Donald Trump - Opinions?

[teddytennisfan]

Hillary Clinton and international relationships isn't a sentence that meshes well.

well as for BARRY ...

IN , i think , early last year -- probably in preparation for his follow-up on what originally is HILLARY'S obsession of 'pivot to asia" (which is of course to challenge china in her neighbhorhood ) -

BARRY made a nice big speech - u know, beating the uncle sam chest >
in california, i believe it was in the san diego pacific naval base - as to symbolically show "the pacific is OURS..OUR american lake -- the philippines isles shall be ours FOREVER from which we shall enter all of ASIA which we shall civilize" (ECHOING of course THEODORE ROOSEVELT who said EXACTLY those words long ago) -

and said:

"america is a pacific nation...therefore america is also an ASIAN nation...and we intend to be THE ASIAN LEADER".

AT which AVERY amused CHINA published editorials (usuall of course reflecting their official position) -

"we have heard the recent statements by the president of the USA...\'
''america may be a pacific nation...but that does NOT mean it is also an asian nation..\
''and has NO business trying to be the asian LEADER".

in view of this ...

as everyone knows (or DO you really? folks? in the right way? ) ..
the SOUTH CHINA sea IS A controversial topic right now in asia..

claims by china that it owns the majority of the south china sea ..the islets in it...
counter claims by philippines (that's my home country) -
vietnam and contrary to what WESTERN media say - NOT MUCH ELSE...

IT is of course known as hugely important in COMMERCE -- always has been for thosuands of years and is in fact what helped create the ''asian cultures" centered around CHINA - which is WHY it was always called ''the MIDDLE KINGDOM"
china after all - really created japan,korea, indochina, etc....

but never mind that ...

for the moment the main challenger to china's claims of 'sov ereignty" to build bases or harbors on those tiny rocks is of courswe philipp'ines suing china in some EUROPEAN court in brussels...wtih of course, of course who ELSE but

the 'ASIAN LEADER USA" backing the philippines..

the philippines might even WIN that court suit..but china is really NOT obligated to even acknowledge it, not according to the REAL laws of UNCLOS (LAWS of the SEA ) --

TO WHICH THE USA, mind you, REFUSES TO SIGN but does stop the USA from MEDDLING , ey?

Anyway........while china of course had traditionally been fishing in ehse waters -- which today have simply been transformed into the world's LARGEST commercial traffica area -- at least 1 TRILLION in commerce every singel DAY comes through it - largely of courswe -- as usual -- tied to china as the main global economic engine ...

NATURALLY china has an immense strategic, economic security interest that it keeps in fact going as it ALWAYS had for thousands of years.

but NOT according to USA/PHILIPPINES -- they say "china is threatening everyone" (but one would ask -- what IS the commercial interest of the chinese in THREATENING against passage ITS OWN CUSTOMES, SUPPLIERS AND TRADE PARTNERS of which china is number one in trade?)

SO THE QUESTION POSED IS THIS:

the other countries are SUPPOSEDLY - according to USA -- NOT happy with china..and yes they are not...

but BEFORE the USA INSERTED ITSELF in recent years - there were plenty of plans between THESE countries, including philippines , to cooperate, share in expanding the commercial activity between ASSOCIATION OF SOUTH EAST ASIAN NATIONS (ASEAN) -

WITH the only stipulation from china that they acknowledge china's ''sovereignty claims" - knowing there's not much THEY can do NOR can china do much abotu pushing that too hard --it's more about ''symbolism" "

these meant of course MANY joint projects (just as china is doing with russia, iran, india now...etc)

the point i am getting at is:

THE traditional RIVALS - china and india -- FINALLY got around last week to HAVE A meeting and agreement in MOSCOW ..in which the statement read:

"THE SOUTH CHINA SEA challenges are fundamentally ASIAN PACIFIC AFFAIRS and shall be discussed and only among ASIANS AND COUNTRIES OF THE REGION and not subject to interference by OUTSIDE influences".

that is a HUGE point because it throws the WEIGHT of INDIA .
this was followed YESTERDAY by a signing of a similar statement between CHINA , CAMBODIA AND BRUNEI (also partial claimants in south china sea)...

attesting to the same thing :;;''asian region affairs -to be decided by ASIANS -- NOT OUTSIDERS".

NOW here is the quesiton on AUSTRALIA.

AN ANGL0 country near asia really...

its economy is 30 percent dependent on CHINA TRADE...WITH THE export of AUSTRALIA larger to china than the export of china TO australia (except in FINANCING australian industries) -

which MEANS to CHINA -- EVEN AUSTRALIA simply takes no higher than 10th place or so in IMPORTANCE in commercial ties..whiel china is HUGELY essential TO australia's prosperity.

FOR contrast -- australia's TRADE with EUROPE is less THAN that with china..with usa -- is a mere 5 percent of australia's economic activity.

YET AUSTRALIA as part of the ANGL0-AMERICAN ''five eyes" nations that CHINA correctly IDENTIFIED AS 'the tight inner circle" ...

has DILEMMA...ITS MASTER USA wants australia to POINT militarily at china -- which YET is australia's LITERAL life-blood TO THE REST OF ASIA..

what to do , what to do...

excpet of course TURNBULL prime minsiter of australia yesterday led a delegation of THOUSANDS of businessment to BEIJING.............

makes one wonder what UNCLE thinks of that.......or -- when KILLARY comes to power....
she'/ll say to australia and japan and phil.ippines...


'SANCTION CHINA?"


roflmao!!!!!

 

[teddytennisfan]

• ENG
• RUS

RSS
Add to favorites

• About
• Contact Us

• Home
• Columns
• Locations
• Contributors
• Search

25.04.2016 Author: Martin Berger

Would Career Criminal Killary Clinton Pose a Threat to the World?
Column: Politics
Region: USA in the World





The faster the situation in Libya deteriorates, and the stronger ISIS becomes in this war-torn land, the more people start asking who’s responsible for this nightmare in order to avoid a repetition of the such a scenario in the future.

According to various Western experts, the actions taken by the United States, NATO and Gulf monarchies against Libya in 2011 constitute a war crime, no matter how you define the term. At a result, hundreds of thousands perished, including a massacre targeting dark skinned Libyans and immigrants from other African countries in particular. Entire cities were turned to rubble by America’s terrorist proxies. President Muammar Gaddafi was murdered by these forces who could only have succeeded in this crime with Western financial and military support.

The American-led military intervention in Libya resulted in the devastation of this nation which to this day is still being ravaged by violence. Libya has no government and has become a safe haven for ISIS terrorists. It’s curious that ISIS has achieved the most in Iraq, Libya and Syria, all of which were targets of Western regime change.

In a bid to find those responsible for this mayhem, The Huffington Post would note:

Hillary Clinton’s support for “regime change” in countries such as Iraq, Syria, Libya, Iran and Honduras. Thousands of Americans died in the Iraq War, and many more were wounded. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and Syrians have died and millions have been wounded or displaced; and President Obama has said specifically the “mess“ in Libya was his “worst mistake,” in which Clinton played a decisive role.

One shouldn’t downplay the crucial role Hillary Clinton played in Honduras following the 2009 military coup, when the military kidnapped the democratically elected president in his pajamas and flew him out of the country. The then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did everything she could possibly do to make the military coup in Honduras succeed by legitimizing the coup even with pro-Western forces there violently cracking down on the media and the opposition, notes the Huffington Post.

The respected alternative media source – Global Research – would go a step further by claiming:

Hillary Clinton is quite rightly taking heat for being the US mastermind of this atrocity. As secretary of state she made the case for the American nightmare. She was quite proud of this evil achievement and infamously said, “we came, we saw, he died.” of course these machinations were the cause of blowback in 2012 when jihadists killed the American ambassador at Benghazi.

Hillary Clinton is the villain in the story. If there was any justice in the world Barack and Hillary would fear being on trial. Instead he leaves office and they work together to make sure that she sits in the oval office after him But they will work hand in hand like the political twins they have always been.

In turn, Counter Punch is not shy either of labeling Hillary Clinton the Queen of Chaos and War Goddess, while noting that from Asia to Latin America her record has been scrutinized to oblivion; support for the Contras in Nicaragua; support for NATO’s bombing of the former Yugoslavia; support for the 2003 Shock and Awe invasion and destruction of Iraq; support for Operation Enduring Freedom; then, as Secretary of State, ” her“ war of turning Libya into a divided and destroyed failed state; the 2009 military coup in Honduras; and finally, support for violent regime change in Syria.

In his article written for Counter Punch, the well-known and well-respected American economist and publicist Paul Craig Roberts asks the following question: “Would the world survive President Hillary Clinton?” He argues that if Americans don’t recognize the fact that Hillary Clinton has been the instigator of numerous wars, they would end up with a restless warmonger heading up a militarist state. Considering the extraordinary destructive force of nuclear weapons, Hillary Clinton as president could mean the end of life on earth.

As Paul Craig Roberts goes on, he notes:

Hillary has survived the bombing of Libya, her creation of a failed Libyan state that is today a major source ofterrorist jihadists, and the Benghazi controversy. She has survived charges that as Secretary of State she arranged favors for foreign interests in exchange for donations to the Clintons’ foundation. She is under investigation for misuse of classified data, an offense for which a number of whistleblowers are in prison.

Bill and Hillary Clinton epitomize the use of public office in behalf of the office holder’s interest. The Wall Street Journal reported that “at least 60 companies that lobbied the State Department during her tenure as Secretary of State donated a total of more than $26 million to the Clinton Foundation.” According to the International Business Times, “Under Hillary Clinton, the State Department approved $165 billion worth of commercial arms sales to 20 nations whose governments had given millions to the Clinton Foundation.

Under these circumstances the American Conservative feels entitled to warn the world of the possible dangers it can encounter should Hillary Clinton become the US president, since her distinguishing feature is an avid support of every US military intervention over the last twenty-five years – which makes her the most militaristic Democratic candidate since Lyndon Johnson.

There’s little doubt that there’s a long list of ruthless client states that will be pleased with a Clinton victory. Hawks everywhere will be reassured that there is once again an American president that would be eager to launch unprovoked military interventions everywhere, without any pretense of caution. However, the rest of the world should be resenting and fearing the unreasonable manifestation of American power that Hillary Clinton advocates.

Martin Berger is a freelance journalist and geopolitical analyst, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

9

Popular Articles
Deutsche Bank Turns on the Gold-fix Ca...
by F. William Engdahl
Deutsche Bank, Germany's once-respected giant bank...
12345
Newsfeed from our colleagues
U.S. killing more civilians in Iraq, Syria than it acknowledges

Paul Wood and Richard Hall
Featured Content

Vladimir Odintsov The Global De-dollarization and the US Polici...

Janet Phelan MIT States That Half of All Children May be A...

Konrad Stachnio Ukraine: ‘Bangladesh’ is Investing in Bandera...

Tony Cartalucci With Aleppo Encircled, West Seeks Wildcard to...

F. William Engdahl Russia and China: Watch Out Moody’s, Here We ...


Blacklisted News

Counter Punch

Foreign Policy Journal

Global Research

Information Clearing House

Moon of Alabama

Modern Tokyo Times

NSNBC

OpEdNews

Tom Dispatch

The Excavator

Voltaire Net




E-mail:
info@journal-neo.org

Electronic analytical journal New Eastern Outlook 2010-2016
Republishing of the articles is welcomed with reference to NEO.
The views of the authors do not necessarily coincide with the opinion of the editorial board.

 

[teddytennisfan]

i want to add a background on KILLARY'S LIBYA WAR CRIME (aided and abetted by OBAMA of course under his administration -- and given ''moral justification" by NOTORIOUS war criminal posing as "'humanitarian war -- we have a responsibility to protect" ideologue SAMANTHA POWERS from IRELAND ) ...

and that is -- LIKE with IRAN , iraq (Saddm hussein and the non-existent WMD'/S ''ABOUT TO rain mushroom clouds of destruction on our cities " -- CONDOLEEZA RICE) -

THESE are among countries that have declared the intent to GET AWAY FROM THE US PETRO-DOLLAR in global trade and return their countries and regions to GOLD-BACKED collateral currencies and trade ...

each one has been attacked and destroyed (not iran, anyway, and nearly so with syria, still. an ongoing attempt) -

..and that LIBya's gaddafi had begun to construct the gold DINAR backed currency with which to begin AFRICA'S independence from US PETRO-DOLLAR BLACKMAIL.

once libya was destroyed (leading of coruswe to the rise of ISIL in the aftermath) =

LIBYA'S 280 TONNES OF GOLD RESERVES DISAPPEARED...oooo...where might it have gone?................

 

[Moxie]

Trump made a "moving" tribute to 7/11. And he didn't correct himself.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/artic...e-during-9-11-tribute-before-new-york-primary

 

[teddytennisfan]

Trump made a "moving" tribute to 7/11. And he didn't correct himself.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/artic...e-during-9-11-tribute-before-new-york-primary

moxie -- they are ALL detestable .

BUT it makes a difference that KILLARY is a DOCUMENTED WAR CRIMINAL .
anyone that tries to argue around what ''she really said" or did not -- justifications are good and not -- isn't paying attention to the factsL:

SHE is a known rabid WAR LUST person. who CAN'T WAIT to show she's got BIGGER BALLS than any man alive.

 

[Moxie]

moxie -- they are ALL detestable .

BUT it makes a difference that KILLARY is a DOCUMENTED WAR CRIMINAL .
anyone that tries to argue around what ''she really said" or did not -- justifications are good and not -- isn't paying attention to the factsL:

SHE is a known rabid WAR LUST person. who CAN'T WAIT to show she's got BIGGER BALLS than any man alive.

I don't agree with your extreme view of Hillary or Obama's actions, and I think "war criminal" is more than a bit much. But I also think it says something that you're worried about Hillary's "balls." She doesn't have balls. She has a vagina. And I'd rather have hers sitting on the chair in the Oval Office than most of the balls on offer. Maggie Thatcher and Angela Merkle may be one thing, but the most powerful job in the world? Some are still not ready for that to be held by a woman. But, then Teddy, who would you rather have? Sanders? Trump? Cruz? I'd be curious, if you're willing to disclose.

 

[teddytennisfan]

I don't agree with your extreme view of Hillary or Obama's actions, and I think "war criminal" is more than a bit much. But I also think it says something that you're worried about Hillary's "balls." She doesn't have balls. She has a vagina. And I'd rather have hers sitting on the chair in the Oval Office than most of the balls on offer. Maggie Thatcher and Angela Merkle may be one thing, but the most powerful job in the world? Some are still not ready for that to be held by a woman. But, then Teddy, who would you rather have? Sanders? Trump? Cruz? I'd be curious, if you're willing to disclose.

ya

? she;'s not a war criminal you say>


apparently some of you -- your measurements of war crminalities have not become so LOW that the destruction of an entier country that the whole world knows what the TRUE reasons are -- NOT because gaddaffi ''brutalized his people" but because he THREATENED the AMERICNA PETRO-DOLLAR (IT ALWAYS is about htat) -

ARE NOW merely some ''mistake" perhaps...hey -- but htat' that's up to you .

you are clearly far too vested in ''supporting hillary" you'd accept any justification such as "trump is worse , he said stuff about other races...he's an idiot" ..or"sanders is worse"...

as for ME -- i have NO desire to promote any of them -- merely topoint out that KILLARY IS A WAR CRIMINAL -- no less than her hsuband (do you REALLY know the history of how yugoslavia was destroyed ? or pherhpas the destruction of iraq under 10 years of sanctions by the USA -- AGAIN NOT because saddam hussein ''brutalized his people" --that's the standards AMERICAN WAR CRIME justification, it makes for GOOD stories -- but once more HE WAS ABOUT TO LAUNCH GOLD BACK CURRENCY AWAY FROM -- You guessed it -- the PETRO DOLLAR - THE foundation fo the USA' S''POWER") --

I'LL put it this way , MOXIE...you WILL see your own hands in blood voting for this woman. it's only a matter of time...

HAD there BEEN choices which there really arent' - bar TRUMP actually SAYING WHAT THE usa BETTER start doing =

end your military empire -

there might have been the MARGINALIZED jill stein - but heck -- she ws arrested for trying to join the debates against obama , u know...

or cynthia mckiney - but hey -- she's just too much talking about ALSO ending your wonderful military empire that HILLARY loves so much and CAN'T WAIT her shooting sprees....

we WILL revisit this matter months from now when EMPRESS KILLARY the WAR CRIMIINAL GETS HER CHANCE...

since OBAMA is now tasked with finishing his ''presidency" to lay the foundations for KILLARY'S ''challenging china" in HER neighborhood -- and MORE with russia in HER neighborhood..eh?

AND very very potentially provoke them in THEIR own neighborhoods for being "'the hitlers of the world" (she's said THAT after all) --

into an \'incident' -- to show ''who's boss" - eh?

yup -- MOXIE -- IN matters of this sort -- i have ALWAYS been right -- and this is ONE reason why i am HERE to remind people -- if any that recall -- that the things i said long ago - HAVE COME TO PASS.

so -- go ahead - VOTE for your dear KILLARY. and VOTE FOR WAR.

BE MY GUEST -- nad by the time KILLARY AND carter the ''defense" secretary who's RARIN TO GO AT CHINA IN SOUTH SEA from ''CHINESE AGGRESSION" -

AND AT RUSSIA IN her NEIGHBORHOOD with the WHINING little batlic countries THAT ARE PICKING YOUR TAX PAYER POCKETS for more tax dollars to ''protect them" from ''russian aggression" (but against whom they ALSO WHINE that THEIR OWN SACNTIONS against russia instigated by YOUR obama -- is blowing back right at them for LOSS OF B USINESS from russia NOW CLOSING OFF THEIR OWN MAIN SOURCES OF ECONOMY - HARBORS, RAILWAYS, FRUITS EXPORTS, ETC) --

AND YOU -- the world JUST MIGHT SEE SOME OF YOUR MAGNIFICENT AIRCRAFT CARRIERS SUNK

like the sitting ducks that they REALLY are !! lol.

just watch -- if you WANT to see a SHOW? ?

go ahead and vote hillary ...roflmao...go a vote for her in her QUEST for looking for toruble where the USA doens't have any business ordering the russians and chinese in THEIR own CONTINENT! thosuands of miles from yours!

BECAUSE YOUR HILLARY is rarin to go to tell them

"WE ARE THE ;LEADER OF THE WORLD"!!

but then -- there isn't a WAR or quarrel somewhere thE USA doens't look for , isn't that so? it's just very american...and KILLARY IS JUST THE WOMAN FOR IT!

 

[Moxie]

Some rant, but no real solutions, eh? You are free-wheeling anger. There is going to be a President after Obama, like it or not. I do think Trump would be a disaster, but I'm be happy with Sanders. Of the rest, only Kasich is vaguely qualified.

 

[teddytennisfan]

Some rant, but no real solutions, eh? You are free-wheeling anger. There is going to be a President after Obama, like it or not. I do think Trump would be a disaster, but I'm be happy with Sanders. Of the rest, only Kasich is vaguely qualified.

YA -- YOU take the easy way out

calling a 'RANT" WHATEVER IT IS THAT ACTUALY BRINGS UP veryk, very , very uncomfortable facts and realities.

lol.

that's why this excange, frankly -- against my own instincts really BORES ME.

speaking with americans is not worht the trouble, really.

BYE.

 

[Moxie]

YA -- YOU take the easy way out

calling a 'RANT" WHATEVER IT IS THAT ACTUALY BRINGS UP veryk, very , very uncomfortable facts and realities.

lol.

that's why this excange, frankly -- against my own instincts really BORES ME.

speaking with americans is not worht the trouble, really.

BYE.

Now, there's a coincidence. I find you boring, as well! Nicely rounded out. You'd be more interesting if you were less convinced by your "facts," and less-inclined to the over-use of capital letters. It would be more of a conversation if you didn't just have to SHOUT IT DOWN. You have a lot of opinions, but you're not really interested in anyone else's.

 

[Federberg]

^not sure what the purpose of your narrative is. I'm sure most people here are familiar Hillary's comments on human rights. But if it pleases you to think you're the forum expert go ahead! I merely sought clarification from @britbox. Thanks anyway!

 

[britbox]

^not sure what the purpose of your narrative is. I'm sure most people here are familiar Hillary's comments on human rights. But if it pleases you to think you're the forum expert go ahead! I merely sought clarification from @britbox. Thanks anyway!

Chinese Human Rights... well, sure... but I don't hear her talking about Saudi Arabian human rights very often... but anyway, I was alluding more to the Libya scenario and her petty "playing to the crowd" comments on Russia. Her general thrust seems to be based on division and isolation rather than anything positive.

 

[Federberg]

Chinese Human Rights... well, sure... but I don't hear her talking about Saudi Arabian human rights very often... but anyway, I was alluding more to the Libya scenario and her petty "playing to the crowd" comments on Russia. Her general thrust seems to be based on division and isolation rather than anything positive.

I wasn't disagreeing with your comment I was seeking clarification.. The comment you're replying to was more to do with being patronised by @teddytennisfan I certainly agree that she tries to come off as tough on other nations and is completely blind to the hypocrisy embedded in her rhetoric

 

[Moxie]

Chinese Human Rights... well, sure... but I don't hear her talking about Saudi Arabian human rights very often... but anyway, I was alluding more to the Libya scenario and her petty "playing to the crowd" comments on Russia. Her general thrust seems to be based on division and isolation rather than anything positive.

The US generally has a Saudi Arabia problem. We've often gotten into bed with the wrong people, and we've been bedded down with the Saudis forever. To the extent that Bush wouldn't admit that that's where the perpetrators of the Sept. 11th attacks came from, and he used it as an excuse to invade Iraq. But I don't agree with you that Hillary's world view is isolationist or divisive, certainly not compared with the Republican opposition, particularly Trump. She was the Secretary of State, after all. It bears remembering for those outside of the US that we are very ego-centric here, and the main thrust of a presidential run will be on domestic issues. I'm sorry...that's how we roll. Most folks here don't care about foreign politics, nor what the rest of the world thinks about us. I think that's wrong-headed, but I'm in the minority.

 

[britbox]

The US generally has a Saudi Arabia problem. We've often gotten into bed with the wrong people, and we've been bedded down with the Saudis forever. To the extent that Bush wouldn't admit that that's where the perpetrators of the Sept. 11th attacks came from, and he used it as an excuse to invade Iraq. But I don't agree with you that Hillary's world view is isolationist or divisive, certainly not compared with the Republican opposition, particularly Trump. She was the Secretary of State, after all. It bears remembering for those outside of the US that we are very ego-centric here, and the main thrust of a presidential run will be on domestic issues. I'm sorry...that's how we roll. Most folks here don't care about foreign politics, nor what the rest of the world thinks about us. I think that's wrong-headed, but I'm in the minority.

I don't mean she's seeking isolationism for the US... she's seeking to isolate other countries that don't bend the knee.

 

[Moxie]

Which are those?

 

[britbox]

Which are those?

Russia being the main one.

 

[calitennis127]

The US generally has a Saudi Arabia problem. We've often gotten into bed with the wrong people, and we've been bedded down with the Saudis forever. To the extent that Bush wouldn't admit that that's where the perpetrators of the Sept. 11th attacks came from, and he used it as an excuse to invade Iraq. But I don't agree with you that Hillary's world view is isolationist or divisive, certainly not compared with the Republican opposition, particularly Trump. She was the Secretary of State, after all. It bears remembering for those outside of the US that we are very ego-centric here, and the main thrust of a presidential run will be on domestic issues. I'm sorry...that's how we roll. Most folks here don't care about foreign politics, nor what the rest of the world thinks about us. I think that's wrong-headed, but I'm in the minority.

It is not just Bush that has covered up the Saudi connection. Both sides of the aisle have done that. Obama just went to Saudi Arabia to kiss up to the Saudi leaders and promise that the 28 pages of the 9/11 report about Saudi involvement would not be released. To exclusively blame the coziness with the Saudis on the Republicans is partisan idiocy.

Hillary was the main driving force behind the disastrous intervention in Libya, a place which even Obama has privately called a "s--- show." She voted for the war in Iraq. She and her husband were behind the stupid intervention in Kosovo in 1998. She has also been as much of an advocate for regime change in Syria as any Republican, she is for confronting the Russians, and she is bought off by the Israel lobby. In other words, she is more of the same of American foreign policy that has been a failure.

Trump, on the other hand, has the right view of NATO and an openness to dialogue with the Russians.

 

[calitennis127]

Trump made a "moving" tribute to 7/11. And he didn't correct himself.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/artic...e-during-9-11-tribute-before-new-york-primary

One minor slip of the tongue when you are getting 4 hours of sleep and traveling across the country to campaign does not even begin to compare to this gaffe Hillary made as secretary of state. This moment was a perfect example of the ignorance and lack of serious education of members of the Democratic Party. It is really sad that we live in a time when our State Department can't even get an accurate translation. I suppose that this is what happens when men are completely consumed with sports and third-rate feminists populate the State Department:

 

[britbox]

Bit of an odd stunt by Cruz announcing his Vice President ticket?? Can he still win this thing?