Lanata Deported From Venezuela

[ben]

There is no evidence, just rumors and gossip, which for good reason aren't admissible in a court of law.

There does exist a middle ground between evidence admissible in a court of law on the one hand, and rumors and gossip on the other. One might even argue that the whole point of the fourth estate is to cover that middle ground.
Society's standards vis-a-vis its high officials and organs of the state can - and should - be a different standard than the one needed to put someone behind bars.
To sort that out - to separate the gossip and innuendo from that which may or may not be admissible in court but is definitely worth bringing to the attention of the public - is precisely the role of the press. That is why we need news organizations to have credibility.

 

[MikeB12]

Lanata, like so many "journalists" in Argentina, is terrible. I wouldn't refer to someone who runs smear campaigns (with no evidence) against politicians he disagrees with a "journalist". He's a political operative. The Argentine Roger Stone.

Maybe the Argentine Sean Hannity or Rachel Maddow? He seems to only be concerned with corruption on the left. Would be interesting if he investigated all political parties, but maybe for the sake of his life he needs to keep some friends.

I think there may be some truth in his shows, but it all has to be taken with a grain of salt. Sal gruesa.

Bradly,

Do you believe there is no money laundering and theft on a large scale by the Kirchners? There seems to be a lot of smoke, even if the actual fire hasn't been discovered. Kind of like the whole Trump situation. Although people like to call politicians idiots, I believe if they were clever enough to gain so much power, they are often clever enough to not be directly implicated in criminal acts.

 

[Gringoboy]

There is no evidence, just rumors and gossip, which for good reason aren't admissible in a court of law. For someone so anal about sources, I'd think you'd post your own.

In fact, there is more evidence to support the idea that Mauricio Macri and his family were laundering money. https://www.nytimes....rican-plot.html

Nothing anal about asking for sources.
Besides, what with Lazaro Baez and some of his cronies in Ezeiza prison, CFK indicted for some very serious charges and numerous other ex functionaries either charged or being investigated, is evidence enough that these people have committed some pretty serious crimes.
Once we get past the flim flam of Lanata and the sensationalism, even you must agree that he wasn't drilling in a dry hole. Real people are in real prisons - fact, not rumour.
As far as Macri is concerned, your link is old, tired and the accusations led absolutely nowhere.

 

[sesamosinsal]

Do you believe there is no money laundering and theft on a large scale by the Kirchners? There seems to be a lot of smoke, even if the actual fire hasn't been discovered. Kind of like the whole Trump situation. Although people like to call politicians idiots, I believe if they were clever enough to gain so much power, they are often clever enough to not be directly implicated in criminal acts.

I would have a hard time believing that Cristina was clueless. My guess is that she'd have to know, but that is far from proof. That said, it wouldn't be just the Kirchners. This is just how the game is played here, unfortunately.

La Nación (Google Translated):

Political parties handle a double standard in electoral accounts. The most important flow of the millions of pesos transits in the shadows through a complex logistics of collection of funds by outside the law. In the last presidential elections, for example, declared expenditures barely reached a third of the real investment that the political forces deployed in the street.

http://www.lanacion.com.ar/1999550-los-partidos-podran-gastar-hasta-710-millones-durante-la-proxima-campana-electoral

Additionally:

Lopez embodies a system, however, that is far from being limited to Kirchnerism. This is how politics works and business is done with the Argentine state for decades. Whether the management is in the hands of Peronists, radicals, provincial parties or neighborhoods. It works with black money, with "returns", "envelopes", "contributions" and "contributions" and many other euphemisms that define the music with which those who want to dance with power dance.

Why? Because although denied the campaign teams of the three main candidates for the presidency during 2015 ?? Mauricio Macri, Daniel Scioli and Sergio Massa ?? Competing with real chances to reach the Casa Rosada demanded more than 1 billion pesos each. Deny it, if you want, but it is so and your own campaign teams admit it with the door closed. And you have to collect that money ?? How did they collect it? Whose is it? In exchange for?

http://www.lanacion.com.ar/1910857-la-corrupcion-esta-en-el-sistema-mas-alla-de-los-nombres

 

[sesamosinsal]

Nothing anal about asking for sources.
Besides, what with Lazaro Baez and some of his cronies in Ezeiza prison, CFK indicted for some very serious charges and numerous other ex functionaries either charged or being investigated, is evidence enough that these people have committed some pretty serious crimes.
Once we get past the flim flam of Lanata and the sensationalism, even you must agree that he wasn't drilling in a dry hole. Real people are in real prisons - fact, not rumour.
As far as Macri is concerned, your link is old, tired and the accusations led absolutely nowhere.

Yes, but as you've lived here for quite some time, you know that the indictments are political. Macri was imputado and procesado during the Kirchner years, and as soon as he became president all of it was dismissed. How convenient.

We're talking about Cristina Kirchner, not Lázaro Báez. There is quite a bit of evidence to suggest that Báez had money he couldn't justify, but that's not Cristina's problem.

Show me Cristina's illicit funds. If you can't, then you don't have a case. The reason I brought up Macri's foreign accounts is because he did not declare them, which is exactly what you want Cristina be punished for doing, despite there not being a single piece of evidence that Cristina has any accounts outside of Argentina. Why the double standard?

 

[Rich One]

For any job minor job here you need a Certificado of Good Conduct. For Congress not necessary.. you may be Procesado .. Ask Menem . Devido , CFK.

 

[ben]

Yes, but as you've lived here for quite some time, you know that the indictments are political. Macri was imputado and procesado during the Kirchner years, and as soon as he became president all of it was dismissed. How convenient.

We're talking about Cristina Kirchner, not Lázaro Báez. There is quite a bit of evidence to suggest that Báez had money he couldn't justify, but that's not Cristina's problem.

Show me Cristina's illicit funds. If you can't, then you don't have a case. The reason I brought up Macri's foreign accounts is because he did not declare them, which is exactly what you want Cristina be punished for doing, despite there not being a single piece of evidence that Cristina has any accounts outside of Argentina. Why the double standard?

The equivalence strikes me as facile.

On a legal level, Bernie Madoff was an absolutely innocent man until the day he was convicted. In fact, on a legal level, Kenneth Lay (of Enron infamy) died an innocent man, since at the time of his death he had appeals pending for his convictions.

As a practical matter, the whole reason we have a press - and why the press is allowed to comment on most court proceedings - is precisely because we evaluate smoke, and the quantity and quality of that smoke, in deciding whether there is fire. And as to the quality and size of that fire.

Regarding Macri, while his tenure as a president is turning out to be decidedly mixed, both legal issues you mentioned are pretty clearly political.

• The procesamiento that was disposed of around the time of his assuming the presidency regards a wiretapping case that it is at least plausible that Macri had no knowledge of. It bears mentioning the legal matter of Jorge “Fino” Palacios, the principal in that case, has yet to be brought to a conclusion either - though the reasons for that delay may too be of a political nature.
• As for the Panama Papers case, his own explanation was immediate, direct, and coherent - to wit, that he was a arm-length director of the company in question, with no personal involvement and no ownership stake. Considering the family's business empire, this holds together. And over the course of more than a year, not a scintilla of evidence has emerged to the contrary.

Cristina's situation, is a wee bit more complicated, unless your sole line of communication with the world is Diario Registrado. Certainly she has not herself (yet) been convicted of anything, but there's a hell of a lot of smoke. And thick smoke. Lazaro Baez. Cristobal Lopez. Guillermo Moreno. Echegaray. Florencia. Scores of officials on the highest levels (incl. all of the above?) increasing their declared holdings by spectacular multiples. Absolutely ham-fisted explanations by officials, that border on laughing at people for their stupidity ("En una financiera lo que se hace es contar guita"). The recordings of her conversations, especially with Parilli. It becomes very hard to pretend that there's nothing there, or to assume that there aren't another few shoes waiting to drop.

So yeah, she's innocent in the eyes of the law until convicted - but let's not be willfully obtuse.

 

[sesamosinsal]

For any job minor job here you need a Certificado of Good Conduct. For Congress not necessary.. you may be Procesado .. Ask Menem . Devido , CFK.

I agree with you 100%, but let's be fair: Macri was also procesado when he became president.

The Sean Hannity's of Argentina (aka Jorge Lanata, Roberto Navarro, et al) never give the full story. This is why you post your list, which conveniently neglects to mention Macri, and why people on the other side of the aisle post a different list of non K politicians. The true list is both of them combined. The entire political class in Argentina is corrupt, and neither Lanata nor Navarro will tell you that.

 

[sesamosinsal]

Regarding Macri, while his tenure as a president is turning out to be decidedly mixed, both legal issues you mentioned are pretty clearly political.

It is all political. The Argentine judicial branch is totally politicized. When the entire political system is corrupt, it's sort of difficult to be a participant in it and not be covered in lots of smoke.

 

[ben]

That the judicial branch is politicized does not mean that all cases that come before it are political.

You read what Macri is accused of and why, and what CFK is accused of and why, and they are not the same. The "It's all the same" conclusion is precisely what the more guilty of the two is hoping you'll say - they're all shite, the whole system is trash, who cares about petty details like evidence and scale.

And that's where an independent press is critical - in fact it's more critical when the organs are politicized.

Also required is a discerning public who can appreciate what elements of the press can be counted on to bring us the facts - even if through a political prism, at least the straight facts - and can then draw some conclusions.

A public who cannot read Diario Registrado but once and immediately identify it as a blatant propaganda rag - not a biased newspaper, simply a propaganda rag - deserves to be led by CFK.