INTERNACIONAL
Trump envoy to Turkey doubles down after backlash, pushes ‘peace through strength’ policy
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
EXCLUSIVE: U.S. Ambassador Tom Barrack is pushing back after backlash over remarks seen as equating Israel with Hezbollah, insisting his comments reflect «realism» and not a change in U.S. policy.
Barrack appeared to equate America’s closest ally in the Middle East with a U.S.-designated terrorist organization, suggested Turkey should soon regain access to the F-35 program despite its purchase of Russia’s S-400 system, and argued that only «powerful leadership regimes» have succeeded in the region.
In exclusive written answers to Fox News Digital’s questions, Barrack rejected accusations that he was softening the administration’s stance toward Hezbollah or Iran, and argued that President Donald Trump’s «peace through strength» approach requires a more pragmatic reading of the Middle East.
WALTZ HAILS ‘NIGHT-AND-DAY’ MIDDLE EAST SHIFT AS TRUMP’S GAZA PLAN RESHAPES REGION
U.S. Ambassador Tom Barrack is pushing back after backlash over remarks seen as equating Israel with Hezbollah. (Hussein Malla/AP)
Fox News Digital: During your remarks at the Antalya Diplomacy Forum Friday, you described the Israel–Hezbollah ceasefire as a «time out» and said that «everybody has been equally untrustworthy.» How do you reconcile that characterization with the U.S. designation of Hezbollah as a terrorist organization?
Does your statement that the goal is «not killing Hezbollah» reflect any shift from the previous «maximum pressure» approach toward a strategy of containment or political inclusion?
U.S. Ambassador to Turkey and Special Envoy for Syria Tom Barrack: Let me be very clear about my remarks at the Antalya Diplomacy Forum on April 17.
When I described the Israel–Hezbollah ceasefire as a ‘time out’ and said that ‘everybody has been equally untrustworthy,’ I was simply stating the obvious reality on the ground. This is realism, not criticism of any side.
The November 2024 ceasefire and the recent April 2026 ceasefire have repeatedly proven fragile because all parties — Israel, Hezbollah and their backers — have tested the limits in the past. Historical patterns of violations, rearmament and proxy escalation confirm that mutual mistrust is the core challenge.
That mutual mistrust is exactly why this administration brokered the ceasefire in the first place: to stop the senseless killing, create breathing room and build a monitored, enforceable path forward that strengthens Lebanese sovereignty and Israeli security.
This characterization in no way softens our ironclad position: Hezbollah is a designated terrorist organization responsible for the deaths of Americans and countless acts of destabilization.
We have never trusted them. We acknowledge that within Lebanon itself, the Hezbollah political party is differentiated from Hezbollah the terrorist group, which holds parliamentary seats within the Lebanese government. Political trust in that regard will have to be earned.
U.S. Special Envoy for Syria and Ambassador to Turkey Tom Barrack speaks during a session at Antalya Diplomacy Forum in Antalya, Turkey, April 17, 2026. (Umit Bektas/Reuters)
My point was straightforward: durable peace requires confronting that mistrust head-on, not pretending it does not exist. This approach fully supports President Trump’s policy of maximum pressure on Iran and its proxies while delivering real results: positioning us to degrade Hezbollah’s terrorist capabilities through a combination of enforcement, Lebanese state authority and the renewal of an economy that can provide a new era of hope to Lebanese communities in both the north and south.
On the goal not being ‘killing Hezbollah,’ I stand by every word. After decades in the region, you cannot eliminate an embedded militia solely by kinetic means when a sovereign state like Iran continues to arm and fund it. Pure ‘mowing the lawn’ has never worked. To the contrary, it often fuels recruitment and prolongs conflict.
Our objective has always been to degrade Hezbollah’s terrorist infrastructure to the point where diplomacy and a sovereign Lebanese government can take over under Lebanon’s confessional system, reflecting Christian, Sunni and Shiite interests. This is not a shift toward containment or political inclusion of a terrorist group. It is the same ‘maximum pressure plus smart diplomacy’ playbook this administration has used successfully against ISIS and other threats.
We continue to back Israel’s right to defend itself decisively, as Secretary Rubio explicitly affirmed in the current ceasefire terms, while also pushing for an end to the idiocy of endless war. Stopping the bleeding first, then enforcing the win. That is exactly what President Trump and Secretary Rubio achieved with this ceasefire.
No policy changes whatsoever. Just clear, effective execution.
TRUMP’S GAMBLE IN NORMALIZING RELATIONS WITH SYRIA IN THE FACE OF IRAN: ‘HIGH-RISK, HIGH-REWARD’
Tom Barrack, U.S. ambassador to Turkey and special envoy to Syria, meets Lebanese President Joseph Aoun in Baabda, east of Beirut, on July 7, 2025. (Lebanese Presidency Press Office/AP)
Fox News Digital: You described the dispute over Turkey’s participation in the F-35 program as «insane» and suggested the Russian S-400 issue could be resolved within months.
What specific safeguards regarding possession and operability are under consideration to satisfy Section 1245 of the National Defense Authorization Act and address concerns that the Russian S-400 system could compromise sensitive F-35 technology? How do you respond to members of Congress who have threatened to oppose F-16 upgrades or any future F-35 transfer to Turkey until your comments regarding Hezbollah and Israel are clarified?
(For example, Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., who responded directly to Barrack’s April 2026 remarks by saying Turkey would not receive either F-35s or F-16s. Scott wrote that Turkey «funds Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, hates Israel, and loves Russia and Iran,» adding: «Good luck buying F-35s, F-16s, and other American-made defense platforms.)
Barrack: Calling the prolonged impasse «insane» is blunt common sense. It highlights exactly why the administration is right to pursue a resolution: NATO unity against Russia and China is a core U.S. national security interest.
Turkey remains a vital ally, hosting critical U.S. assets, contributing to NATO missions and countering shared threats. Sanctions and exclusion from the F-35 program, triggered by the S-400 purchase, have strained ties unnecessarily while Russia benefits from the wedge.
The S-400 issue can and should be resolved within months through surgical diplomacy from Secretary Rubio, grounded in the strong personal relationship between President Trump and President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.
Let me be explicit: any resolution will fully satisfy Section 1245 of the NDAA. That means verifiable cessation of possession and operability of the Russian S-400 system, with formal certifications from the secretaries of Defense and State confirming there is no risk of compromise to sensitive F-35 technology.
There will be no shortcuts on American security standards. What I am signaling is that real breakthroughs are imminent: restoring Turkey’s role in the F-35 ecosystem, strengthening NATO interoperability, boosting U.S. industry and denying Russia leverage.
This is classic Trump deal-making: enforce the law, protect our technology and rebuild alliances that advance American strength.
In every one of these statements, I am speaking directly in support of this administration’s foreign policy. We believe in peace through strength, candid assessment of realities and delivering results that protect U.S. interests without dragging America into endless conflicts.
These comments reflect that approach: maximum leverage against terrorists, pragmatic engagement with key partners like Turkey and a clear-eyed path to greater stability in a volatile region.»
Another point of contention was Barrack’s repeated argument that strong centralized rule, rather than Western-style democracy, has been the most successful model in the Middle East. Reiterating comments he had made previously, Barrack said at the Antalya Diplomacy Forum on April 17: «The only thing that’s worked, the only thing, are these powerful leadership regimes: either benevolent monarchies, the kind of monarchical republic.
IRAN’S COLLAPSE OR SURVIVAL HINGES ON ONE CHOICE INSIDE THE REVOLUTIONARY GUARD
Turkey was removed from the American F-35 program in 2019 after purchasing Russia’s S-400 air defense system, which U.S. officials warned could allow Moscow to gather intelligence on the stealth fighter.
Under Section 1245 of the National Defense Authorization Act, Turkey cannot rejoin the program unless the president certifies to Congress that Ankara no longer possesses or operates the S-400 and that the system poses no risk to the F-35.
Syrian President Ahmed Sharaa met with U.S. Special Envoy for Syria Thomas Barrack at the People’s Palace in Damascus on Jan. 18, 2026. (Syrian Presidency/Handout/Anadolu)
Fox News Digital: You said that «powerful leadership regimes» are the only structures that have worked in the Middle East.
Does that statement reflect a broader shift away from longstanding U.S. support for democratic governance and human rights in the region?
Barrack: When I said that ‘powerful leadership regimes,’ whether benevolent monarchies or the kind of monarchical republics seen elsewhere in the region, are the only structures that have actually worked in the Middle East, I was speaking from decades of hard-earned observation, not ideology.
Look at the track record. Countries that tried to adopt Western-style democracy quickly after the Arab Spring largely failed, often descending into chaos, civil war or new forms of authoritarianism.
Meanwhile, stable, results-oriented leadership in places like the Gulf monarchies has delivered security, economic growth, modernization and real improvements in people’s lives.
Israel, which one can rightly point to as a vibrant democracy in the region, stands as a notable outlier that has thrived under extremely strong, bold leadership capable of delivering security and prosperity under extraordinary challenges, even as some critics describe it as a «flawed democracy.»
Turkey, operating as a presidential republic with regular multiparty elections, also demonstrates how strong, centralized leadership under President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has delivered stability, economic dynamism and assertive regional influence, though critics have described it as a hybrid regime with strong authoritarian tendencies.
This is not a change in U.S. policy away from supporting democratic governance and human rights. It is a realistic assessment of what produces stability so that human rights and prosperity can take root.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Warren Stephens, Tom Barrack, and Tilman Fertitta sit for their confirmation hearings. (Getty Images)
President Trump’s approach has always been peace through strength: deal with the world as it is, not as we wish it to be. We support effective governance that prevents chaos, counters terrorism and creates conditions for long-term progress.
That includes backing strong, accountable leaders who deliver for their people, whether in monarchies that have modernized successfully or in evolving systems that prioritize security and opportunity over imported models that have repeatedly collapsed.
lebanon, turkey, middle east foreign policy, war with iran, terrorism, national security, israel
INTERNACIONAL
Escándalo en Uruguay con el presidente Yamandú Orsi por la compra de una camioneta de US$ 80.000: un llamativo descuento de US$ 25.000, dudas y su descargo
INTERNACIONAL
FIRST ON FOX: ActBlue board members in hot seat as GOP probes ‘serious’ misconduct allegations
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
FIRST ON FOX: Congressional investigators are expanding their probe into Democratic fundraising giant ActBlue, seeking interviews with board members as scrutiny intensifies over the platform’s handling of foreign donations.
The GOP chairs of three House committees are requesting that five members of ActBlue’s board sit for transcribed interviews and produce a slew of documents related to their involvement in the payment processor’s response to allegations of donor fraud.
The board members have until June 16 to voluntarily comply with the Republicans’ invitation, according to a copy of the letters reviewed by Fox News Digital.
The letters come as ActBlue is under intense pressure over whether it accurately represented its fraud-prevention practices and handling of foreign donations that may have been routed through the platform into U.S. elections. The Republican-led committees have accused the platform of stonewalling their investigation by withholding documents subpoenaed by the panel and failing to be transparent after learning about the potential misrepresentation of facts.
Congressional investigators are expanding their probe into Democratic fundraising giant ActBlue. (Getty Images)
DEM FUNDRAISING GIANT IN THE HOT SEAT AS GOP LAWMAKERS DEMAND ANSWERS OVER DODGED SUBPOENA
«Information produced to the Committees and public reporting indicate that ActBlue’s Board of Directors may have participated in or been aware of this misconduct,» House Administration Committee Chairman Brian Steil, R-Wis., House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, wrote in the letters. «Accordingly, we write to request your voluntary cooperation with our oversight.»
A spokesperson for ActBlue did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
House Republicans’ widening probe into ActBlue comes as the group’s embattled CEO, Regina Wallace-Jones, is expected to testify before the House Administration Committee about the platform’s vetting of foreign donations at a June 10 hearing.
«Ms. Wallace-Jones allegedly misled our committee at the outset of our investigation into ActBlue’s fraud prevention standards,» Steil previously told Fox News Digital. «It’s past time we set the record straight and got answers for the American people.»
Central to those concerns is reporting that ActBlue’s own attorneys questioned whether the organization had accurately described some of its fraud-prevention practices to Congress.
According to The New York Times, Covington & Burling, ActBlue’s then-outside counsel, warned Wallace-Jones in early 2025 that she may have given misleading comments to Steil’s committee about how the platform screened potentially illegal contributions, including those from foreign donors.
ActBlue did not immediately clarify that some of its screening procedures for fraudulent donations were not always followed as described to congressional investigators, the outlet reported.
House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, Committee on House Administration Chairman Bryan Steil and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan are leading investigations into ActBlue. (AP)
ACTBLUE SCRUTINY FUELS NEW GOP BILLS TO TIGHTEN ELECTION DONATION RULES
ActBlue’s new outside counsel later acknowledged in a June 2025 letter that the payment processor strengthened certain donor-screening procedures, months after the board learned of the concerns raised by Covington.
«We saw it as we weren’t going to poke the bear by issuing a correction for things that, frankly, the committee hadn’t necessarily looked at more closely,» Kimberly Peeler-Allen, chairwoman of the ActBlue board of directors, told The Times in April.
Peeler-Allen is among the targets of the new round of interview requests.
The Republican chairs are also scrutinizing the board’s response to a wave of high-profile departures and alleged retaliation that occurred following internal concerns that ActBlue may have provided misleading information to Congress.
An ActBlue lawyer had his access to ActBlue’s computer networks cut off after he tried to warn the board about the group’s potential legal jeopardy, The Times reported. According to the outlet, two ActBlue unions later warned the board about current leadership’s association with a «growing pattern of volatility and toxicity» and asserted that the constant turnover was «eroding our confidence in the stability of the organization.»
ActBlue CEO Regina Wallace-Jones, a delegate from California, wears a U.S.-flag themed outfit ahead of the Democratic National Convention at the United Center in Chicago on Aug. 19, 2024. (Vincent Alban/Reuters)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
«The union noted that ActBlue’s legal and compliance functions had been compromised,» the group of Republicans said in the letter. «It is unclear what actions the Board took in response to these serious allegations.»
ActBlue has consistently denied any wrongdoing and has not been criminally charged. Spokespersons for the payment processor have previously cast the congressional probe as an attempt by Republicans to undermine the group — a key plank of the Democratic Party’s financial infrastructure — ahead of November’s midterm elections.
politics, congress, republicans elections, investigations, fund raising, republicans
El presidente Donald Trump dejó claro lo que quería cuando reunió a líderes conservadores latinoamericanos en Florida el pasado mes de marzo. Al prometer que, juntos, habrían de “erradicar los cárteles criminales que plagan nuestra región”, Trump dijo a los líderes que solo necesitaba una cosa.
“Necesitamos su ayuda”, dijo. “Díganos dónde están”.
Trump podría ganar ahora un aliado en un país que, según los expertos, es el más importante para esa misión fuera de México: Colombia.
Abelardo de la Espriella, un abogado penalista sin experiencia política que se hace llamar “El Tigre”, aventajó el domingo a su rival conservador en las elecciones presidenciales de Colombia y pasó a la segunda vuelta.
Se enfrentará el 21 de junio a un senador de izquierda del partido del presidente Gustavo Petro. Además de construir 10 megacárceles, De la Espriella ha prometido que aplastará a los grupos de traficantes armados de su país.
“Vamos a enfrentar, a derrotar y a castigar a los enemigos de Colombia que quieren destruir nuestra patria”, dijo De la Espriella en un discurso pronunciado en Barranquilla tras los resultados.
Por el contrario, su oponente político de izquierda, Iván Cepeda, defensor de los derechos humanos desde hace mucho tiempo, ha advertido contra el uso excesivo de la fuerza militar y ha denunciado lo que denomina “la fracasada guerra contra el narcotráfico”, que, según dijo, ha hecho poco por frenar el comercio mundial.
Si gana De la Espriella, sería un triunfo para Trump en la región, dijo Gimena Sánchez, directora para los Andes de la Oficina de Washington para América Latina, que calificó a Colombia de “aliado número uno para Estados Unidos”.
Colombia es el mayor productor de cocaína del mundo y el hogar de varios grupos de traficantes importantes que el gobierno de Trump ha designado como organizaciones terroristas.
A medida que los grupos armados luchan por el control de las rutas de la cocaína y las minas de oro ilegales, también se han desbordado a través de las fronteras de Colombia hacia Venezuela, Ecuador y Brasil, países de tránsito clave para la cocaína.
De la Espriella enfocó su campaña en la promesa de tomar medidas drásticas contra los grupos, así como de reprimir la delincuencia urbana, en lo que, según los expertos, equivale a una mezcla de Trump y el presidente de El Salvador, Nayib Bukele.
Ha propuesto construir 10 megacárceles privadas «en la mitad de la nada» y ha planteado la idea de promulgar una legislación “temporal” que otorgue a su gobierno amplios poderes para encerrar a más delincuentes, lo que ha provocado comparaciones con el estado de excepción que El Salvador y Ecuador han utilizado para desplegar al ejército contra los miembros de las bandas.
De la Espriella ha prometido bombardear los “campamentos narcoterroristas” el primer día y recuperar el control del gobierno en las zonas de conflicto en un plazo de 90 días.
También ha prometido perseguir la producción de coca, y calificó a la cocaína de “fuente primigenia de todas las formas de violencia”, y ha dicho que erradicará más de 330.000 hectáreas de plantaciones de coca -una superficie del tamaño de Rhode Island- con la reanudación de la fumigación aérea, una técnica que se prohibió después de que fuera relacionada con riesgos para la salud. (Ha dicho que utilizará un producto químico más seguro).
Colombia ha sido históricamente uno de los aliados más estrechos de Estados Unidos en América Latina. Aunque la colaboración ha continuado, los expertos afirman que Petro, el primer dirigente de izquierda de Colombia, tensó esa relación, al denunciar como “asesinato” los ataques de Trump a barcos frente a las costas de Sudamérica que, según él, transportan drogas.
“Estados Unidos no hizo muy privado que quiere un nuevo presidente en Colombia que siga lo que Estados Unidos quiere en la región”, dijo Sánchez, al describir que la prioridad del gobierno de Trump es conseguir nuevos socios en un “esfuerzo de cooperación en materia de narcoseguridad” en toda la región.
A través de una coalición militar recién formada para erradicar los cárteles, Estados Unidos está tratando de persuadir a sus aliados en Latinoamérica para que permitan ataques militares en conjunto con Estados Unidos contra grupos delictivos dentro de sus territorios, según ha informado The New York Times.
De la Espriella ha sugerido que, aunque no permitiría operaciones militares estadounidenses en suelo colombiano -una línea roja para muchos gobiernos de la región-, sí incluiría a Colombia en la alianza, que incluye a casi 20 países latinoamericanos.
El ascenso de De la Espriella representa un desplazamiento en la región de los políticos conservadores tradicionales hacia figuras alineadas con el movimiento MAGA, que promueven la militarización de las fuerzas del orden para responder a la preocupación de los votantes por la delincuencia, dijo Vanda Felbab-Brown, investigadora principal de Brookings Institution en Washington.
En la segunda vuelta de Colombia, se preguntará a los votantes: “¿Quieren ir esencialmente a toda marcha en la dirección MAGA? ¿Y a toda marcha en la dirección Bukele?”, dijo Felbab-Brown.
“De la Espriella”, añadió, “está en la extrema derecha de la derecha”.
Sus estrictas propuestas en materia de seguridad preocupan a algunos analistas, quienes afirman que políticas similares en El Salvador y Ecuador han dado lugar a abusos contra los derechos humanos.
De la Espriella también ha adoptado una postura contraria a los migrantes, y prometió deportar a los migrantes que cometan delitos en un país en el que ahora viven hasta tres millones de venezolanos. También ha adoptado posturas sociales conservadoras que resuenan entre muchos votantes de Colombia, un país de mayoría católica, como oponerse al aborto y al derecho de las parejas homosexuales a adoptar niños.
Se ha presentado a sí mismo como partidario de las empresas y del gobierno pequeño, al prometer -al igual que el presidente Javier Milei de Argentina- reducir de manera drástica el gasto público, recortar las normativas, eliminar los organismos gubernamentales “inútiles” y erradicar la corrupción.
El rival de De la Espriella, Cepeda, propone un enfoque totalmente diferente en materia de seguridad.
Cepeda, conocido sobre todo por su labor en la defensa de las víctimas del largo conflicto armado colombiano, ha dicho que protegerá a los colombianos de la violencia. Pero cerró su campaña diciendo que buscaría la paz y la reconciliación y detendría “el ciclo de las violencias” que durante décadas ha visto a las fuerzas de seguridad colombianas atacar a los grupos armados, con bajas masivas en ambos bandos.
No ha dicho que vaya a archivar el muy criticado plan de paz de Petro, “Paz Total”, y ha sostenido que los acuerdos negociados con los actores armados son la única forma de evitar más derramamientos de sangre. Los críticos han dicho que aliviar la presión militar sobre los grupos les había permitido expandirse.
Cepeda ha dicho que su propio plan de seguridad implicará una mayor inversión en las zonas de conflicto, el apoyo a los pequeños agricultores, la creación de empleo y la ayuda a las escuelas para evitar el reclutamiento de niños.
Al enfrentarse a Estados Unidos, Cepeda se aleja de Petro.
Petro discutió a menudo con Trump, pero al final le aseguró que su gobierno estaba llevando a cabo un ataque militar total contra los grupos armados. En una reunión en la Casa Blanca a principios de este año, transmitió que trabajar con Colombia era la mejor apuesta de Trump para lograr sus objetivos antinarcóticos en la región.
De la Espriella se ha inclinado por una imagen de línea dura, y ha dado discursos con el puño en alto. Pero ha rechazado las etiquetas ideológicas y ha dicho que no era “extremo” de la derecha, sino de “extrema coherencia”.
“Al final del día yo no estoy defendiendo ideologías. Yo estoy defendiendo valores y principios”, dijo en una entrevista reciente con un influente colombiano, y citó la familia, la libertad y la seguridad como pilares de su campaña.
Cepeda, por su parte, ha intentado poner en duda el mensaje de ley y orden de De la Espriella.
Al referirse a la carrera de De la Espriella como abogado penalista que representaba con frecuencia a clientes implicados en polémicas relacionadas con la corrupción y las drogas, Cepeda lo calificó de “estafador de estafadores”, que representa un “pasado parapolítico, narcotraficante, mafioso, plutocrático y corrupto”.
De la Espriella ha hecho caso omiso del escrutinio de su pasado y ha afirmado de manera repetida que nunca ha sido acusado de ningún delito y ha citado su carrera jurídica como prueba de su compromiso con el Estado de derecho.
Algunos colombianos dijeron estar preocupados por sus mensajes. Juli Salamanca, directora de un grupo de salud trans de Bogotá, dijo que apoyaba a Cepeda por temor a que De la Espriella pudiera erosionar las libertades civiles y poner en peligro derechos que tanto había costado conseguir.
“Representa todos los odios de la sociedad”, dijo.
Otros votantes no estaban de acuerdo. William Bohorquez, quien asistió a un acto de campaña de De la Espriella en Barranquilla el domingo por la noche, dijo que su candidato reconduciría el rumbo de Colombia tras años de liderazgo “a la deriva” bajo Petro, especialmente en su relación con Estados Unidos.
“Donald Trump ve que no hay interés del actual gobierno en acabar con el narcotráfico ni con los criminales”, dijo Bohorquez.
Y añadió: “Por eso, queremos que Abelardo actúe con mano dura contra la delincuencia y contra los grupos armados”.
—-
Genevieve Glatsky colaboró con reportería desde Bogotá.
Annie Correal es corresponsal de Latinoamérica para el Times.
Luis Ferré-Sadurní es reportero del Times radicado en Bogotá, Colombia.
Genevieve Glatsky colaboró con reportería desde Bogotá.
The New York Times, data-cc, data-cc-nyt
Buenos Aires fue sede del taller para el desarrollo de energía nuclear impulsado por Estados Unidos
La mora de las familias marcó un nuevo récord en abril y ya hay 5,3 millones de personas con problemas para pagar sus deudas
Alerta en Uruguay antes del Mundial: se lesionó una de las máximas figuras de Bielsa y podría quedar afuera
Pablo Quirno presentará la adhesión de la Argentina al Tratado Transpacífico para profundizar el libre comercio
Juicio por la muerte de Maradona, en vivo: “Me sacan mi bala de plata”, dijo Luque cuando no lo dejaron operar a Diego
Reforma laboral: cómo funcionará el nuevo Fondo de Asistencia Laboral y qué cambiará en los recibos de sueldo
Quién era Agostina Vega, la adolescente de 14 años que encontraron muerta tras una semana desaparecida en Córdoba
La peor de las sospechas: encontraron restos humanos en el descampado donde buscan a Agostina y se espera la palabra de las autoridades
Contraofensiva de Abel Furlán: pidió a la Justicia la nulidad de la intervención a la UOM y su inconstitucionalidad
Ley de Sociedades: los cambios clave del proyecto que el Gobierno enviará al Congreso
SOCIEDAD3 días agoQuién era Agostina Vega, la adolescente de 14 años que encontraron muerta tras una semana desaparecida en Córdoba
- CHIMENTOS3 días ago
La peor de las sospechas: encontraron restos humanos en el descampado donde buscan a Agostina y se espera la palabra de las autoridades
- ECONOMIA3 días ago
Ley de Sociedades: los cambios clave del proyecto que el Gobierno enviará al Congreso
