România
Roportal.ro

Alegeri Prezidenţiale USA 2016

Început de The Unknown, Sâm 12 mar 2016 · 785 răspunsuri · 30.290 vizualizări · închis

The Unknown45.704 mesaje#341
aramis a scris:

fusesera niste diplomati care nu mai puteau  ajunge la ONU din cauza asta. 

Si ce faceau acolo any way???   Numarau paduchii de primavara!!!   Trag pe dreapta si americanii-i platesc, se va termina si asta ... soon.

Supreme Court seems split in case of boy's death near border
image001-png_162613.png.cf.jpg
MARK SHERMAN
Associated Press February 21, 2017
562 Comments
  • 541be438d9874b7ea55457b17d6e19ec.jpg
  • 5480d9cc747640b58d1df7cb628ead2a.jpg
1 / 2
FILE - In this June 7, 2010 file photo, Mexican forensic experts examine the body of 14-year-old Sergio Adrian Hernandez Guereca under the Paso Del Norte border bridge in the city of Ciudad Juarez, Mexico. The Supreme Court appears to be evenly divided about the right of Mexican parents to use American courts to sue a U.S. Border Patrol agent who fired across the U.S.-Mexican border and killed their teenage son. (AP Photo/File)
FILE - In this June 7, 2010 file photo, Mexican forensic experts examine the body of 14-year-old Sergio Adrian Hernandez Guereca under the Paso Del Norte border bridge in the city of Ciudad Juarez, Mexico. The Supreme Court appears to be evenly divided about the right of Mexican parents to use American courts to sue a U.S. Border Patrol agent who fired across the U.S.-Mexican border and killed their teenage son. (AP Photo/File)
More

WASHINGTON (AP) — Examining a tragic shooting death on the U.S. border with Mexico, a divided Supreme Court on Tuesday puzzled over the rights of foreigners to sue in American courts.

The case involving a Mexican teen slain by a U.S. Border Patrol agent's gunshot, which traveled across the border, elicited questions about how a ruling could affect victims of American drone strikes. The court battle over President Donald Trump's ban on travelers from seven majority Muslim nations also lurked in the background: While the legal issues are different, both issues have courts weighing the rights of foreigners.

A 4-4 tie could provide Judge Neil Gorsuch an early opportunity to cast a key vote if he is confirmed to the court before the term ends in late June.

Tuesday's case arose from a June 2010 shooting in the wide, concrete-lined ditch — actually the dry bed of the Rio Grande river — that separates El Paso, Texas, from Ciudad Juarez, Mexico.

The agent was on the U.S. side of the border when he fired his gun, striking Sergio Adrian Hernandez Guereca, who was on the Mexican side.

U.S. officials chose not to prosecute Agent Jesus Mesa Jr. in the killing of the Mexican teenager, and the Obama administration refused a request to extradite him so he could face criminal charges in Mexico.

Lower courts dismissed the parents' lawsuit. The Supreme Court is considering whether noncitizens who are injured or killed outside the United States can have their day in American courts.

The parents argued that the lawsuit is their only chance for some measure of justice in their son's death, and some justices appeared to agree.

In past cases, courts that have limited the right to sue have "been able to point to some alternative remedy," Justice Elena Kagan said. "And here, there really is nothing."

Kagan and the other three liberal justices indicated they would support the parents' lawsuit because the shooting happened close to the border in an area in which the two nations share some responsibilities, including for upkeep.

But Justice Anthony Kennedy and other conservative justices suggested that the boy's death on the Mexican side of the border was enough to keep the matter out of U.S. courts.

Kennedy noted the court has been reluctant to allow civil rights lawsuits like the one the parents filed, especially when they may affect international relations. "This is a sensitive area of foreign affairs where the political branches ought to discuss with Mexico what the solutions ought to be," Kennedy said.

Other justices worried about a decision that could open courthouse doors to victims of U.S. drone strikes, or other military actions. "How do you analyze the case of a drone strike in Iraq where the plane is piloted from Nevada?" Chief Justice John Roberts asked.

Lawyer Robert Hilliard, representing the parents, said the court easily could limit its decision to incidents that occur near the border.

The Trump administration, like its predecessor, is arguing that the location of the teenager's death, in Mexico, should be the end of the story.

Deputy Solicitor General Edwin Kneedler told the court that even if the victim had been American and all the other circumstances were the same, the lawsuit should be thrown out.

But Kneedler and Mesa's lawyer both acknowledged that someone killed by an agent on the U.S. side of the border could sue.

"That doesn't make a whole lot of sense, does it? To distinguish these two victims?" Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said.

Even if the justices were to rule that the lawsuit can be filed, Sergio's family still would have to prevail on two other issues. The government said the parents' claims under the Fourth Amendment should be dismissed because its protections against unreasonable search and seizure don't apply to noncitizens outside the U.S.

Privacy experts are watching the case because it could affect how courts treat global internet surveillance, particularly when foreigners are involved.

Mesa also should be shielded from liability for the shooting, Mesa and the government argued in court papers.

Sergio's shooting was not an isolated border incident. Parents of another teenager killed in Nogales, Mexico, by a federal agent in a cross-border shooting have filed a civil rights lawsuit that is being delayed until the Supreme Court rules.

While Kagan said Tuesday that U.S. officials almost never bring criminal charges in these cases, federal prosecutors are pursuing second-degree murder charges against Agent Lonnie Swartz in the death of Jose Antonio Elena Rodriguez, 16. Swartz was on the Arizona side of the border when he shot the teenager.

A decision in Hernandez v. Mesa, 15-118, is expected by late June. In the event of a tie vote, the court could order new arguments if Gorsuch is on the bench.

adal*4.350 mesaje#342
Allexandrra a scris:

Adica astepti sa inceapa sa faca ce trebuie? :) Dar daca nu a facut decat sa se plieze pe anumite nevoi neavand in vedere altceva decat castigarea alegerilor si instalarea la Casa Alba?

Da. Astept. Am rabdare.

Ce spui tu face orice candidat(politician). De ce ar fi Trump altfel?

Sa inteleg ca ai avut asteptari si nu le mai ai? :)

aramis a scris:
ai gresit faza a doua, dar ti-o spun eu benevol:

si anume când li se pune republicanilor pata pe el si-l pun cu botul pe labe,

aia-i faza a doua.

Republicanii vor incerca sa se foloseasca de el fara sa se friga cu cartofii.

Cand va fi bine, va fi meritul lor, cand trebuiesc luate palme dupa ceafa, le va lua Trump.

Dar la fel vede lucrurile si Trump, doar ca invers, asa ca este un joc interesant.

Allexandrra8.367 mesaje#343
adal* a scris:

Da. Astept. Am rabdare.

Ce spui tu face orice candidat(politician). De ce ar fi Trump altfel?

Sa inteleg ca ai avut asteptari si nu le mai ai? :)

Daca iti pui sperante mari in el, ar trebui sa fie altfel sau sa crezi ca este altfel. Un om capabil sa aduca o schimbare ar trebui sa aiba alt orizont moral, sa aiba viziune, calitati din astea care parca au disparut. 

N-am avut asteptari deloc. M-am uitat la niste filmulete cu el si nu mi-a inspirat nici cea mai vaga urma de incredere de la bun inceput. 

Mi s-a parut ca ai un anume simt al oamenilor si ma mira putin ca nu ti s-a declansat alarma in cazul lui. Sau poate ma insel eu si nu e nimic in neregula cu el.

Editat Mie 22 feb 2017 18:46

Abbie M.9.599 mesaje#344

A fost o mirare spontana bazata pe ideea ca ar fi impotriva sistemului, cum "sistemul" era vazut ca fiind de stanga, promovand globalizarea, societatea multiculturala etc. Muti nu credeau ca se va intampla pentru ca ar fi fost, chipurile, totul planificat dinainte asa incat sa castige Clinton (mass-media era de partea ei pretutindeni si circula ideea ca ar fi fost o campanie organizata pentru a manipula populatia (si a fost, evident, Clinton nu era cu nimic mai putin psihopata decat Trump).

Cand a fost ales, intrebarea generala a fost daca totusi se poate vota impotriva globalizarii si marxismului cultural, asa, din principiu. A fost o ruptura in perspectiva pesimista, dar de scurta durata.

Apoi a crescut entuziasmul pe baza problemei cu extremismul islamic, in legatura cu care in multe state se tace pur si simplu; se matura sub pres. Asa ca a castigat popularitate pe moment pana si in randul scepticilor, unii incepand sa il laude pana la greata, pe baza sperantei ca este totusi impotriva "sistemului" si s-a produs o schimbare majora.

Apoi au inceput sa se vada urmarile concrete ale deciziilor luate de el, extremismul si narcisismul propriu, a inceput lumea sa se documenteze mai adanc in legatura cu el (pana sa fie ales, cei sceptici au manifestat dezinteres, din cate am inteles pe social media). Unii s-au trezit, altii ba, dar am incredere ca au sa se trezeasca mai toti la un moment dat.


Allexandrra a scris:

Daca iti pui sperante mari in el, ar trebui sa fie altfel sau sa crezi ca este altfel. Un om capabil sa aduca o schimbare ar trebui sa aiba alt orizont moral, sa aiba viziune, calitati din astea care parca au disparut. 

N-am avut asteptari deloc. M-am uitat la niste filmulete cu el si nu mi-a inspirat nici cea mai vaga urma de incredere de la bun inceput. 

Mi s-a parut ca ai un anume simt al oamenilor si ma mira putin ca nu ti s-a declansat alarma in cazul lui. Sau poate ma insel eu si nu e nimic in neregula cu el.

Pai tocmai, la inceput foarte multi l-au vazut ca pe un clown, au remarcat ca nu e un om cult (din modul in care se exprima), ca e populist (sloganuri in sanga si in dreapta pe un ton impunator) etc. Sprijinul pentru el a venit in preajma alegerilor si imediat dupa, cand circulau multe informatii despre Clinton si pericolul prezentat de ea si ai ei.

Dar pentru ca a fost ceva de moment, putini din cei ce l-au considerat "in febra evenimentelor" raul mai mic sau chiar o sansa pentru mai bine erau chiar in tema despre trecutul lui, iar pe baza ideei ca "stanga minte pentru Clinton", tot ce a scos stanga la iveala a fost desconsiderat din start ca propaganda, desi era o realitate. Am vazut dinamica asta din partea unor formatori de opinie. A avut loc polarizarea si unii il sustin in continuare, desi candidatura lui le paruse o abjectie pe durata campaniei.

Pentru a intelege ce consideratie are Trump fata de alte persoane (nu alte grupuri, partide etc) nu e nevoie decat sa vizionati documentarul de mai jos. Auzisem cate ceva in trecut dar nu aprofundasem problema. Documentarul detaliaza cum a ajuns sa construiasca un teren de golf in apropiere de Aberdeen. Cum a mintit pentru a obtine aprobare, promitand marea cu sare dpdv economic (urmand sa nu faca nici o fractiune din cat a promis), a intimidat localnicii incercand sa ii evacueze, a desconsiderat toate organizatiile pentru protectia mediului (zona era protejata legal), a distrus un ecosistem, a intimidat presa etc. Comportamentul lui fata de localnici, care au luptat ani de zile pana cand a renuntat el, a fost unul de tot jegul, dupa cum reiese din declaratiile lui. A incercat sa ii intimideze prin tot felul de metode, i-a batjocorit in presa, le-a taiat temporar, cand a putut, apa si curentul. Iar autoritatile l-au sustinut din motive financiare.

E imposibil ca vazand acest documentar cineva sa nu isi dea seama ce caracter are acest om. Daca sunteti pe muchie, va rog sa investiti o ora si 40 de minute, ca veti scapa de indoiala. Nu e niciun strop de propaganda acolo, sunt filmate evenimentele asa cum au avut loc.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_hisXNDZkY

Editat Mie 22 feb 2017 19:04

aramis14.399 mesaje#345
adal* a scris:

Republicanii vor incerca sa se foloseasca de el fara sa se friga cu cartofii.

Cand va fi bine, va fi meritul lor, cand trebuiesc luate palme dupa ceafa, le va lua Trump.

Dar la fel vede lucrurile si Trump, doar ca invers, asa ca este un joc interesant.

teza ta e interesanta,

numai ca am aici o mica retinere.

Trump are nevoie de republicani (în congres), altfel e cu mâinile legate.

Invers nu stiu daca-i tot asa.

însa, sunt de acord, ramâne interesant de urmarit cum evoluaza acest mariaj neconventional dintre ei.

Abbie M. a scris:

Pentru a intelege ce consideratie are Trump fata de alte persoane (nu alte grupuri, partide etc) nu e nevoie decat sa vizionati documentarul de mai jos. Auzisem cate ceva in trecut dar nu aprofundasem problema. Documentarul detaliaza cum a ajuns sa construiasca un teren de golf in apropiere de Aberdeen.

exact despre asta amintisem ieri.

eu l-am vazut la o televiziune locala de-aici.

Abbie M.9.599 mesaje#346
aramis a scris:

exact despre asta amintisem ieri.

eu l-am vazut la o televiziune locala de-aici.

Stiam doar in mare ca au fost presiuni; nu il auzisem vorbind si denigrandu-i pe acei oameni in asemenea hal. Nu stiam nici pana la ce nivel a incercat sa le faca viata dificila. E totul foarte clar acum.

"Vreau sa dispara casele de acolo, sunt urate; cand vor veni miliardarii aici sa joace golf nu vor vrea sa vada asa ceva de la fereastra hotelului. Scapati de ele, demolati-le, oamenii aia traiesc ca niste porci. Nu va obiecta nimeni, decat poate cei care locuiesc acolo. Cui ii pasa?"

Parafrazez, nu am retinut mot-a-mot, dar asta a spus. "Porcii" erau fermieri si pescari, stabiliti acolo de generatii. Dl Trump nu prea e invatat sa vada case fara etaj, barci si tractoare. Si nu accepta sa i se spuna "nu".

aramis14.399 mesaje#347

da,

e un tip execrabil si fara scrupule.

de obicei, marii oameni de stat sunt in stare sa coaguleze, sa uneasca, sa gaseasca punti de comunicare cu ''masele''.

Trump în schimb îsi bazeaza sustinerea pe contradictoriu, pe contraziceri, pe - vorba lui - "fapte alternative" (o gaselnita pentru minciuni sfruntate),

si si-a început mandatul acuzând presa de reavointa, desi campania s-a terminat deja, iar pe unii judecatori i-a hulit în mod public.

amatorismul lui (gafele curente) scot la iveala un tip nepregatit pentru functia asta.

însa cel mai grav va fi atunci când caracterul lui de om va domina definitiv politica casei albe.

The Unknown45.704 mesaje#348
adal* a scris:

Pe calculatorul tau in ce limba este clipul? :)

In alfabetul secuiesc .... 600px-Szekely-Hungarian-Rovas-standard-I

adal*4.350 mesaje#349
Allexandrra a scris:

Mi s-a parut ca ai un anume simt al oamenilor si ma mira putin ca nu ti s-a declansat alarma in cazul lui. Sau poate ma insel eu si nu e nimic in neregula cu el.

Sincer, am mai spus intr-un mesaj pe topicul asta, ca tot ce sper de la trump este sa apese acel buton de avarie,  care poate opri procesul de propagare ca un tavalug al corectitudinii politice in lume.

Lumea avea nevoie de acest moment de respiro, pentru a evalua si decide daca mai poate merge mai departe in acelasi fel.

Am spus ca astept sa intre in faza a doua, dar sincer, nu am asteptari, vreaun doar un status quo, care sa echilibreze  cat de cat situatia.

Sunt foarte vag in exprimare, pentru ca si situatia in lume este la fel.

Poate ca tot ce o sa faca trump, o sa fie o repolarizare a lumii, care este necesara in acest moment, in care nimeni nu mai stie cine ii sunt aliati si cine dusmani.

Poate ca trump pregateste doar, apocalipsa, care ar fi venit oricum, doar ca acum avem timp sa ne pregatim cat de cat.

The Unknown45.704 mesaje#350

Trump administration reverses transgender bathroom guidance

The Trump administration on Wednesday night rescinded Obama-era guidance directing schools to allow transgender students to use the bathroom that matches their gender identity.

In a letter sent to schools on Wednesday, the Justice and Education Departments said the Obama administration's guidance -- which cited Title IX -- did not explain how it was consistent with the law.

The letter claimed that the directive caused confusion and lawsuits over its enforcement. Anti-bullying safeguards will not be affected, according to the letter.

"All schools must ensure that all students, including LGBT students, are able to learn and thrive in a safe environment," the letter reads.

Instead, the letter suggests that the states should take a "primary role" in establishing policy.

"As President Trump has clearly stated, he believes policy regarding transgender bathrooms should be decided at the state level," the White House said in a statement, adding that today's letter "paves the way for an open and inclusive process to take place at the local level with input from parents, students, teachers and administrators."

Last April, Trump weighed in on the North Carolina "bathroom law" -- HB2 -- that banned people from using public bathrooms or locker rooms that don't match the sex on their birth certificate.

State lawmakers should “leave it the way it is,” Trump said in an interview with NBC, adding that people should "use the bathroom they feel is appropriate."

"We have a responsibility to protect every student in America and ensure that they have the freedom to learn and thrive in a safe and trusted environment. This is not merely a federal mandate, but a moral obligation," Education Secretary Betsy DeVos -- who has supported accommodations for transgender people in the past -- said in a statement Wednesday.

"Congress, state legislatures, and local governments are in a position to adopt appropriate policies or laws addressing this issue," Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in a statement Wednesday. " The Department of Justice remains committed to the proper interpretation and enforcement of Title IX and to its protections for all students, including LGBTQ students, from discrimination, bullying, and harassment."

Responding to early reports in the media about the Trump administration reversing those rules regarding transgender bathrooms, the Human Rights Campaign released a statement on Monday.

"Transgender young people face tragically high rates of discrimination and bullying, and they need a government that will stand up for them -- not attack them," HRC President Chad Griffin said in the statement.

And ACLU LGBT project director James Esseks said in a statement, "Revoking the guidance shows that the president’s promise to protect LGBT rights was just empty rhetoric. The bottom line is that this does not undo legal protections for trans students... School districts that recognize that should continue doing the right thing; for the rest, we’ll see them in court."

Ma bucur ca aceasta LEGE a fost distrusa ca deja mi-era frica sa merg undeva sa folosesc toaleta comuna!!!   Oare de ce nu le-a construit separat acomodari, in loc sa desfiinteze mentiunile Femei - Barbati si sa ne arunce ca oile in tarc.   

← Înapoi la SUA & Canada