Amarumayu: el río serpiente.

After Trump survived an assassination attempt, some believe God has ordained him to win the upcoming election this November. Could they be onto something?

En este episodio, La Luciérnaga se enciende para hablar de la muerte de la Reina Isabel II. Además, ¿Qué pasa con el reloj de la criminalidad? También, hablamos del horario de la rumba en Cartagena que sería recortado hasta la 1 de la mañana

La Luciérnaga, un espacio de humor, análisis y opinión de Caracol Radio que acompaña desde hace 30 años a sus oyentes en el regreso a casa.

[17:45, 4/4/2023] Juan Camilo Bueno: r[18:33, 4/4/2023] Juan Camilo Bueno: La Luciérnaga se enciende para hablar del caso en contra del expresidente de Estados Unidos, Donald Trump. Además, le contamos sobre el polémico viaje de Francia Márquez a Africa. También, ¿porqué fue tendencia el ICFES del presidente Petro?La Luciérnaga, un espacio de humor, análisis y opinión de Caracol Radio que acompaña desde hace más de 30 años a sus oyentes en el regreso a casa.

Escuche el programa de este jueves 30 de mayo. La Luciérnaga, un espacio de humor y opinión de Caracol Radio que desde hace 31 años acompaña a sus oyentes en su regreso casa.

Escuche el programa de este miércoles 6 de noviembre. La Luciérnaga, un espacio de humor y opinión de Caracol Radio que desde hace 31 años acompaña a sus oyentes en su regreso casa.

Daniel García-Peña Jaramillo, embajador de Colombia ante Estados Unidos, paso por los micrófonos de Caracol Radio, y recalcó que ambos países deben estar trabajando de la mano

Alejandro Restrepo, vigente campeón del fútbol colombiano como técnico del Deportivo Pereira y quien actualmente cumple una destacada participación con el cuadro Matecaña en la Copa Libertadores, aprovechó los micrófonos de El Alargue de Caracol Radio para desmentir que tenga un acuerdo con el Deportivo Independiente Medellín y el América de Cali. Restrepo valoró su trabajo en el equipo Matecaña y aseguró estar enfocado en los dos partidos que les restan del certamen continental.

David Mackalister Silva, capitán de Millonarios y quien viene de tener una destacada actuación el pasado fin de semana en el juego ante Envigado, donde fue elegido como la figura del encuentro, dialogó con El Alargue de Caracol Radio. El capitán se refirió a la actualidad del equipo, el rendimiento de algunos jugadores y habló de los rumores de una supuesta división al interior del grupo.

En 6AM Hoy por Hoy, el exembajador de EE.UU. en Colombia, Kevin Whitaker, ofrece un análisis sobre el significado del ‘Supermartes’ para las candidaturas de Joe Biden y Donald Trump.

Jaime Flórez, portavoz en español del Partido Republicano, Jaime Flórez, habló sobre los resultados del “super martes”, uno de los días más importantes para definir los candidatos a la presidencia de Estados Unidos

En diálogos con 6 AM Hoy por Hoy, Miguel Uribe, senador del Centro Democrático, extendió una invitación a los ciudadanos para desplazarse a la movilización que se llevará a cabo en el Parque Nacional en horas de la mañana.

En 6AM Hoy por Hoy, Diego Alejandro Torres, profesor de la Universidad Nacional, ofrece detalles sobre las opiniones de los profesores en cuanto al camino que plantea el gobierno para la Universidad Nacional.

En 6AM Hoy por Hoy de Caracol Radio, que se transmite desde la ciudad de Cali este viernes 28 de junio, estuvo Alejandro Eder, alcalde de la capital del Valle del Cauca, para brindar un panorama general de la situación actual de la ciudad.

En entrevista con 6AM, Jaime Flórez, portavoz en español de la campaña de reelección de Donald Trump y del partido republicano, cuestionó al Servicio Secreto luego de que se revelara que el tirador estaba ubicado en el techo de una edificación cercana al escenario donde se encontraba Donald Trump.

El mundo sigue conmocionado por el atentado contra Trump y lo que podría ver detrás del ataque

En 6AM Hoy por Hoy de Caracol Radio estuvo Diego Alejandro Torres, profesor y Representante ante el Consejo Superior Universitario de la Universidad Nacional, para hablar sobre por qué la UNP consideraría otorgarle un esquema de seguridad.

En 6AM Hoy por Hoy de Caracol Radio estuvo el capitán Álvaro Farfán, delegado del Cuerpo Oficial de Bomberos de Cundinamarca, para hablar sobre algunos equipos que estarían “arrumados” en medio de las emergencias por incendios forestales en Colombia.

Roberto Angulo, secretario de Integración Social de Bogotá, hablo en 6AM sobre cómo va  a actuar el Distrito frente a la instrumentalización de menores en las manifestaciones de indígenas 

En 6 AM, Gabriel Silva, exministro de Defensa y exembajador en los EE.UU, habló sobre las perspectivas que se tienen de las elecciones presidenciales en Estados Unidos 2024.

En 6 AM, Gabriel Silva, exministro de Defensa y exembajador en los EE.UU, habló sobre las perspectivas que se tienen de las elecciones presidenciales en Estados Unidos 2024

Juan Carlos Pinzón habló en 6AM sobre que viene para Colombia con la elección de Trump

Kevin Whitaker, exembajador de los EE. UU. en Colombia, habló en 6AM sobre los resultados de las elecciones de Estados Unidos y lo que se espera de Donald Trump

En 6 AM de Caracol Radio estuvo Jaime Flórez, portavoz de la campaña de Donald Trump y del Partido Republicano, quien habló sobre cómo reciben el triunfo de Trump a la presidencia de los Estados Unidos.

Ariel Ávila, senador, habló sobre en qué ámbitos podría la gobernabilidad de Donald Trump afectaría a Colombia

Echoes of the ballroom, barroom, bordello, circus, concert hall, and jazz club intermingle with folk traditions from around the world to create a new hybrid form. Step right up! Step right in… to Little Big Top, the charming debut album from a new quartet led by accordion legend Guy Klucevsek (kloo-SEH-vik) with visionary trumpeter Volker Goetze...

NPR's Ayesha Rascoe talks with A.B. Stoddard, columnist at The Bulwark, about the election results and if it means there has been a durable political realignment.

NPR's Ayesha Rascoe talks to Georgetown Law Professor Steve Vladeck about the role federal courts can play as a check on presidential power during a second Trump Administration.

NPR's Scott Simon speaks to Sunmin Kim, an assistant professor in Dartmouth College's sociology department, about the reliability of political polling leading up to elections.

President Biden used to tell world leaders "America is back," implying the Trump era's go-it-alone ethos was a one-term blip. But Biden needs a new line for this week's APEC and G20 summits.

The incoming Trump administration has expressed a desire for a big overhaul at the Department of Justice and the FBI.

A New York judge is set to decide whether President-elect Donald Trump has immunity from prosecution in his criminal trial, after he was convicted of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records.

Congress comes back for a lame-duck session with a packed agenda, including voting on a new Senate majority leader.

Where did Democrats go wrong with men this election? How did Republicans win them over, and how might Democrats work to win some of them back?NPR's Michel Martin speaks with Aaron Smith of the Young Men Research Initiative and John Della Volpe with the Harvard Kennedy School Institute of Politics.

Donald Trump Elected As The Next U.S. President The election of Donald Trump as our next president exposed a truth about where we the people are at. Because there could […]

The post Donald Trump Elected As The Next U.S. President and A Democratic Party Disaster appeared first on KKFI.

This week on CounterSpin: We talk about what just happened, and corporate media’s role in it, with Julie Hollar, senior analyst at the media watch group FAIR, and FAIR’s editor Jim Naureckas. We […]

The post Julie Hollar and Jim Naureckas on Placing Blame for Trump appeared first on KKFI.

A second solo set that’s bold of ambition, but flawed of execution.

Currently, the nation and perhaps the world struggles with the recent jury verdict against Donald Trump finding him guilty of 34 felony counts. Trump claims that the verdict proves Joe Biden uses the criminal justice system as a political tool intended to defeat his political opponents, in this case him. On the other hand, many take the position that the case demonstrates the triumph of the rule of law because it proves that even the most privileged and powerful of citizens must ultimately reckon with legal accountability. I opt for the conclusion that the case exemplifies a healthy rule of law operating to impose reasonable and predictable accountability and consequences for even the most powerful governing elites in American today for the following six reasons.

First, and foremost, the guilty verdict reflects the unanimous conclusion of 12 jurors, after careful deliberation and judicial instruction, empaneled pursuant to pre-announced New York Law. Donald Trump, like all criminal defendants, held the power to refuse a limited number of jurors without cause and to move to strike jurors for cause. The jurors hailed from Trump's former home state and the headquarters of the Trump Organization—New York. It is noteworthy that not a single juror dissented from the verdict and that they reached the verdict without any judicial cajoling through, for example, an Allen charge. The jury questioned the evidence and the instructions to assure they acted properly. They deliberated about 12 hours after spending five weeks listening to witness testimony and reviewing other evidence including extensive documents. Trump's high-powered legal team exercised their right to cross-examine witnesses, explain away evidence and submit their own exculpatory evidence. Despite these rights, the best legal team money could buy failed to raise any reasonable doubt with even one juror, on even one count, regarding Trump’s guilt.

Second, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg holds a well-earned reputation as a professional prosecutor who gets the job done and gets it done professionally. Recall that Bragg endured severe criticism for declining to prosecute Trump for tax fraud in 2022, prompting two prosecutors to resign. Bragg apparently found the case against Trump too risky to warrant pursuit. Instead, he meticulously built this case which proved bullet-proof. Bragg won his office through an election of local voters and does not work for Joe Biden or even the federal government. The man holds total legal independence from the Biden Administration and proved himself as a non-partisan prosecutor by letting Trump walk on other fraud charges in 2022. The fact that he sought a Grand Jury indictment against Trump on this case suggests that there was probable cause that Trump committed the crimes—a fact that the jury's verdict fully vindicates.

Third, Justice Juan Merchan presided over the entire Trump matter with appropriate judicial restraint. Given Trump’s contemptuous misconduct and constant threats of violence against the judge, his family, his staff and the jury, Merchan certainly held the power to imprison Trump for contempt. He held his fire and allowed the jury to do its job. Despite Fox “News” reports to the contrary, the evidence suggests the Judge ruled on objections and other procedural matters with judicious wisdom. He righteously rejected Trump’s efforts to dismiss the charges, as proven by the unanimous jury verdict on all counts. Again, Merchan, a New York state judge, holds total legal independence from the Biden Administration and, Trump and his team produced zero evidence that Biden even attempted to influence Merchan.

Fourth, Trump himself knew he faced an uphill battle once he decided not to testify and take the stand to declare his innocence. Due to Trump’s decision the jury never heard Trump deny the charges, claim innocence or explain the mountain of evidence against him in the form of witnesses, key documents, or the tape-recording directing Cohen to pay Daniels by check. In fact, there was no defense theory of the case. Trump would not exude credibility as a witness due to his history of fraud, and he would risk a finding of perjury if he claimed innocence under oath or if he simply made-up stories on the stand. In any event, many defendants face challenges testifying on their own behalf, but Trump made that call, not Joe Biden.

Fifth, after reviewing the jury instructions, I saw no error, in that the instructions fairly reflect governing law in New York. While some complain reasonably that the jury was not required to identify the precise crime that transforms misdemeanor falsification of records into a felony, there is Supreme Court authority in support of this. Juries typically do not need to identify with particularity (nor even agree upon a particular predicate crime) a predicate crime to a felony charge; here the crime Trump intended to further with false business records. The US Supreme Court might well make up some means of saving Donald Trump (see Trump v. United States and Trump v. Anderson). Justice Merchan, however, cannot read the minds of the conservative Court majority and it is not his job to predict ways the Supreme Court can throw lifelines to former President Trump. Merchan’s instructions reflect the law today and that is the goal of jury instructions, not to craft new innovations to save Trump.

Sixth, all the cries of conspiracy theory and a rigged justice system from Trump and his minions lack any evidentiary foundation. They produced zero evidence that Joe Biden masterminded this entire prosecution. The claim is facially absurd. Biden did not set up Trumps illicit and adulterous liaisons, Trump did. Biden did not meet with David Pecker to set up a scheme to hide Trump’s prior bad acts in the run-up to election 2016. Trump signed the checks reimbursing Cohen the hush money paid to Trump’s co-adulterers. Trump can only blame Trump for his 34 felony convictions.

In light of the above, I conclude that Donald Trump enjoyed all the due process the US Constitution accords criminal defendants. Of course, with his billions, Trump can afford the very best lawyers which most defendants cannot. As former President, Trump enjoys the right to argue before many justices he appointed which most defendants do not. From a rule of law perspective the case proves that even the richest and most politically powerful must answer for their crimes.

 On March 11, 2024, Donald Trump claimed that cutting Social Security and Medicare could help him cut the national debt tremendously. (See video above). On March 22, 2024, the House GOP announced cuts including a plan to raise the retirement age. This was the second straight year that the House GOP proposed a budget with deep Social Security and Medicare cuts. Trump started promising cuts to Social Security and Medicare in his second term before some audiences as early as January of 2020.  At a Fox News Town Hall in March of 2020, again promised to cut Social Security and Medicare.

All of this talk of cuts forms the prelude to last Thursday's debate which included a question about cuts to Social Security and Medicare. Biden gave a straight-forward answer saying that no cuts are necessary if we raise the Social Security tax to the same level for all. Currently, those making high incomes pay much lower rates than those making low incomes. As President Biden explained at the debate:

Right now, everybody making under $170,000 pays 6 percent of their income, of their paycheck, every single time they get a paycheck, [But] millionaires pay 1 percent – 1 percent. So . . . I would not raise the cost of Social Security for anybody under $400,000. After that, I begin to make the wealthy begin to pay their fair share, by increasing from 1 percent beyond, to be able to guarantee the program for life.

That provides a sensible and efficient means of securing Social Security. And, Biden never varies from that position.

Trump on the other hand, takes different positions with different audiences and covers the full spectrum of options. According to NBC News:

An NBC News examination found that Trump's views have zigzagged over the years — from calling Social Security a “Ponzi scheme” in 2000 to endorsing then-Rep. Paul Ryan’s plans to restructure Medicare in 2012 to positioning himself as the protector of those programs in 2016 to taking aim at some retirement spending in his White House budgets (which never became law).

Essentially we know Trump is lying because of his radically divergent positions over time. In fact, in 2016 he promised to preserve Social Security and Medicare, and then in his budgets he proposed cuts.

 In recent months, Trump opened the way for Social Security and Medicare cuts and refuses to disclaim the GOP plan to cut those programs as, shown above. Which brings us to the his debate comments in response to a question about entitlement cuts. While Biden gave a simple and clear statement of how he intends to save Social Security and Medicare, Trump attacked Biden's honesty and switched the topic to immigration, Russia, Ukraine, a mysterious laptop, the VA, and luxury hotels. Trump was incoherent. Remarkably, he never addressed his recent comments about Social Security and Medicare cuts, nor the GOP plan to cut Social Security and Medicare. Trump provided no explanation of his prior budget proposals including Social Security and Medicare cuts.  As stated in the Washington Post: "Protecting Social Security . . . was also a major theme of Trump’s 2016 campaign. His avowed stance, however, is at odds with Trump’s own record as president: Each of his White House budget proposals included cuts to Social Security and Medicare programs."

Trump has staked out so many positions on Social Security that no matter what he says he lies. The only thing we know for sure about Trump and entitlements is that despite campaign promises to the contrary he included Social Security and Medicare cuts in each of his annual budget proposals as President. Given the GOP commitment to cutting Social Security and Medicare a vote for any GOP candidate is a vote to slash your Social Security and Medicare benefits by about 30 percent. If Trump gets elected the GOP will have a clear path to gutting Social Security and Medicare as he promised to do in a second term in 2020, and regardless of any lies or gibberish he feeds the voters today. 

Donald Trump's longest serving and hand-picked Chief of Staff, Four Star Marine General John Kelley, recently confirmed that Trump called those serving in the military "suckers" and those making the ultimate sacrifice for our nation and our freedom "losers." These comments now confirmed through numerous sources prove Trump's unfitness for office. Some background:

 On August 27, 2024, Special Prosecutor Jack Smith announced a Superseding Indictment Against Donald Trump arising from Trump's misconduct on January 6, 2021. The January 6 Insurrection already led to over 1400 indictments, 950 convictions, and landed over 600 protestors in jail. The Superseding Indictment seeks to restate the crimes alleged against former President Trump in light of the Supreme Court's novel and unprecedented decision in United States v. Trump granting Presidents a new-fangled immunity for official acts. In sum, according to the outstanding website January 6: And Why  it Matters:

While the core of the case remains unchanged with the four original charges intact, the revised indictment refines the scope of the accusations. Notably, it excludes certain claims, such as those involving attempts to use the Justice Department to support Trump’s false election fraud allegations.

This case will not go away absent an order to Jack Smith that he desist from prosecution. That will not happen unless Donald Trump assumes the Presidency. On the other hand, Trump will likely move to dismiss the Superseding Indictment and the trial judge could well partially grant that motion. Whatever remains of this case will very likely go to trial well after election day on November 5, 2024, and even if a jury convicts Trump litigation will continue about the scope of Presidential immunity leading to further Supreme Court review.

But what about the other criminal cases against Donald Trump?

In one criminal action brought in  Florida federal court, Special Counsel Jack Smith filed an appeal with the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals of the dismissal of all charges relating to Trump's alleged pilfering and mishandling of government documents including classified documents. Judge Aileen Cannon ruled that Smith's appointment as Special Prosecutor did not comply with law.  Special Counsel Smith just filed an appellate brief and Trump will file a response; but, this appeal will not conclude before the election and any decision will then face Supreme Court review. Consequently, the election could well decide this matter instead of a jury.

In another criminal action in New York state court, a jury Trump helped pick from his native state, unanimously found Trump guilty of all 34 felony counts alleged against him. Trump's guilt rested on evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. According to Politico:

On May 30, 2024, Trump became the first U.S. president to become a convicted felon. After a six-week trial . . . he was found guilty of falsifying business records in connection with a payoff to Stormy Daniels, a porn star who claimed she had a sexual encounter with him. By buying Daniels’ silence, the payoff avoided a possible sex scandal in the final weeks of the 2016 presidential campaign. Michael Cohen, Trump’s personal attorney and “fixer” at the time, sent the $130,000 hush-money payment to Daniels in October 2016, and then, while Trump was president, he reimbursed Cohen in a series of installments processed by Trump’s company. A unamimous 12-person jury found that Trump fraudulently disguised those installments as corporate legal expenses in violation of New York law.

In short, Trump defrauded voters in election 2016 by covering up his adulterous affair with a porn star. 

Currently, Judge Juan Merchan will rule on the impact of the Supreme Court's new-fangled immunity defense on September 16, 2024, and will sentence Trump for these felony convictions for these 34 felony convictions on September 18, 2024. Experts disagree on the likelihood of prison for these felonies.

Trump also faces felony charges in Georgia for alleged criminal efforts to change the outcome of election 2020 in Georgia. As stated at Politico:

Trump’s efforts to overturn his loss in the 2020 election were perhaps most aggressive in the state of Georgia. Multiple recounts confirmed that Joe Biden narrowly prevailed in the race for the state’s 16 electoral votes. But Trump and his allies spread lies about voter fraud, urged Georgia officials and state lawmakers to reverse Biden’s win and plotted to send fake electors to Washington. On Jan. 2, 2021, Trump called Georgia’s secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, and urged him to “find” 11,780 votes — the number needed to overcome Biden’s victory. Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis charged Trump and 18 of his allies for these efforts, alleging a wide-ranging criminal enterprise.

Essentially Trump refused to accept the reality of his defeat in Georgia and allegedly resorted to criminal measures to change the outcome. Trump filed an appeal arguing that District Attorney Fani Willis should be removed due to a a romantic relationship with a special prosecutor. Willis' team filed an appeal of a dismissal order of six counts of the indictment. Trump also filed a motion asserting Presidential Immunity. Consequently, this criminal action is hopelessly stalled and will not be resolved for years.

The above summary of the criminal actions pending against Trump suggests the following:

1)    Somewhere American law went wrong. The people no long hold sufficient confidence in the fairness and impartiality of our system of justice. Otherwise, Trump supporters would not so readily fall prey to the Big Lie that all these criminal proceedings arise from a vast Democratic and deep state conspiracy to get Trump. No evidence supports this Big Lie. We need to rebuild confidence in the American criminal justice system.

2)    The rule of law in America failed to hold President Trump accountable for the wrongdoing in connection with contesting the election of 2020, and especially the Insurrection of January 6, 2020. Many others sit in jail. Still more pleaded guilty. There is little doubt Trump led those efforts. He did so openly on television, and in recorded phone calls. Yet, Trump suffered no adverse legal consequences for his role. This failure of the rule of law must lead to reform. Citizens must view criminal justice as fair and non-partisan. It also needs to apply swiftly, even to the rich and powerful.

3)    We need enhanced legal education in primary and secondary schools as well as at the college level. The judicial power in the US is highly fragmented. The split starts with 51 differing sovereigns each with a largely independent judicial power. Yet, many apparently believe that Joe Biden or the Democratic Party holds the ability to influence the independent judicial branch across jurisdictions. This, despite a complete lack of evidence of any improper influence. We should certainly reinforce the independence of the judicial power while simultaneously increasing transparency and accountability. At the same time citizens require more education regarding the structure and protections already in place to maintain a fair and non-partisan criminal justice system.

4)    A Trump victory at the polls will destroy the quest for a fair and non-partisan criminal justice for decades to come, as he has promised to eliminate independence in criminal enforcement at the federal level and to use the system to exact retribution and revenge upon his political opponents.