Latvian Political Monitor

From@DmitrijsMironov

For every crime committed by migrants, including sexual assaults on minors, there is always a little bunch of progressives with the text: “Aren’t there people like that among our own?” There are! https://t.co/uggoDPK3g8

Open referenced post

From@AgneseMargevica

The public mud fight between the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Minister of the Interior is not in the national interest; it is shameful and also manipulative. Braže knows perfectly well the difference between a situation where a person is placed on the blacklist by the foreign minister or by the interior minister (Immigration Law). If Braže can simply declare Ragozins persona non grata (a political decision without explanations) as a person undesirable to Latvia and he has to accept it, then Dombrava must justify his decision by one of the violations specified in the Immigration Law and, the most significant difference, Ragozins can challenge this decision of the interior minister in a Latvian court. Imagine the long fuss and Ragozins’ tearful appearances on air, telling how the “Nazi” Dombrava is persecuting him, a beacon of the free press. Which option is more beneficial for Latvia, if the Immigration Law provides for both? The answer is clear. Meanwhile, both ministers are engaged in pre-election empty chatter instead of agreeing on a state decision in a professional bilateral conversation. Both are manipulating: 1. Braže, on the eve of the election, trying to sit on two stools at once, neither saying that actually he does not want to expel Ragozins at all, nor taking political responsibility, but publicly creating the false impression that this is some special case in which a decision to add a person to the blacklist can be made only by the interior minister, not the foreign minister; 2. Dombrava, provocatively throwing this burning stick into Braže’s hands, who on the eve of the election must now bend over backwards between the desire to be friends with Ragozins’ friends in the Russian emigration, efforts to maintain her image as a “fighter of chastushkas” in the eyes of voters and Twitter fans, while at the same time the interior minister does not want to or cannot explain why he does not make this decision himself, whereas it would be in Latvia’s interest for the foreign minister to make it.

Open referenced post

From@RihardsKols

Artjom, thank you for confirming: the Interior Minister's route is legal. That most likely means a court, and the TV Rain case shows well how such cases end. Ragozin will appeal the very next day. Will the Foreign Minister include Ragozin on the persona non grata list? Yes or no? For the second day already, the Foreign Ministry cannot answer an elementary question. Which, of course, is also a kind of answer. By the way, does the surname Ponomarenko mean anything in this context?

Open referenced post

From@karlis_serzants

If this is true, then there is nothing to comment here, or how PRO themselves trampled the principles of the Istanbul Convention. https://t.co/e47FeEzY6u

Open referenced post

From@kr_klavins

Has Delfi portal’s left-wing ideology propagandist Alina Lastovska already called the leader of the “Progressives’” communist party, Andris Šuvajevs, on the carpet and started publicly shaming him? Not yet? And why will that never happen? https://t.co/HYb0MyNnsg

Open referenced post

From@JanisVoins

European values! The Istanbul Convention in action!! What the Progressives tried to hide! I remind you – the Progressives’ policy is not about people – it is about them being in power. https://t.co/SwDgXQbWr1

Open referenced post