Category Archives: Disclosures

A CLT, prestes a ser modificada, é mesmo responsável pelo desemprego?

Por 296 votos a favor e 177 contra, a Câmara dos Deputados aprovou, na quarta-feira, 26, o texto-base da chamada reforma trabalhista. A votação aconteceu dois dias antes da greve geral programada para acontecer em todo o país justamente contra as reformas trabalhistas e previdenciárias do governo Temer. As duas pautas são consideradas prioritárias pela gestão peemedebista, e os debates (e embates) acontecem quase concomitantemente.

Na véspera da votação, por exemplo, quem quisesse acompanhar as discussões dos temas em suas respectivas comissões especiais na Câmara, longe do espalhafato observado no Plenário no dia seguinte (entre outras questões, um deputado usou o microfone para pedir a CPI da segurança pública), teria de escolher entre uma e outra. Ambas eram transmitidas ao mesmo tempo pelo“> canal no YouTube da TV Câmara.

Na comissão da reforma trabalhista, presidida pelo jovem deputado tucano de Goiás, Daniel Vilela, a diferença de posições entre governistas e oposição, manifestada durante as sessões, mostra o tamanho do impasse sobre as regras que hoje regulam as relações trabalhistas do país, cujo marco data de 1943, quando Getúlio Vargas aprovou a Consolidação das Leis Trabalhistas (CLT). Entre as normas estabelecidas desde então,  está a proteção aos empregados em caso de demissão sem justa causa.

meMBL-1493324581

Reprodução da página do Facebook do MBL

Como se trata de uma lei estabelecida nos anos 1940, e obviamente muita coisa mudou de lá para cá, os defensores das mudanças na CLT chamam as reformas em análise de “modernização”. Argumentam que as leis atuais criam amarradas ao empregador, impedem a geração de empregos e empurram parte da mão de obra para a informalidade.

Embora tentem emplacar a ideia de que patrão não é inimigo dos funcionários e vice-versa, a defesa ou a oposição das propostas parte de dois pontos inevitáveis de observação: uma é a do empregado; outra, do empregador.

“Não deveria nem existir”

“É melhor reduzir a jornada de trabalho em 10% do que demitir 10% dos funcionários em uma situação de crise”, disse o CEO da Votorantim S/A, João Miranda, em entrevista à Folha de S.Paulo.

“Quando o trabalhador está protegido, com carteira assinada e garantia de emprego, ele consome, compra uma casa. Mas, se ele tiver um contrato precário, de jornada de três horas, que segurança vai ter? Quanto mais você precariza o trabalhador, menos ele consome, menos a indústria produz e menos o país cresce”, contesta, Sérgio Nobre, secretário-geral da Central Única dos Trabalhadores (CUT), também em entrevista para a Folha.

A disputa por posição tem eco entre os deputados. Na sessão de terça-feira, por exemplo, o deputado Vitor Lippi (SPDB-SP), argumentou que as mudanças não trarão riscos aos direitos do trabalhador, mas o esclarecimento de algumas “jurisprudências inadequadas, incompatíveis, prejudiciais” à geração de empregos no país. “Temos de valorizar o trabalhador, mas não podemos criar uma situação de insustentabilidade das empresas brasileiras.”

“Quem paga a conta é quem dá emprego.”

Um dos argumentos, além dos quase 13 milhões de desempregados, é que cerca de 60% das empresas morrem com menos de cinco anos de idade no Brasil.

Parte da culpa, segundo ele, cabe ao número de ações trabalhistas na Justiça e à proliferação dos sindicatos. “Quem paga a conta é quem dá emprego.”

O discurso está em sintonia com o que disse recentemente o presidente da Câmara, deputado Rodrigo Maia (DEM-RJ), vulgo Botafogo nas planilhas da Odebrecht: a Justiça do Trabalho, onde empregados podem recorrer caso se sinta injustiçado em casos de demissão ou eventuais abusos, “não deveria nem existir”.

Com essas mesmas leis, o Brasil atingiu o pleno emprego há poucos anos.

Sindicatos, Justiça Trabalhista e a própria lei que protege o trabalhador são assim, direta ou indiretamente, alçados a inimigos do empreendedorismo e da geração de empregos, mas nem todos pensam assim.

Na sessão, o deputado Alessandro Molon (Rede-RJ) lembrou: com essas mesmas leis, o Brasil atingiu o pleno emprego há poucos anos.

Segundo ele, o acordo negociado hoje entre trabalhador e empregador, ponto-chave da reforma, já prevalece sobre o legislado, desde que beneficie o trabalhador. “O que não existe é que o negociado seja pior do que o legislado para o trabalhador.”

A proposta de reforma, avalia, vai inverter essa posição e dificultar o acesso do trabalhador à Justiça. Segundo ele, é como dificultar o registro do crime em vez de combater a criminalidade. “Esse substituto (do projeto de lei) tem lado, e está do lado de quem tem muito. É injusto e é covarde”, disse no plenário.

Diante desta polarização, é no contexto em que se dá a discussão (e a forma como tem sido colocada) que está o principal fio desencapado da conversa. Enquanto centrais sindicais, que podem perder um montante generoso do financiamento das próprias atividades, mobilizam manifestações, e grupos apoiadores do governo lançam memes classificando os atos como coisa de vagabundo, a pergunta que vale um ministério no governo Temer é se, de fato, a remoção de alguns dispositivos da CLT será suficiente para alavancar a geração de empregos no país após anos seguidos de recessão.

Quando a crise ainda era marola

Para responder, é preciso voltar algumas casas. De fato, as mesmas leis hoje sob discussão estavam em vigência quando a crise era ainda chamada de marola – foi ontem, e não nos anos 1940.

No livro “As contradições do lulismo”, o cientista político André Singer analisa como o avanço da intervenção estatal provocou expansão dos postos de trabalho formais entre 2011 e 2014, quando as taxas de desocupação estavam próximas a 4,5%, e como isso se converteu em um problema, dali em diante, para o governo Dilma.

A tese de Singer é que, para revogar o arcabouço estatal que sustentava o pleno emprego, a burguesia usaria uma espécie de “greve de investimentos” como estratégia. “Talvez não seja casual que as inversões tenham estagnado de 2011 a 2013, vindo a cair em 2014”, escreve ele. O pleno emprego deu musculatura aos sindicatos, o que resultou na contínua elevação do número de greves. “As paralisações, que já vinham subindo desde 2008, atingiram quase 87 mil horas em 2012, o maior índice desde 1997. Depois, continuaram a crescer, batendo 111 mil horas paradas em 2014. Em número de greves, houve 873 em 2012 com um salto para 2.050 em 2013.”

A chamada bancada empresarial é formada por 208 deputados e está entre as mais atuais da Câmara.

Na mesma direção, escreve Singer, o salário médio real teve aumento de 13% entre 2011 e 2013 e, considerando-se a pressão de custos, decorrente da inflação e da desvalorização cambial, somada ao desaquecimento da economia, segmentos empresariais começaram a se queixar da elevada parcela do faturamento destinado a remunerar o trabalho.

Para ele, o encarecimento da mão de obra, que não poderia ser repassado aos preços devido ao desaquecimento econômico, explicaria, ao menos em parte, a redução da lucratividade. “Entende-se, no contexto, que a perspectiva neoliberal de diminuir salários e direitos tenha se tornado atraente.”

Essa queixa por parte dos empresários pode ser observada nos últimos dias na fala dos deputados. Não por acaso, segundo a Agência Pública, a chamada bancada empresarial é formada por 208 deputados e está entre as mais atuais da Câmara, juntamente com a das empreiteiras e construtoras (226), a evangélica (197) e a dos “parentes” (238).

É dessa base aliada de um governo sem voto, impactado pela Lava Jato e aprovado por menos de 5% da população, que parte a iniciativa de “modernizar” as relações de trabalho em uma sociedade cada vez mais complexa, conectada, informada e impactada com o surgimento de novas tecnologias.

Os protestos do dia 28 podem servir de termômetro para consolidar o fosso entre as ruas e quem de fato representa seus representantes. Como diz Trebor Scholz no livro “Cooperativismo de Plataforma” (outra leitura recomendada para orientar as discussões atuais), “daqui a 20 ou 30 anos, quando provavelmente enfrentaremos o fim das profissões e mais empregos serão ‘uberizados’, podemos muito bem acordar e imaginar por que não protestamos contra essas mudanças com mais força”.

 

The post A CLT, prestes a ser modificada, é mesmo responsável pelo desemprego? appeared first on The Intercept.

from The Intercept bit.ly/2qbJCP6

Wall Street Firm Paying Obama $400,000 Faced Internal Controversy After Pocketing Huge 9/11 Settlement

Barack Obama will deliver a speech this September at a swanky healthcare conference for investors run by Cantor Fitzgerald. As Fox Business News first reported on Monday, the firm is paying him $400,000.

The ensuing criticism of Obama for cashing in on his presidency has been thunderous – but has overlooked exactly whose money he is taking.

Cantor Fitzgerald, a major Wall Street brokerage house, lost 658 of its 960 employees when the World Trade Center was destroyed in the September 11, 2001 terror attacks. But when it settled a long-running lawsuit against American Airlines for $135 million in 2013, the proceeds didn’t go to the families of the dead.

At the time of the settlement, Cantor’s CEO Howard Lutnick issued a statement: “For the insurance companies, this was just another case, just another settlement, but not for us. We could never, and will never, consider it ordinary. For us, there is no way to describe this compromise with inapt words like ordinary, fair or reasonable.”

But Lutnick and his fellow Cantor partners reportedly kept some of the money for the firm and distributed the rest to themselves, in proportion to their ownership stake. Lutnick, the firm’s biggest partner, may have received as much as $25 million.

And according to Liz O’Brien and Marilyn Rocha-Carmo, widows of two of the Cantor employees killed on 9/11, the firm never informed them of the settlement — nor even that the company had filed the lawsuit in the first place.

Rocha-Carmo, whose husband Antonio was a Cantor bond trader, sounded noticeably taken aback when told of the firm’s actions. “It is a little shocking,” she said, because Lutnick “always made it sound like he was always going to take care of us, and was doing everything in our best interest, and now learning about this doesn’t feel like that anymore.” Rocha-Carmo added that she is in touch with other Cantor victim families via social media, and they do not appear to be aware of the American Airlines settlement.

Cantor declined to comment about the lawsuit’s outcome. Because Cantor is a partnership, little about its finances is publicly available.

Obama’s office did not respond to a request for comment on the settlement.

In a statement released on Wednesday, Obama senior adviser Eric Schultz wrote, “As we announced months ago, President Obama will deliver speeches from time to time. Some of those speeches will be paid, some will be unpaid, and regardless of venue or sponsor, President Obama will be true to his values, his vision and his record.” Schultz also said Obama accepted the invitation “because, as a president who successfully passed health insurance reform, it’s an issue of great importance to him.”

Former US President Barack Obama speaks at a forum with young leaders to discuss community organizing at the University of Chicago in Chicago,Illinois on April 24, 2017. / AFP PHOTO / JIM YOUNG        (Photo credit should read JIM YOUNG/AFP/Getty Images)

Obama speaks at a forum on community organizing on April 24, 2017.

Photo: Jim Young/AFP/Getty Images

Cantor Fitzgerald, a powerful force in the trading of Treasury securities, suffered extraordinary devastation on 9/11, more than any other business or organization in New York.

The firm’s New York offices were located on floors 101-105 of One World Trade Center. When American Airlines Flight 11 struck the tower between floors 93 and 99 at 8:48 a.m., everyone in the building above that point was trapped with no means of escape. None of the Cantor employees then in its offices survived. According to USA Today, many of those who jumped to their deaths on 9/11 came from the Cantor Fitzgerald floors.

Lutnick himself was not yet at work because he was taking his son to the first day of kindergarten. However, Lutnick’s brother Gary, who also worked at Cantor, was already at his desk and was killed.

Lutnick was initially excoriated when he cut off the paychecks of the 658 missing Cantor employees within days of September 11, even before they were confirmed to be dead.

But he and the firm soon pledged to donate one-quarter of the firm’s profits over the next five years to the families of Cantor’s lost employees and pay for the families’ health insurance for 10 years. Cantor made good on this promise, distributing over $180 million, an average of about $275,000 per Cantor victim.

For years after 9/11, Lutnick received glowing praise from the media for this generosity. When the New York Post asked him on the 10th anniversary of the attacks whether he considered himself a hero, Lutnick said “I’ve never been asked that before” but that he’d prefer to be called “a friend of the families.”

Appearing on CNBC, Lutnick said that “We rebuilt the company in order to help the families. That was the most important thing to me. If you’d asked me a couple years after 9/11, ‘What matters to you?’ I’d say ‘the number.’ ‘What do you mean, the number?’ ‘How much money we’re going to give the families.’”

In late 2014, almost a year after the American Airlines settlement, Fox Business News published an article reporting that Cantor Fitzgerald was keeping the $135 million – about three-fourths of the money it donated to the firm’s 9/11 families.

According to the story’s author, Charlie Gasparino – who also first reported that Obama would be giving the Cantor Fitzgerald speech – some executives at Cantor were “steaming mad” at Lutnick for the decision.

“Speculation in the firm,” Gasparino wrote, “suggests Lutnick took anywhere from $15 million to $25 million from the settlement.”

Cantor had accused American of negligence and sought damages of about a billion dollars for business interruption largely due to the deaths of its “exceptionally talented and liberally compensated” workers, plus harm to its brand identity and destruction of its property and technological infrastructure. The judge overseeing the case eventually ruled that Cantor could only seek business interruption damages caused by the actual physical destruction of its offices rather than the offices’ inhabitants.

A Cantor spokesperson told Fox that “All of the money for the business interruption recovery relating to the American Airlines case went either to strengthen and support the overall business, or to the over 600 Cantor Partners, precisely proportionate with the exact stake in the company, Mr. Lutnick included.” As of 2001, Lutnick reportedly owned one-third of Cantor.

In addition to donations from the firm itself, almost all of the Cantor 9/11 families received payments from the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund, which was funded by Congress. The median award was $1.7 million. To receive money from the fund, families were required to agree not to sue the airlines involved on 9/11.

But according to Kenneth Feinberg, who administered the fund, that would not have prevented Cantor Fitzgerald from distributing proceeds of its lawsuit to its employee families. Cantor “could do whatever they want with that money,” said Feinberg.

Feinberg notes in his book “What Is Life Worth?” that Lutnick vociferously criticized him for keeping payments from the fund in a narrow range – and therefore not providing more money to the families of high-earning Cantor workers.

As for Barack Obama, he insightfully wrote in 2006 in “The Audacity of Hope” that when he entered the world of high-level politics, “I became more like the wealthy donors I met, in the very particular sense that I spent more and more of my time above the fray, outside the world of immediate hunger, disappointment, fear, irrationality, and frequent hardship of the other 99 percent of the population.”

“The path of least resistance,” Obama continued, “starts to look awfully tempting, and if the opinions of these insiders don’t quite jibe with those you once held, you learn to rationalize the changes as a matter of realism, of compromise, of learning the ropes. The problems of ordinary people, the voices of the Rust Belt town or the dwindling heartland, become a distant echo rather than a palpable reality, abstractions to be managed rather than battles to be fought.”

When breaking the story of Obama’s speech, Fox Business News reported that its sources at Cantor Fitzgerald believed that “Obama could ultimately back out of the arrangement depending on his schedule and other concerns such as adverse publicity.”

Top photo: Howard Lutnick, head of Cantor Fitzgerald,  at the memorial during tenth anniversary ceremonies of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks at the World Trade Center.

The post Wall Street Firm Paying Obama $400,000 Faced Internal Controversy After Pocketing Huge 9/11 Settlement appeared first on The Intercept.

from The Intercept bit.ly/2pr1YO8

Governo ignora trabalhadores e segue firme com mudanças que beneficiam empresários

Avaliada pelo Palácio do Planalto como um teste vital para a continuidade de outras reformas, a aprovação da reforma trabalhista nesta quarta fez crescer no governo a sensação de que a batalha pela aprovação da Reforma da Previdência será ainda mais árdua. A começar pelo alto número de traições: foram mais de 80. E o governo tem no horizonte motivos de grandes preocupações – entre elas, a proximidade da greve geral, marcada para esta sexta (28).

A sessão desta quarta, que durou mais de 10 horas, foi marcada por protestos da oposição e mais manobras da base aliada do governo. Temendo deixar a digital no resultado final, deputados governistas articulavam que a votação fosse simbólica, ao invés de nominal. Em votações simbólicas, os deputados dizem se aprovam ou não o texto, mas sem possibilidade de saber como cada deputado votou. Após a oposição ameaçar que não haveria acordo e que dificultaria mais ainda as próximas sessões, o líder do governo na Câmara, Aguinaldo Ribeiro (PP/PB), anunciou o recuo e afirmou que o governo apoiaria a votação nominal da proposta.

Quem acompanhou as discussões antes da votação percebeu que os lados estavam bem divididos em relação à proposta. Para o governo, o texto era o melhor dos mundos e a saída para tirar o Brasil da crise econômica. Na trincheira da oposição, o sentimento era de que não havia possibilidade de discutir mudanças nas leis trabalhistas.

Reforma Trabalhista beneficia a quem?

A perversidade da Reforma Trabalhista está ligada umbilicalmente aos pensadores do texto. Ontem, The Intercept Brasil revelou que, após exame das 850 emendas apresentadas por 82 deputados durante a discussão do projeto na comissão especial, 292 (34,3%) foram integralmente redigidas em computadores de representantes da Confederação Nacional do Transporte (CNT), da Confederação Nacional das Instituições Financeiras (CNF), da Confederação Nacional da Indústria (CNI) e da Associação Nacional do Transporte de Cargas e Logística (NTC&Logística).

Por mais que o governo rebata as críticas à reforma, The Intercept Brasil esclareceu sobre os pontos críticos da reforma, que atingirá o coração dos direitos trabalhistas brasileiros.

Apesar da aprovação, um clima de apreensão rastejava pelos corredores do Palácio do Planalto. A votação da trabalhista era considerada importantíssima para o governo, como forma de testar a fidelidade da base aliada, e um teste para a votação mais espinhosa, da Reforma da Previdência, que precisa de no mínimo 308 votos para ser aprovada. Como demonstração de força, nos bastidores, o governo trabalhava para que a trabalhista tivesse mais de 320, o que acabou não ocorrendo.

twitter.com/GeorgMarques/status/857406674482712577

Outro fator de preocupação para o governo centrava na dissidência aberta pelo PSB, partido da base aliada do governo. No início da semana, o Diretório Nacional do partido orientou que sua base votasse contrária às reformas trabalhista e previdenciária. Diante do painel eletrônico, a bancada se dividiu. Dos 30 parlamentares da legenda presentes em plenário, 14 votaram com o governo e 16, contra.

twitter.com/GeorgMarques/status/856644923201908736

“A demonstração de que o governo Temer é fraco é que ele mandou seus ministros filiados ao PSB para votar a reforma”

“A demonstração de que o governo Temer é fraco é que ele mandou seus ministros filiados ao PSB para votar a reforma”, alfinetou o deputado Julio Delgado (PSB/MG) em discurso no plenário da Câmara. Na tarde da votação, Temer exonerou o ministro Fernando Bezerra Coelho Filho (PSB/PE), do Ministério de Minas e Energia, para que ele votasse favoravelmente à proposta, contrariando orientação do direção nacional do PSB.

Em defesa da reforma trabalhista, no plenário o líder do PSDB Ricardo Tripolli (PSDB/SP) na Câmara afirmou que o discurso anti-imperialistas estaria superado e que, por isso, o projeto seria aprovado. “Sem capital não se gera emprego. Temos consciência de nossa responsabilidade”, argumentou.

Por nota, Temer pediu “o mesmo grau de engajamento” dos parlamentares para que também aprovem o projeto no Senado e que o resultado da aprovação mostra que a sociedade quer “adequar” as relações trabalhistas para o presente e para o futuro.

Planalto monitora greve geral

Receoso de que o parlamento possa sofrer interferências e pressões externas com a greve geral – e que isso possa interferir no resultado final da Previdência – a orientação no Planalto é monitorar o alcance das manifestações e manter o tom máximo de normalidade no dia da greve. Num governo de surdos e mudos, a ordem-primeira é ignorar as manifestações e manter-se firme nas propostas que fortalecerão o empresariado brasileiro.

The post Governo ignora trabalhadores e segue firme com mudanças que beneficiam empresários appeared first on The Intercept.

from The Intercept bit.ly/2qbuOjw

Le Pen Promotes Holocaust Denier and Plans to Ban Kosher Butchers and Yarmulkes

France’s Jewish community is watching the second round of this year’s presidential election with profound unease, as Marine Le Pen of the far-right National Front has unveiled plans to ban the ritual slaughter of animals for kosher and halal meat and promoted a deputy who has been accused of praising an infamous Holocaust denier.

Le Pen temporarily stepped aside this week as the leader of the extreme nationalist party founded by her Holocaust-denying father, Jean-Marie, as part of an effort to present a more moderate face in the general election.

That attempt was immediately spoiled, however, by the revelation that the former associate of her father she put in charge of the party, Jean-François Jalkh, told a scholar in 2000 that he did not accept evidence that the Nazis used the pesticide Zyklon B to murder Jews in the death camps.

Jalkh’s comments were published 12 years ago in an academic journal, but not widely known about until a reporter for the Catholic daily La Croix, Laurent de Boissieu, came across them on Tuesday.

During a three-hour interview with the researcher Magali Boumaza, for her dissertation on the National Front’s youth activists, Jalkh, who joined the movement at 17, said that he had been struck by the “seriousness and rigor” of arguments made by the Holocaust denier Robert Faurisson about the gas chambers.

That reading led Jalkh to consult a chemist, he added, before saying, in a passage shared on Twitter by the reporter who unearthed it: “the use of a gas, for example, called Zyklon B, I personally consider that from a technical point of view, it is impossible, clearly impossible, to use it in […] mass exterminations. Why? Because it takes days before decontaminating a room … where one used Zyklon B.”

Although Jalkh quickly denied ever having made such comments, Boumaza, who is now a professor, told Le Monde that she still had a recording of the conversation. “The interview lasted three hours, and it was he who spontaneously broached the subject of the gas chambers,” she said. “At no time did he ask me to stop recording or not to transcribe his words.”

Le Monde also noted that its own archives reveal that in 1991 Jalkh attended a memorial for Marshal Pétain, the wartime leader of Vichy France who collaborated with the Nazis, at which prayers were said “for the restitution of the outraged honor of this great soldier.”

The Council of Jewish Institutions in France, which is known by the French acronym CRIF, noted that Jalkh’s appointment clearly undermined Le Pen’s effort to detoxify her party’s image — which included expelling her own father for Holocaust denial two years ago. Still, the council asked, why would anyone would be surprised that the new leader of the National Front is “a traditional Lepenist.”

After elevating Jalkh in her place, Le Pen campaigned among butchers at a market in Paris and defended her proposal to ban the ritual slaughter of animals without prior stunning, in accordance with Jewish and Muslim dietary regulations, as a matter of animal welfare.

Like her earlier call for a ban on religious head coverings, including hijabs and yarmulkes, Le Pen’s proposed policy appeared to be a strike aimed at preventing devout Muslims from adhering to their faith, but she seemed entirely untroubled by the “collateral damage” the ban would cause to France’s Jews.

In response to the proposal, the Chief Rabbi of France, Haïm Korsia, told Agence France-Presse Le Pen’s idea was “stupefying.”

“Is it necessary to launch real religious wars in France by saying that it is essential to ban Jewish and Muslim ritual slaughtering?” Korsia asked.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, Korsia has endorsed Le Pen’s rival, Emmanuel Macron, in the election to be held on May 7th. “It is necessary to call on all of those who believe in France to vote for Emmanuel Macron,” the rabbi wrote on Twitter, “because he now carries this hope of fraternité.”

Le Pen’s call for a ban on the ritual slaughter that would make it impossible for French Jews to keep kosher attracted the attention of Israeli journalists. Gilbert Collard, a member of the National Front’s political bureau, was pressed on the issue during an interview on Wednesday with the French channel of Israel’s i24 news network. Collard defended the move as essential to protecting secularism in France, and even argued that anti-Muslim measures were necessary, in part, to protect French Jews.

Attempting to cast the National Front as the defender of French Jews, Collard pointed to what he said was an outrageous example of anti-Semitism by leftist protesters — the slogan “Jews: Thieves, Murders!” (“Juifs: voleurs, assassins“) which he said was chanted during a recent demonstration.

In fact, Collard was repeating a willful misinterpretation of video that showed protesters chanting instead “Cops: Rapists and Murders!” (“Flics: violeurs, assassins“) while marching on April 16 against the National Front in Paris. That slogan makes reference to the violent anal rape with a police baton of a young man named Theo in a Paris suburb in February.

Nonetheless, video of the chant shared by Collard on Twitter and Facebook with that inaccurate transcription has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times. (Collard appears to have gotten the video, and the inaccurate transcription, from a self-described French-Israeli Zionist who posted it on Twitter earlier the same day.)

Video recorded at street-level during the demonstration that day — scroll to the 5:20 mark of the Periscope clip embedded below — appears to confirm that the anti-fascist protesters were indeed chanting “flics: violeurs,” not “juifs: voleurs.

As supporters of the demonstrators and journalists pointed out, there is quite a lot of evidence on social networks that this slogan about police brutality has become common at left-wing protests across France since Theo was brutalized in February.

Back on the campaign trail, Le Pen spent part of Thursday with Collard on a fishing boat in the Mediterranean region he represents in the French parliament. The outing gave rise to some bizarre images of the politicians attempting to fit in on the boat, including video of Le Pen demonstrating her dolphin call for the non-plussed fishermen.

From the Paris suburbs, where he was demonstrating his skills with a soccer ball, Macron mocked Le Pen’s outing on Twitter, suggesting that her promise to take France out of the European Union would devastate the French fishing industry.

The night before, Macron’s rhetoric against Le Pen was even sharper, telling supporters that while “she pretends to be one of the people, she is an heiress.”

Le Pen’s attempt to cast herself as the champion of the common man, despite her well-off upbringing, inspired some of her critics to share a photograph of her and her sisters with their father in evening clothes in front of the family mansion in 1988.

The post Le Pen Promotes Holocaust Denier and Plans to Ban Kosher Butchers and Yarmulkes appeared first on The Intercept.

from The Intercept bit.ly/2qk6QSx

Formerly Imprisoned Journalist Barrett Brown Taken Back Into Custody Before PBS Interview

Award-winning journalist Barrett Brown was re-arrested and taken into custody Thursday, the day before he was scheduled to be interviewed for a PBS documentary.

Brown quickly became a symbol of the attack on press freedom after he was arrested in 2012 for reporting he did on the hacked emails of intelligence-contracting firms. Brown wrote about hacked emails that showed the firm Stratfor spying on activists on behalf of corporations. Brown also helped uncover a proposal by intelligence contractors to hack and smear Wikileaks defenders and progressive activists.

Faced with the possibility of 100 years in prison, Brown pled guilty in 2014 to two charges related to obstruction of justice and threatening an FBI agent, and was sentenced to 5 years and 3 months. In 2016, Brown won a National Magazine Award for his scathing and often hilarious columns in The Intercept, which focused on his life in prison. He was released in November.

Jay Leiderman, Brown’s lawyer, told The Intercept Brown was arrested Thursday during a check-in. According to his mother, Brown had not missed a check-in or failed a drug test since he was released to a halfway house in November. Neither his mother or lawyer has been informed where he is being held.

According to his mother, who spoke with Brown by phone after his arrest, Brown believes the reason for his re-arrest was a failure to obtain “permission” to give interviews to media organizations. Several weeks ago, Brown was told by his check-in officer that he needed to fill out permission forms before giving interviews.

Since his release, Brown has given numerous interviews, on”> camera and by phone. But according to his mother, Brown said that the Bureau of Prisons never informed him about a paperwork requirement. When he followed up with his check-in officer, he was given a different form: a liability form for media entering prisons.

Just last week, Brown was interviewed for two days by VICE news, and his PBS interview was set for Friday.

Leiderman said he had not been presented with a formal justification for the arrest, but was told that it had “to do with failing to abide by BOP restrictions on interviews, which is disgusting.”

Leiderman called the impromptu media restrictions “disgusting,” and said  he believed the arrest was an act of reprisal for criticizing the government. “I would call the people who did this a bunch of chicken-shit assholes that are brutalizing the Constitution,” Leiderman said.

The post Formerly Imprisoned Journalist Barrett Brown Taken Back Into Custody Before PBS Interview appeared first on The Intercept.

from The Intercept bit.ly/2pmtZEE