allegedly covering up Clinton’s abominable email offences.

“FBI director said Crooked Hillary compromised our national security. No charges. Wow! #RiggedSystem,” Trump Tweeted when Comey cleared Clinton of criminal wrongdoing.

On Friday, he was in a J. Edgar state of mind with his opponent back in the investigative crosshairs. “I have great respect for the fact that the FBI and the Department of Justice are now willing to have the courage to right the horrible mistake that they made,” he said, with faintest flip-floppy grin. “This was a grave miscarriage of justice that the American people fully understood. And it is everybody’s hope that it is about to be corrected.”

Now it was the Democrats’ turn to accuse Comey and Co. of unfairness – with surrogates like former Obama Justice Department official Matt Miller flat-out accusing the director of needlessly publicizing the details of an ongoing investigation to burnish his own image. The reaction among Clinton’s top aides and lawyers was fury – they had been given no advance warning by the bureau before Comey sent a letter to congressional Republicans, copying Hill Democrats – and they questioned whether the timing was, somehow, intended to scuttle Clinton’s chances of winning the White House.

By late afternoon, it was Clinton’s turn to play the old Trump card against Comey, demanding that all the details of the probe – especially the involvement of Abedin and Weiner were made immediately public.

“We don’t know the facts, which is why we are calling on the FBI to release all the information that it has,” a clearly ticked-off Clinton told reporters between campaign stops. “Even Director Comey noted that this new information might not be significant, so let’s get it out.”

Trump’s not the only candidate with a self-destructive streak. Among the most revealing (and funny) emails released as part of WikiLeaks’s (allegedly) Kremlin-supplied hack were the tart, accurate observations by longtime Hillaryland adviser Neera Tanden, who couldn’t believe the Clintons would have set up a private server in the first place. “Do we actually know who told Hillary she could use a private email? And has that person been drawn and quartered?” Tanden asked her friend John Podesta, who was subsequently hacked – adding that the “whole thing is f—ing insane.”

What made it especially insane was the candidate’s own propensity for self-protective self-immolation: The server was set up, in part, to shield the hyper-scrutinized former first family from scrutiny, embarrassment and scandal. Worked like a charm, if that charm was to foment an already burbling suspicion among the American people that Clinton was secretive, self-interested and not to be trusted. In September 2015, before the email server scandal was weaponized by Trump (her primary opponent Bernie Sanders famously eschewed using the issue against her), The Atlantic hosted a focus group to figure out why more than half of Americans didn’t trust an international superstar who was almost always voted the most admired woman in the world.

“She’s lied again and again and again in the pursuit of power,” one man told the magazine’s pollster. “This has been her entire life’s work, it seems like, has been building up to this moment, so she doesn’t have any shots left.”

“She wants it so much she’ll say anything, she’ll do anything,” a female respondent added: “the people behind her will say anything or do anything. Do I want those kind of people in power? Oh, please no.”

Those opinions have taken deep root, even among her supporters; Mind you, voters often vote for candidates they don’t trust, but Clinton’s no-trust numbers are abysmal – topping 60 percent in some polls, with solid majorities of voters expressing unease about her handling of the emails and her family’s charitable foundation. This won’t help.

Trump hasn’t done much to burnish his own image, but he’s been relentless in degrading public esteem for “Crooked Hillary” – leading rally chants of “Lock her up!” despite Comey’s July exoneration of Clinton. The FBI’s decision was hailed with relief in Clinton’s Brooklyn headquarters but it came ahead of her deepest swan dive in the polls to date: For a few days in late July, Trump briefly seized the national lead, and poll aggregators gave him a roughly 55 percent chance of winning the election on the eve of Clinton’s successful convention in Philadelphia.

She’s in better shape now – the handicappers give her between an 80 and 90 percent chance of winning and roughly 30 percent of votes have already been cast, thanks to early balloting and absentee voting in many states. And the scandal (or pseudo-scandal) doesn’t yet directly involve her.


But by late Friday all the Democratic talk of landslides and big down-ballot victories had given way, yet again, to nervous chatter about a candidate who never seems to able to seal the deal.

Belgium officially signs CETA agreement


Belgium officially signs CETA agreement
Formal approval of Belgium will allow EU leaders and Canada to sign the deal.

By MAÏA DE LA BAUME 10/29/16, 12:52 PM CET Updated 10/29/16, 3:07 PM CET

Belgium’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Didier Reynders on Saturday signed the CETA agreement at a ceremony in Brussels, his spokesman Didier Vanderhasselt told POLITICO.

The formal approval of Belgium’s federal government will allow EU leaders and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to sign the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement at an EU-Canada summit on Sunday.


A green light from Belgium will allow the EU member states to start implementing CETA on provisional basis at the beginning of next year.

The signing ceremony on Saturday took place at the Palais d’Egmont, a conference center, two days after regional authorities gave their approval to the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), ending days of tense negotiations with the federal government, the EU and Canadian officials.

Vanderhasselt said in an interview that Reynders had signed the agreement in the presence of Cecilia Malmström, European Trade Commissioner, Mauro Petriccione, the Commission’s chief negotiator on CETA, Olivier Nicoloff, Canada’s ambassador in Belgium, … and Jean-Pierre Tanghe, the president of the Belgian-Canadian Chamber of commerce.

Sunday’s summit will come as a relief for European and Canadian trade officials, who had been negotiating the trade deal since 2013. Their efforts were blocked two weeks ago by the parliament of Belgium’s French-speaking region of Wallonia.

Wallonia resisted to CETA in part because it was seeking further assurances on agricultural and legal aspects of the trade pact between Brussels and Ottawa.

On Sunday, Trudeau will be joined by Jean-Claude Juncker, the commission president, and Donald Tusk, the Council president at a signing ceremony at noon local time.

In a statement, posted on its website, the Council said, “the agreement comes with a binding joint interpretative instrument, which explains what the provisions mean in practice.”

Many EU officials hailed the agreement on Twitter on Saturday, expressing satisfaction that the deadlock on CETA was over.

Juncker said in tweet, “Hard work and patience paid off. Looking forward to tomorrow’s #EUCanada Summit.”


Authors:


Maïa de La Baume  

sexta-feira, 28 de outubro de 2016

O ministro da Educação ainda não se demitiu?


O ministro da Educação ainda não se demitiu?
JOÃO MIGUEL TAVARES 29/10/2016 – 00:36

Ou Tiago Brandão Rodrigues desmente de forma muito convincente o seu anterior secretário de Estado da Juventude e do Desporto ou o seu único caminho é a demissão.

Deixemos por um momento de lado o colapso moral da classe política portuguesa e dos seus tristes jotinhas, essa subespécie que enche gabinetes ministeriais após ter-se arrastado por universidades, com um empenho associativo inversamente proporcional à sua aplicação académica. A facilidade com que se continua a transitar da colagem de cartazes para o tacho da assessoria mereceria um texto só por si, pois demonstra bem que a cultura jobs for the boys está muito longe de ter esmorecido. Só nesta semana foram duas demissões. Depois de Rui Roque, adjunto para os Assuntos Regionais do primeiro-ministro, foi agora a vez de Nuno Félix, chefe de gabinete do secretário de Estado da Juventude e do Desporto, duas demissões por terem invocado (está em Diário da República) uma licenciatura que nunca tiveram. No que diz respeito à produção de aldrabões académicos, Portugal pode começar a apresentar-se como país exportador.

Mas independentemente de o governo estar a necessitar de uma profunda auditoria às habilitações dos seus membros de gabinete, vale a pena concentrarmo-nos naquilo que por esta altura já deveria ser óbvio para todos: ou Tiago Brandão Rodrigues desmente de forma muito convincente o seu anterior secretário de Estado da Juventude e do Desporto, João Wengorovius Meneses, ou o seu único caminho é a demissão. Wengorovius Meneses, que bateu com a porta do ministério em Abril, garantiu ao Observador que Brandão Rodrigues sabia perfeitamente que Nuno Félix tinha mentido nas suas habilitações, e que essa havia sido uma das razões para a sua demissão. O ministério da Educação negou que o ministro tivesse conhecimento de qualquer irregularidade – só que, como explicação, é curto.

Dizer que há aqui apenas a palavra de um ministro contra a palavra de um ex-secretário de Estado não convence ninguém que tenha lido com alguma atenção a investigação do Observador. Por uma razão simples: a demissão de Wengorovius Meneses foi muito badalada, e já em Abril ele havia afirmado publicamente que saía “em profundo desacordo” com o ministro da Educação no “modo de estar no exercício de cargos públicos”. De resto, recusou-se a adiantar mais por respeito à “dignidade do Estado” e à “estabilidade política”. Agora, o ex-secretário do Estado vem confirmar histórias inacreditáveis sobre Nuno Félix – hesito sobre qual será a minha favorita, se o facto de ele ter um motorista para o ir buscar e levar todos os dias a São Martinho do Porto (108 quilómetros de Lisboa, 432 quilómetros diários para o pobre motorista), se o facto de manter, em acumulação, o trabalho na secretaria de Estado do Desporto com o cargo de olheiro (juro) do Colónia FC –, mas vem dizer mais: Wengorovius afirma preto no branco que o ministro o impediu de exonerar Nuno Félix, nome que lhe havia sido imposto por Brandão Rodrigues aquando da aceitação do cargo e que era um homem da sua confiança directa, tendo transmitindo, segundo o Observador, “essa ordem por e-mail”.


Ora, se há mails, há provas. Um dos dois está a mentir. Portanto, a bem da salubridade da República, espero que esse mail seja publicamente revelado se Tiago Brandão Rodrigues continuar a garantir que não tinha qualquer consciência das irregularidades de Nuno Félix. Se se provar que tinha, o caminho só pode ser um: apresentar a sua demissão do cargo de ministro da Educação, que não é com certeza o lugar mais adequado do país para andar a brincar às licenciaturas.