Bulgari est le chevalier blanc de la ville de Rome. La marque de luxe vient d’annoncer qu’elle dépensera 1,5 million d’euros pour aider à la rénovation de l’escalier de la place d’Espagne.

« L’Italie est un pays de culture donc je lance un défi aux entrepreneurs. Qu’attendez vous ? », voilà l’appel au secours du premier ministre italien Matteo Renzi lancé début mars. L’homme politique est désespéré par l’état de certains monuments historiques que son gouvernement n’a plus les moyens d’entretenir. Ni une, ni deux, la marque Bulgari est montée au créneau et a déclaré à la ville de Rome qu’elle offrait 1,5 million d’euros pour aider à la rénovation des marches de l’escalier le plus connu d’Italie.

Ses 136 marchesrelient la place d’Espagne et l’église de la Trinité des Monts depuis le XVIIIe siècle. Le ministère de la Culture italien subissant chaque année des coupes supplémentaires dans son budget, c’est finalement la filiale du groupe français LVMH qui s’engage à financer ces travaux de deux ans. L’annonce a été faite par le maire de Rome en personne. Ignazio Marino a expliqué au passage que la rénovation de l’ouvrage débuterait courant 2015.

Ce n’est pas la première fois qu’une grande marque vient au secours du patrimoine italien. Tod’s, la marque de chaussures transalpine, a déjà accepté de financer une partie des travaux prenant place au Colisée de Rome. La fontaine de Trevi voit quant à elle sa rénovation de vingt mois prise en charge par la marque du prêt-à-porter de luxe Fendi. Alors, coup de cœur pour la culture italienne ou coup de communication ?

Click Here: Kangaroos Rugby League Jersey

Hollywood producer and horror book author Stephen King is at it again, using Twitter to attack President Donald Trump.

“Trump reminds me of that old cartoon character, Crabby Appleton. He’s rotten to the core,” Stephen King tweeted on Tuesday.

At least his Tuesday tweet was relatively clear of foul language, unlike many of his other tweets. For instance, last week the schlock horror scribe jumped to Twitter to tell the president “fuck your wall.”

“Fuck your wall. Split that 5 billion between at-risk children who don’t have lunches and vets who can’t get proper medical and psychological treatment. Fuck your vanity project. Do something good for once,” King fumed.

King also ridiculously called for President Trump to be impeached over his reaction to the murder of foreign national, radical Muslim Brotherhood activist, and occasional editorialist Jamal Khashoggi, who was likely murdered by Saudi agents in the country of Turkey.

Only days before that, King was tweeting that Trump has a “disordered mind.”

“Donald Trump’s tweets over the last 9 days provide a window into an increasingly disordered mind. Since we are all to some extent his hostages, I find this dismaying and rather frightening,” he wrote in a viral screed.

Speaking of minds, with his near weekly anti-Trump tweeting, it appears that Trump lives in King’s mind.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @warnerthuston.

Late-night host Jimmy Kimmel peddled a list of fake news stories to his audience on Friday, one of which was the impeachment of President Donald Trump.

But just how much fake news is in this video bit? Turns out a lot.

Kimmel took his Jimmy Kimmel Live cameras out on the street in California to ask folks on the street what they felt about stories in the news this year in a segment he called “Lie Witness News.”

For instance, the woman behind the microphone asked passersby what they thought of “this year’s deaths” of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and President Andrew Jackson — each of whom died in 1791 and 1845 respectively.

The folks were also asked about other false stories such as what they thought of President Trump’s nuclear annihilation of North Korea, the Supreme Court’s ruling that men could marry a smartphone, and the time scientists “brought back” a saber-toothed tiger.

Kimmel’s fake news purveyor also asked one fellow how he felt when Donald Trump was impeached and sent to jail.

Each of the people on the video seemed to think all the fake news stories they were told were real. At least, that is what Kimmel’s audience was supposed to think.

But, while it might seem fun to laugh at the idiots on the street, it appears that there is more being faked than it appears. In fact, according to Mashable’s Brian Koerber, not only are the news stories “fake,” but the people on the screen are also “fake,” at least to the extent that they are already in on the joke and are not actually reacting as if they believed the fake news being presented to them.

Some sources allege the whole video is a “bit” from front to back. The news is fake and so are the reactions of the “people on the street.”

One woman who appeared in one of Kimmel’s past “Lie Witness News” bits admitted that she was in on the joke and trolled Kimmel right back.

“It is fake, but it’s all in good fun! The people being interviewed know that the camera person is kidding,” said Colleen McEachern, who appeared in one of Kimmel’s Super Bowl-themed “Lie Witness News” videos.

“I don’t know if you can see it, but when I get asked the question, you can see that I’m trying to figure out what they want me to answer with. I knew that the Super Bowl was a week from that day, but I wanted to get on TV so I said something else,” she added.

McEachern also noted that she watched as fan after fan was filmed giving proper, truthful answers and not one of them made it to the final reel.

Koerber also found a person who appeared in a different “Lie Witness News” video who said that Kimme’s post-production team edited her replies to make her look clueless. Indeed, this person even told Koerber that she was coached by Kimmel’s film crew so that she would give them what they wanted for the bit.

“It was fake. They replaced some of the band names in post and also used my description of other groups/bands as answers to other questions,” the woman said. She also told Mashable that crew members told participants to “play along.”

She knew it was all fake from the word go, she said. “I figured, “Why not?” she said admitting that she just wanted to be on TV.

Koerber asked Kimmel’s people about these claims, but they flatly denied all allegations that the people on their “Lie Witness News” bits were coached.

This latest prank video comes on the tail of an entire year of Jimmy Kimmel complaining about “fake news.”

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @warnerthuston.

Click Here: Geelong Cats Guernsey

Click:Ceiling Fan

The United Kingdom might be trying to check out of the European Union, but there are at least 10 countries keen to be in. There’s a problem though: The EU’s golden age of expansion is over.

While national governments would like to ensure political stability in the EU’s neighborhood, they have no appetite to let those countries join before 2025. For some countries, such as Turkey, there’s almost no chance of ever joining. The European Parliament and countries such as Austria are already trying to suspend membership negotiations with Turkey.

“I won’t set a speed limit on the road to Europe,” said Johannes Hahn, the European commissioner responsible for EU enlargement, who insisted “Each candidate defines speed of joining via [its] own merit.”

At the same time, Hahn told a Western Balkans policy summit hosted by Friends of Europe on December 7, that there is a majority against EU enlargement in most EU countries. Instead of pushing EU national governments before they are ready Hahn suggested candidate countries focus on economic development and anti-corruption efforts.

Shada Islam, Europe director at Friends of Europe, is pessimistic. “I think we need to stop pretending and accept that there will be no new enlargement for many years — and that all these countries have a long way to go before they meet any of the key membership criteria,” Islam said, adding that given six to 10 years of continuous effort, the six Balkan nations may have a chance at membership.

The countries lining up for EU membership are becoming restless. “Enlargement is not high on the EU’s agenda and we know it,” said Natalie Sabanadze, Georgia’s ambassador to the EU.

Prior to the closed-door policy of the Juncker Commission, leaders in countries wanting to join the EU could promise to voters that EU membership would be forthcoming in exchange for sometimes difficult institutional and policy reforms. Today, even if a country meets all of the EU’s requirements it may be blocked for political reasons.

Western Balkans countries see themselves as rooted in Europe and warn that the EU will hurt itself if it fails to draw them close. Tanja Miščevič, Serbia’s chief membership negotiator, said “The Schengen system cannot function, and energy union cannot be completed, without the Western Balkan countries.”

Click Here: essendon bombers guernsey 2019

Ditmir Bushati, Albania’s foreign minister, said that while it is clear “No one will be able to join EU in foreseeable future” it would be dangerous to allow Russia to fill a vacuum in his region.

If anyone can become a surprise front-runner in the membership race it is Albania, already a NATO member and mostly free from the complications of the Yugoslav wars of the 1990s.

All other prospective EU members in the Western Balkans suffer fundamental complications. For Macedonia, it’s as simple as Greece refusing to even recognize its name. Allowing Montenegro and Kosovo to join without Serbia alongside them could create a security risk for both countries. Bosnia and Herzegovina is in the worst position of all and may hold these countries back if the EU insists they join in bloc formation.

Don’t expect the European Commission to give firm indications about any of this in 2017: The EU promises a policy update only in spring 2018.

Several EU officials POLITICO spoke to suggested that with Brexit and a new budget to negotiate and implement from 2020-2026, the EU simply doesn’t have room on its plate until 2027 to consider new members.

Goran Svilanović, a former Serbian foreign minister, and now head of the Regional Cooperation Council, said he is “very frustrated” by this approach and says that it would be better to “start negotiating. Keep us busy. Help us be successful.”

No country has even turned around a membership application in less than five years (Finland is the current record holder), and for former Warsaw Pact and Yugoslav states, 10-15 years is typical.

If Iceland decided to reapply for EU membership it would immediately shoot to the front of the queue, and if Scotland were to achieve independence, it would not be far behind. The Scottish government is keen. “As part of our response to the EU referendum we are exploring all options to protect Scotland’s relationship with Europe,” a government spokesperson said.

Another potential big member, Ukraine, is realistic about its membership prospects. Given the country’s internal difficulties and the rejection by Dutch voters of the country’s ‘Association Agreement’ with the EU, diplomats say neither it nor the EU are ready for membership. It would in any case be “suicidal” to join the EU while Russia is headed by Vladimir Putin, a senior diplomat told POLITICO.

Natalie Sabanadze, the Georgian ambassador, said Georgia is in a similar position. “Georgia is stubbornly pursuing [the] European and Euro-Atlantic course despite difficulties and costs involved,” she said.

“Our membership in the EU should be a mutually beneficial move not a matter of charity.”

THE CANDIDATES

ALBANIA

Joining date: Not before 2025

Chances of joining: 80 percent

Pros: Albania has shown an ability to deliver bipartisan reforms and is “the least screwed-up country” in the Western Balkans, according to a diplomat active in the region. The country largely avoided the Yugoslav wars of the 1990s, allowing it distance from the problems of other EU applicants in the region.

Cons: Formal negotiations have not yet started, and corruption and organized crime remain serious problems, according to the European Commission. The Commission has also criticized the politicization of Albania’s courts.

MONTENEGRO

Possible joining date: Not before 2027

Chances of joining: 90 percent

Pros: Montenegro is the richest Western Balkan nation per capita and has shown ongoing willingness to be part of Western institutions, as illustrated by its nearly completed bid for NATO membership.

Cons: Corruption remains “prevalent” and a “serious problem” according to the Commission, and other political and economic progress is moderate. Allowing Montenegro membership without including Serbia would expose the small nation to a security risk.

SERBIA

Possible joining date: Not before 2027

Chances of joining: 80 percent

Pros: Serbia is the biggest of the Western Balkan countries hoping to join the EU, and could be a pro-EU stabilizing force in the region and good neighbor if kept within the EU’s orbit. The Commission has praised Serbia for aligning its legislation with the EU across the board.

Cons: There has been no progress over the past year in fighting corruption. Serbia may also continue refusing to recognize Kosovo unless offered EU membership, which may be tactically clever but breaches the spirit of EU norms.

BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

Possible joining date: Not before 2027, possibly much later

Chances of joining: 50 percent

Pros: This multi-ethnic, multi-religion country could one day be a poster child for the EU’s ability to forge unity from diversity. And if the EU membership process can drag Bosnia up to speed with its neighbors, the prize could be a transformed region.

Cons: Not even the citizens of this country can agree on its basis or continued existence. The country’s constitution will also need a dramatic makeover to meet EU fundamental rights and other standards.

KOSOVO

Possible joining date: Not before 2027

Chances of joining: 30 percent

Pros: Kosovo stands to gain strength in numbers and valuable institution-building capacity through the EU membership process, and has already adopted the euro as its currency.

Cons: It is home to a troubled EU rule-of-law mission (which at times has had 2,000 staff members), and due to deep political polarization and ongoing corruption, the journey to EU membership will be a long one. Its sovereignty is not recognized by five EU countries, nor by its biggest neighbor Serbia.

MACEDONIA

Possible joining date: Not before 2030

Chances of joining: 50 percent

Pros: The country has fewer internal problems than Bosnia.

Cons: Membership negotiations have been painfully slow. Greece objects to even the name “Macedonia” as it sees this as a threat to the territorial integrity of its own Macedonia region. Macedonia also has numerous disputes with Bulgaria and there are persistent concerns to democracy and rule of law.

GEORGIA

Possible joining date: Not before 2035

Chances of joining: 20 percent

Pros: Its government could not be more positive about the EU in its rhetoric. “Georgia has no alternative,” Ambassador Sabanadze told POLITICO. “Georgians want to live in a normal, European-style democracy and they want to safeguard political independence and territorial integrity.”

Cons: Georgia is saddled with its former relationship with Russia, and like Ukraine, faces a frustrated path to EU and NATO membership, independent of the reforms it delivers as part of its membership bid.

MOLDOVA

Possible joining date: Not before 2035

Chances of joining: 50 percent

Pros: Moldova has strong ties, a shared language and a similar culture to its neighbor Romania.

Cons: The small country has a breakaway republic (Transnistria) supported by a Russian military presence, and is the poorest of the prospective EU members. A pro-Russian, anti-EU president was elected last month.

UKRAINE

Possible joining date: Not before 2035

Chances of joining: 20 percent

Pros: Millions of Ukrainians are so committed to moving into the EU’s political and economic orbit they are willing to protest or shed blood. EU links are a means to achieving stability in the post-Soviet era.

Cons: Even a loose “Association Agreement” proved too much for Dutch voters to accept in 2016, and political fears delayed EU government support for visa-free access for Ukrainians into the Schengen area. Its easter regions are war-torn and Crimea was annexed by Russia in 2014.

TURKEY

Possible joining date: Not applicable

Chances of joining: 0 percent

Pros: Inclusion of Turkey into Western institutions, and a sign that moderate Islam is welcome at the world’s top tables.

Cons: Turkey has been drifting toward authoritarianism under President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, with fundamental rule of law and freedom of expression problems. Only a small percentage of the country is geographically in Europe. Some EU institutions such as the Parliament, and governments such as Austria’s, want membership talks suspended.

ICELAND

Possible joining date: Five years after restarting bid, meaning not before 2022.

Chances of joining: 100 percent if a reapplication is made. 20 percent overall.

Pros: One of the world’s oldest democracies, Iceland boasts a strategic mid-Atlantic location, high education levels and strong cultural links to Europe.

Cons: Iceland has permanent Euroskeptic factions born from concern about protecting the nation’s fishing rights (which would be limited and partially collectivized in the EU), and the fact that it got rich on its own, and doesn’t need the EU to develop.

SCOTLAND

Possible joining date: Five years after applying, meaning not before 2024.

Chances of joining: 90 percent if application is made. 20 percent overall.

Pros: An independent Scotland in the EU would be a major prize for European integrationists. Scotland is EU-enthusiastic, with a government spokesperson calling Brexit: “a democratic outrage” against Scottish voters.

Cons: Anything short of Scotland’s full independence from the U.K. might trigger Spain to block Scotland’s bid to avoid setting a precedent for Catalan nationalists.

The simple act of screening a few fleeting seconds of a sex scene from a Jackie Chan movie has cost a regional TV producer in Iran his job.

Iran’s Kish Island viewers were mortified when their local TV station showed the martial arts star having sex with a prostitute in one of his films, the semi-official ISNA news agency reports. The country’s strict religious authorities agreed.

The Islamic republic has long frowned on any open displays of affection, let alone sex, being broadcast to the general populace and even men and women holding hands on Iran TV is viewed as forbidden. The interenet is also heavily regulated for the same “crime”,  as Breitbart News has reported.

“Clips of immoral scenes of a film featuring Jackie Chan have been circulating on social media which was apparently shown by Kish IRIB,” ISNA reported.

“These scenes which are in total contradiction with the principles of IRIB has ultimately led to the dismissal and reprimand of some of the employees of IRIB in Kish,” it said, adding this included IRIB’s director-general for Kish.

Some Iranians were quick to point no one had lost their job over a fatal bus crash that killed 10 students at Tehran’s Azad University last week.

“Buses turn over, planes crash, ships sink… no one is dismissed… A few seconds of Jackie Chan making love on IRIB and immediately all staff in that section are sacked,” wrote one Twitter user.

IRIB TV presenter Reza Rashidpoor joined the controversy by observing it could have been avoided if IRIB had captioned the scene with a disclaimer maintaining that the actress Chan was involved with is actually his wife.

He was referring to a program last week in which IRIB added a caption to say a couple holding hands on screen were married in real life and therefore viewers should not allow their strict Islamic sensibilities to be affronted.

AFP contributed to this report

Follow Simon Kent on Twitter: Follow @SunSimonKent or e-mail to: [email protected]

 

The desire of senior members of the European Parliament to protect Günther Oettinger from public scrutiny about his proposed change of responsibilities as a European commissioner indicates a failure to grasp what’s at stake.

The issue of how free the president of the European Commission is to reshape his college part-way through a term is at heart a trial of strength between the Berlaymont and Parliament. High-ranking MEPs like Manfred Weber and Ingeborg Grässle would be wise to look after the interests of their institution, rather than molly coddle the scandal-plagued Oettinger, even if he is a fellow German Christian Democrat.

Up until Tuesday, there were whispers — stoked perhaps by the German commissioner’s enemies — that the center-right European People’s Party was pressing for him to be excused a public examination of his fitness to change from the digital economy and society portfolio to that covering budget and human resources.

The attempt has failed and is therefore now denied. There will be a public exchange of views with MEPs from the Budgets, Budgetary Control and Constitutional Affairs Committees.

That is all for the good. Given his recent remarks to a business audience in Hamburg seemingly mocking Chinese people, women and gay marriage, plus his use of a private jet belonging to a lobbyist with links to the Russian government, the last thing Oettinger needs is another closed-doors meeting.

Conflicting loyalties

Not for the first time, the prospect of a commissioner being given a mauling by the Parliament has brought on an uncomfortable case of divided loyalties in the EPP.

Weber, recently reelected as leader of the EPP group, must weigh his loyalty to the German Christian Democrats against his loyalty to the institution of the Parliament. The former demands that he protect Oettinger; the latter that he put the independence of the Parliament ahead of the comfort of the Commission.

It’s the same for Grässle, who chairs Parliament’s Budgetary Control Committee. As a rule, she is ferociously combative — countless witnesses who have appeared before her committee still bear the emotional scars — but a click of the fingers from the party hierarchy acts like a tranquilizer dart, turning her from tiger to tabby.

Weber in particular should tread carefully. He is putting himself up for election as the EPP nominee for Parliament president. Whoever wins the EPP nomination is virtually assured the presidency because the EPP is the body’s biggest political group and can probably count on the support of the second-biggest group, the Socialists & Democrats. The two have a tradition of sharing out the top jobs between them. In which case the contest to take over the presidency from Martin Schulz in January will effectively be decided in December, when EPP MEPs make their choice, likely between Weber, Parliament Vice President Antonio Tajani, veteran French MEP Alain Lamassoure and Ireland’s Mairéad McGuinness.

How Oettinger’s nomination is now handled will provide a felicitous test of Weber’s appreciation of Parliament’s institutional significance. Its right to scrutinize the appointment of commissioners has been hard won and should not be put at risk — certainly not for the sake of protecting Oettinger, or his boss, Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker.

At the end of the public examination, MEPs will not be given a vote on Oettinger’s new responsibilities.

There was no such vote in July when Valdis Dombrovskis took over responsibility for financial stability, financial services and capital markets union from Jonathan Hill, who resigned as Britain’s European commissioner after the vote for Brexit. But back in June 2008, when Jacques Barrot was switched from the transport portfolio to justice and home affairs, the Parliament held a vote, as well as a separate vote on the nomination of a new commissioner, Antonio Tajani.

Step by step

Julian Priestley, who as secretary-general of the Parliament spent 10 years up to 2007 as the institution’s most powerful bureaucrat, devoted a chapter of his entertaining 2008 book “Six Battles That Shaped Europe’s Parliament” to how Parliament acquired the powers to vote on the appointment of a new Commission. He gave most credit to Klaus Hänsch, a German Social Democrat MEP who was president of the Parliament when a new Commission was being formed in 1994-95. It was he who instituted the practice of committee hearings for Commission-nominees, which passed off uncontroversially in 1995 and 1999, but blew up in the face of José Manuel Barroso, the Commission president-designate, in 2004, when Parliament threatened to reject the college. Two nominees — Rocco Buttiglione and Ingrida Udre — were replaced and other portfolios were switched. On each occasion since then, in 2009 and 2014, a nominee has been rejected (Rumiana Jeleva and Alenka Bratušek).

Priestley stressed how Parliament attained its position of power incrementally. “It has been a case of pushing procedures to the limits, but not quite beyond,” he wrote.

The lesson of such struggles is that small steps can have a significant effect on the balance of power between the two bodies. That contest is not yet over.

The procedures for assessing nominations are set out in the Parliament’s rules of procedure — in rule 118 and in Appendix XVI. A revision of those rules was set in train after the 2014 hearings and the revision — drafted by Richard Corbett, a British center-left MEP, and the Constitutional Affairs Committee — is to be put to the Parliament for approval in the coming weeks. That would mean the revised rules would take effect from January, after Oettinger makes his appearance before the committees sometime in December.

The current rules make a distinction between i) the nomination of an entire college of commissioners at the outset of the five-year mandate; ii) the nomination of an individual commissioner, either at the admission of a new member country or to replace a commissioner who resigns; and iii) a substantial change to the portfolio of someone who is already a commissioner. The revised rules would narrow the difference between how the latter two cases are treated.

Click Here: Cardiff Blues Store

I do not myself think it makes much difference that a new commissioner is subjected to a hearing, whereas a commissioner whose portfolio is being changed is merely invited for “an exchange of views.” Both cases involve a hearing in front of a parliamentary committee and the television cameras.

But under the current procedures, the newly nominated commissioner receives a stricter form of evaluation. The revised rules would prescribe that Parliament make a similar evaluation of a commissioner changing portfolios.

I have spoken to some in the Parliament who think that the revised rules, if they come into effect next year, would guarantee a vote in the event of a commissioner changing of portfolios; and others who think it would not.

How useful a precedent is the Dombrovskis-Hill scenario, where Dombrovskis was already the vice president in charge of “a deeper and fairer economic and monetary union” and Hill’s powers were effectively being passed upward? A switch from commissioner for the digital economy and society to budget and human resources — with a remit that runs across all departments — seems of a different order.

A sense of loyalty to the EPP family should not blind either Weber or Grässle to their role as custodians of Hänsch’s achievements. They must let Oettinger’s hearing take its course and let Oettinger and Juncker take responsibility for the outcome. It was Juncker who decided to nominate Oettinger for new responsibilities. Parliament should not abase itself in order to accommodate that mistake.

Tim King writes POLITICO‘s Brussels Sketch.

EU expects home-team advantage in Brexit talks

Thorny issues like financial settlement and citizens’ rights after Brexit will dominate initial rounds of talks.

The European Commission intends to conduct Brexit negotiations with the U.K. government in Brussels, rather than alternating with London, and sees the talks taking place in “rounds” as has been the case with EU trade deals, according to officials in Brussels.

The Commission and European Council’s plans for handling the divorce are beginning to take shape as they await official notification of Britain’s departure via Article 50, expected in mid-March. Officials at both institutions clearly expect to have the home-team advantage and to make a strong initial impact on the U.K. by bringing up some of the toughest issues, including Britain’s bill for leaving the European Union, in the early stages of play.

In Brussels’ view of how the negotiations will pan out, the U.K’s financial settlement with the EU, the rights of EU citizens in the U.K. and vice versa, and the future of the U.K.’s borders with the EU will be among the eight initial areas for discussion.

That order of priorities would push any talk of parallel negotiations on the future EU-U.K. trading relationship to 2018 at the earliest, an example of how the apparently bureaucratic issue of how to format the talks will have huge political implications both for Theresa May’s government — which is keen to show Britons they will have a bright future outside of the EU — and Brussels, which will instinctively want to discourage other countries from leaving.

The Commission wants to structure any future EU free-trade deal with the United Kingdom as a “mixed agreement,” mirroring the format of the EU-Canada trade deal approved this year, one of the EU officials said. That would enable parliaments across the EU to veto parts of the text — the same way Belgium’s Walloons held up the Canadian deal — while keeping other elements as the exclusive competence of the EU.

That could be a particular concern for London, as it could delay an agreement and subsequent trade deal with the remaining EU27 while individual countries could hold up a deal on issues ranging from access for U.K. financial institutions to the rights of EU workers in Britain.

The issue with the greatest risk attached is that of the financial bill to be presented to the U.K. as it leaves the EU.

The figure, which the EU estimates to be around €60 billion, cannot be precisely calculated until the day the U.K. leaves the EU, Commission officials told national diplomats in Brexit coordination meetings that were held on February 6.

In the meantime, the European Commission and some national governments are already split on how Britain’s payment should be determined

While the Commission’s Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier wants to avoid giving the impression that any such calculation is designed to punish Britain for leaving, some national governments — including France and Germany — are in no mood to find ways to reduce the financial impact on the Brits. Those countries reject the idea of reducing the payment to be made by the U.K. by deducting its notional share of the EU’s estimated €154 billion in assets, such as property, cash and other financial holdings.

From the U.K. side, a point of tension will be whether it should pay any of its existing commitments (for example, contributions to the EU’s 2014-2020 budget) beyond the date at which it leaves the EU. National diplomats have discussed 2023 as a possible final due date for the payment.

Guaranteed residency

At a February 22 meeting of Commission officials, diplomats from the 27 countries that will remain in the EU, and members of the European Parliament, the main topic of discussion was the reciprocal rights of EU citizens living in the U.K. and British citizens living in Europe. The Commission and EU diplomats agreed both categories of people should be guaranteed the right of residency in the country where they are living on the date of U.K. withdrawal, said one EU official close to the talks.

“The question was how do we count? And when do we start counting? From the notification or withdrawal? The Commission agreed that the withdrawal would be a relevant date,” said the official, adding that the pension rights of both categories of people should also be protected. “If you have lived in the U.K. for years, you have acquired rights, and these can’t be contested, and same for Brits living in the EU.”

Representatives of countries including Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Spain, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Poland, Slovakia and Portugal had expressed in the February 6 meeting that the Brexit agreement must guarantee such rights in writing to ensure they are upheld by Britain.

One month ahead of the U.K.’s self-imposed deadline for triggering the start of negotiations, other basic questions remain unanswered. While Barnier will lead negotiations for the EU and Brexit Secretary David Davis for Britain, it’s unclear how involved they will be in day-to-day negotiations.

Barnier has yet to receive any official mandate from the EU’s national leaders, and will in any case have to report back to them for instructions on a regular basis. He will receive his negotiating mandate only in April, at a summit of EU leaders called to discuss the triggering of Article 50.

Of the two chief negotiators, the Frenchman appears to have the tougher challenge. While Theresa May is quick to rebuke ministers who stray from her hardline Brexit message, Barnier has to satisfy 27 national leaders, and has toured EU capitals to seek a unified position on what his mandate will be, before it is subjected to a Council vote on a qualified majority basis. He is now in the middle of a second tour of capitals, this time to engage with national parliaments, including Germany’s Bundestag on March 7.

The interplay between the negotiators and national capitals promises to be fraught: Once technical agreement has been reached on any point up for negotiation, national leaders may be tempted to re-litigate elements that prove political contentious, or even to take over the talks directly if their underlings fail to agree. Officials on both sides of the Channel are extremely sensitive about what information reaches the public domain during the negotiations, particularly on sensitive issues such as the U.K.’s final bill for leaving the EU.

TEL AVIV – Comedian Roseanne Barr dismissed the claim that the rise in anti-Semitism in the U.S. directly correlates with the Trump presidency as nothing more than a cover. 

“I’ve been fighting anti-Semitism my whole life and I don’t see it that way,” Barr said in an exclusive interview with Breitbart News in Tel Aviv on Monday evening. “I think they found the perfect cover,” she added.

Trump “loves Jewish people,” Barr said, and noted that his daughter, Ivanka (“Isn’t she lovely?”) and grandchildren are Jewish. “That’s why they hate him.”

“There has been a war against the Jewish people for thousands of years and every 70 years they rise up again, it never goes away,” the comedian said, and added that the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel is just the latest “incarnation” of that war.

Anti-Semitism, Barr claimed, is not even limited to non-Jews.

“You can barely make people listen to [the truth about BDS] because they’re so anti-Semitic,” she went on to charge, “including Jews in America on the left. They’re complete anti-Semites.”

Barr also slammed the notion suggested by Women’s March leader Tamika Mallory that “white Jews, as white people, uphold white supremacy,” with Mallory adding that at the same time “all Jews are targeted by it.”

“Well that’s a racist term because the cornerstone of white supremacy is anti-Semitism, Jew-hatred,” Barr told Breitbart News. “And then to blame Jews for it is actually very anti-Semitic.”

Click Here: Aston Villa Shop

“Jews have no white privilege,” she added.

“I don’t identify as a white person, I only identify as a Jew,” she said, and added that “most of the Jews in the world are brown.”

Last week, Barr told an enthusiastic audience of some 500 Israelis and new immigrants that anti-Semitism is growing in the U.S. because it is “largely unopposed.”

“We need to be more vocal and be more organized and get out there and fight it,” she said at an event in Tel Aviv organized by the Tel Aviv International Salon in conjunction with the Times of Israel.

In remarks that were met with loud cheers, Barr said she voted for Trump because of his campaign promise to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of the Jewish people.

If Trump were elected, she told people at the time, it would be “so cool because it would prove that Hillary [Clinton] doesn’t own everything.”

Trump called the star to congratulate her on the astounding success of the first episode of the revival of her since-cancelled eponymous sitcom, Roseanne, which pulled in 28 million viewers.

Roseanne recalled telling Trump on the phone, “I want to thank you so much for recognizing Jerusalem as our home, as our capital. I wanted to thank you for saying you’re for moving the embassy.”

To which the comedian said Trump answered, “I will do it. It’s a wrong that has long needed to be righted and I intend to do it.”

Barr also addressed Trump’s much-anticipated peace proposal, warning the president that “it better be good.”

“I only hope his peace plan is a good one because if it isn’t — if he makes God mad he’s going to make me mad too,” she quipped.

Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, who  accompanied Barr on her visit to Israel, lauded Trump for his actions defending Israel and the Jewish people.

While acknowledging that the president could have done more to condemn the violent Charlottesville march, Boteach went on to list the measures Trump has taken to defend Israel: The recognition of Jerusalem and subsequent embassy move, scrapping the nuclear deal with Iran, the appointment of staunch pro-Israel advocate Nikki Haley to the UN, and finally, Trump’s message to U.S. allies around the world that crossing Israel means crossing America.

“I think what Trump has done for Israel is make it clear to Arab Gulf states, whether it’s Saudi Arabia, whether it’s United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Qatar or whether it’s counties around the world, is that if you don’t get along with Israel you’re not going to get along with the United States of America,” Boteach said.

“And that’s a very important statement,” he concluded.

The England forward had been out of action with a hamstring injury since the start of February, but is set to feature at Santiago Bernabeu

Raheem Sterling is back fit for Manchester City, Pep Guardiola has confirmed, meaning he could feature in the Champions League against Real Madrid on Wednesday.

The news comes as a huge boost for City ahead of their last-16 first leg at Santiago Bernabeu, with Sterling having missed their last two matches.

He has been out of action since picking up a hamstring injury in the 2-0 Premier League defeat to Tottenham at the beginning of the month.

More teams

“Yeah, Raheem is fit,” Guardiola said in his pre-match press conference. “His natural physical condition, his regeneration is amazing.

“He said to us, ‘I could have played the West Ham game, I could have played against Leicester’.

“The doctor said to be careful because of the timing. With this injury it’s always three weeks, one month and after 15 days he wanted to play.

“That’s a good sign. He’s fit, he’s ready.”

One player who will not feature in the Spanish capital is Madrid winger Eden Hazard, who could be out for the rest of the season after fracturing his ankle.

Hazard picked up the injury in Madrid’s shock 1-0 defeat to Levante, which saw them cede advantage to Barcelona in the Spanish title race on Sunday.

“It’s very bad he’s not here,” Guardiola said of Hazard. “I had the honour of watching and suffering him in England!

“To see him close you think, ‘What a player’. I wish he was here. He is a magnificent player.”

With City currently facing a two-year ban from the Champions League, extra significance has been heaped on the Madrid tie as Guardiola looks to deliver the trophy for the first time at the club.

However, he maintains he still trusts the club hierarchy, who are set to appeal the ban.

“We were under suspicion for a long time. We have the right to appeal,” Guardiola added.

“I trust the people in my club. They showed me the arguments and the proof.

“We are going to appeal and we are optimistic. We deserve to be in the Champions League.

“If it doesn’t happen, we have to accept it with the people who want to stay. I trust the club. We appeal as a club and wait to see what will happen.”

La principauté a été le théâtre d’une soirée caritative et glamour comme elle seule sait les organiser.

Dans la salle du Sporting Monte-Carlo, ouverte sur le ciel étoilé de la principauté, un millier d’invités sont venus soutenir les actions de la Croix-Rouge monégasque.

Charlène, dans une robe bustier turquoise du créateur Patrice Papa, a ouvert le bal au bras du prince Albert II, tout sourire. Le couple, complice, s’est élancé sur la piste à l’issue du dîner. Eros Ramazzotti a donné un concert, avant de laisser la place au DJ Bob Sinclar.

Click Here: Italy Football Shop

Albert et Charlène étaient accompagnés de la princesse Caroline, venue sans ses enfants. Ni Charlotte, ni Andrea et Tatiana Santo Domingo, ni Pierre n’étaient présents. Ce qui n’a pas empêché la princesse de Hanovre de profiter de la soirée, et du feu d’artifice, tiré en fin de soirée.