Alana Moceri

Entrevista con la Tarde de la COPE

Puedes escucharlo aquí sobre las :30.

Entrevista sobre el impeachment con Las Mañanas de RNE

Hablé con Las Mañanas de RNE sobre el impeachment.

Juicio político contra Trump: Un proceso histórico

 

EEUU: ¿qué demócrata podría ganar a Trump? Entrevista con Cinco Continentes

Hablé con Cinco Continentes sobre el ultimo debate entre los Demócratas antes del caucus de Iowa, los candidatos y quien puede vencer a Trump. Puedes escucharlo aqui:

EEUU: ¿qué demócrata podría ganar a Trump?

 

Si la absolución del Senado está tan clara, ¿por qué el 'impeachment' a Trump?

Desde que la Cámara de Representantes de Estados Unidos votó en diciembre a favor de abrir el proceso de impeachmentde Donald J. Trump, su presidenta, Nancy Pelosi, quedó atrapada en un dilema gestado durante meses. Y es que, si las declaraciones del líder de la mayoría del Senado, Mitch McConnell, deben tomarse al pie de la letra, entonces no habrá imparcialidad en el juicio a Trump en esta Cámara.

A pesar del juramento de imparcialidad que los senadores deberán hacer antes de que comience el juicio, McConnell se ha jactado ya de que él no es "un jurado imparcial". Más aún: ha dicho que "no habrá diferencia entre la posición del presidente y la nuestra sobre cómo resolver esto ". (leer articulo / English version)

If a Senate acquittal is so certain, what is the point of impeaching Trump?

Since the House of Representatives voted to impeach President Donald J. Trump in December, Speaker Nancy Pelosi has been caught in a quandary that’s been in the making for several months. If Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s statements are to be taken at face value, then there will be no impartiality in Trump’s Senate trial. Despite the oath to be impartial that Senators will take before the trial begins, McConnell has boasted that he is “not an impartial juror.” There’s more: he’s said that “there will be no difference between the president’s position and our position as to how to handle this.”

In response, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi held off on formally presenting the two articles of impeachment to the Senate until this week. This appears to be classic Pelosi: strategic and shrewd. Firstly, because, in the face of a Senate trial favoring Trump, it makes sense to delay its occurrence. Why? Because more evidence is coming out which might influence public opinion which could pressure the Senate into upholding their oath to run an impartial trial. This isn’t restricted to the Ukraine question that the impeachment articles center around, it can be any ongoing issue that affects public opinion. A big “for example” is Trump’s the recent decision to kill Iran’s General Qasem Soleimani that has resulted in fears of what would be devastating war in the Middle East. This has won Trump not only criticism from Congressional Democrats but also Republicans, who have struggled to defend this reckless action.

Viejos, blancos y varones: el Partido Demócrata no encarna su promesa de diversidad

Hay que reconocérselo, los demócratas están demostrando que casi son capaces de andar y masticar chicle al mismo tiempo. Durante dos meses dirigieron una investigación que ha desembocado, en diciembre, en la votación para iniciar el enjuiciamiento y el proceso de destitución de Donald Trump, y, al mismo tiempo, están en plena campaña de las primarias para elegir al candidato que se enfrentará a él en 2020.

Las dos actividades tienen el mismo objetivo, acortar la presencia de Trump en la Casa Blanca, pero las dos tienen muy poca seguridad de que vayan a triunfar. El Senado de mayoría republicana, casi con toda certeza, absolverá al presidente. Y, a pesar de que hay un grupo de candidatos lleno de talento y más variado que nunca, da la impresión de que la competición de las primarias está centrada ya en cuatro candidatos: dos hombres ancianos y blancos, el ex vicepresidente Joe Biden y el senador Bernie Sanders, un hombre blanco más joven, Pete Buttigieg, alcalde de Southbend, Indiana, y una mujer blanca, la senadora Elizabeth Warren. Este grupo no representa la promesa del Partido Demócrata de ser el partido de la diversidad frente a un Partido Republicano de hombres viejos y blancos. (leer articulo / English version)

Old, white and male: the Democratic Party's failure to embody their promise of diversity

You have to give them credit, the Democrats are showing that they can almost walk and chew gum at the same time. They have spent two months running an investigation and finally voted to impeach Trump in December and at the same time have been running a primary to choose the candidate who will face Trump in 2020.

Both activities share the same goal of cutting short Trump's days in the White House yet the success of either is highly uncertain. The Republican-controlled Senate will almost certainly acquit Trump. And despite a talented and historically diverse field of candidates, the primary race seems to be settling on four candidates: two older white men, former Vice President Joe Biden and Senator Bernie Sanders and younger white man, Southbend, Indiana Mayor, Pete Buttigieg and one white woman, Senator Elizabeth Warren. This group hardly represents the promise of the Democratic Party to be the party of diversity in the face of the Republican Party of old white men.

Impeachment: la baza de Trump, mantener dividida a la opinión pública

Cuando la Cámara de Representantes de Estados Unidos votaba este miércoles (jueves ya en España) a favor del impeachment a Donald J. Trump, el nombre del presidente norteamericano se unía a un club exclusivo que incluye sólo a otros dos predecesores: Andrew Johnson y Bill Clinton.

El impeachment de Trump ha estado en boca de todos desde antes incluso de que fuera elegido presidente. La cosa estaba tan cantada y Trump ha llevado la indignidad a tales extremos, que el proceso para su destitución casi resulta hoy chocante. Ahora bien, se trata de un acontecimiento histórico, y hay que decir que sólo estamos asistiendo a un comienzo, no al fin.

(Leer articulo / English version)

Impeached, Trump’s best hope is to keep public opinion divided

When the U.S. House of Representatives impeached Donald J. Trump on Wednesday, he joined an exclusive club that includes only two other presidents, Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton. We’ve been talking about a Trump impeachment since before he was even elected. This moment has been so anticipated, and this president has taken impropriety to such new heights, that this vote to impeach feels anti-climactic. It is indeed historic, but it is a beginning not an end. The next stop in this process will be the U.S. Senate which is expected to hold a two-week trial next year to decide whether or not to remove Trump from office. While this decision is up to the Senators who will eventually have to cast a vote, this vote will be highly influenced by public opinion.

Disinformation and the 2020 campaign: what can we possibly believe¿

In an Oval Office meeting with President Trump, Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan whipped out an iPad to play a propaganda video that depicted the leader of the mostly Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces as a terrorist. Erdoğan did this unabashedly in a meeting that included five Republican senators who have been the most vocal critics of Turkey’s invasion of Syria and attacks on Kurdish allies. Somehow, he thought he could lure them into changing their minds, but as the video ended, Senator Lindsey Graham reportedly asked: "Well, do you want me to go get the Kurds to make one about what you've done?"

We might be using more innocuous words for it these days, like fake news or disinformation, but attempts to manipulate our emotions, attitudes and beliefs are nothing new. We used to call it propaganda or just plain old lies. It would be jaw dropping that the president of Turkey would take a crude and clearly propagandistic video with him to the White House if it were not for the man currently occupying it.