Trump: Democrat congresswomen ‘love’ al-Qaeda, use ‘anti-Semitic’ language

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF THE TIMES OF ISRAEL)

 

Trump: Democrat congresswomen ‘love’ al-Qaeda, use ‘anti-Semitic’ language

US president says ‘many people agree with me’ that lawmakers Tlaib, Omar, Ocasio-Cortez and Pressley should ‘leave the country’ if they hate it

US President Donald Trump speaks during a Made in America showcase event on the South Lawn of the White House, July 15, 2019, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

US President Donald Trump speaks during a Made in America showcase event on the South Lawn of the White House, July 15, 2019, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

Unbowed by searing criticism, US President Donald Trump on Monday emphatically defended his tweet calling on four Democratic congresswomen of color to go back to their “broken and crime infested” countries. Condemnation of his comments “doesn’t concern me because many people agree with me,” Trump declared, adding that the lawmakers employ “anti-Semitic” language and have “love” for terror group al-Qaeda.

Trump responded to questions at the White House after his Sunday tweet assailing the lawmakers, all of whom are US citizens and three of whom were born in the country. He has been roundly criticized by Democrats, who labeled his remarks racist and divisive, and a smattering of Republicans, who also have objected. Most leading Republicans have been silent.

“When I hear the way they talk about our country, when I hear the anti-Semitic language they use, when I hear the hatred they have for Israel, and the love they have for enemies like al-Qaeda, then you know what, I will tell you I do not believe this is good for the Democrat party,” Trump said.

Resurrecting language not prevalent in the US for decades, he added that if the lawmakers “hate our country,” they “can leave” it.

“If you’re not happy in the US, if you’re complaining all the time, you can leave, you can leave right now,” he said.

The lawmakers’ criticism has been aimed at Trump and his administration’s policies and actions.

Earlier Monday, Trump made clear he had no intention of backing down, asking on Twitter when “the Radical Left Congresswomen” would “apologize to our Country, the people of Israel and even to the Office of the President, for the foul language they have used, and the terrible things they have said.”

“So many people are angry at them & their horrible & disgusting actions!” he wrote.

It was yet another sign that Trump, who won the presidency in 2016, in part by energizing disaffected voters with incendiary racial rhetoric, has no intention of backing away from that strategy going in 2020. Trump has faced few consequences for such attacks, which typically earn him cycles of front-page media attention.

Asked whether Trump’s comments were racist, Marc Short, chief of staff to Vice President Mike Pence, defended Trump, telling reporters he had been responding to “very specific” comments made by Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, who was born in Somalia, and was not making a “universal statement.”

But Trump did not make that distinction in his tweets. He cited “Congresswomen” — an almost-certain reference to a group of women known as “the Squad” that includes Omar, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan.

This combination image shows, from left, US Congresswomen Rashida Tlaib, July 10, 2019; Ilhan Omar, March 12, 2019; Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, July 12, 2019; and Ayanna Pressley, July 10, 2019, all in Washington. (AP Photo)

“I don’t think that the president’s intent any way is racist,” said Short, pointing to Trump’s decision to choose Elaine Chao, who was born outside the US, as his transportation secretary.

Chao is one of the few minorities working among the largely white and male aides in high-profile roles in Trump’s administration. She is the wife of Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, who had made no comment on Trump’s attacks as of midday Monday.

Omar ignited a bipartisan uproar in Washington several months ago, when she suggested that some members of Congress support Israel because of money, while Tlaib, who is of Palestinian origin, riled up a supportive crowd by calling the president a profane name and predicting he would be removed from office.

Tlaib and Omar are fierce critics of Israel and have voiced support for the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign against the Jewish state. Ocasio-Cortez has also criticized Israel on multiple occasions. Pressley, on the other hand, has said she opposes BDS and supports the two-state solution.

Tlaib is organizing a congressional visit to the West Bank in August, to compete with Israel trips organized by the American Israel Education Foundation, an affiliate of AIPAC.

Following a familiar script, Republicans remained largely silent after Trump’s Sunday morning broadsides that caused Democrats to set aside their internal rifts to rise up in a united chorus against him.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi speaks during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, on June 13, 2019. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Trump wants to “make America white again,” while Ocasio-Cortez said Trump “can’t conceive of an America that includes us.”

“Mr. President, the country I ‘come from,’ & the country we all swear to, is the United States,” she tweeted, adding that, “You rely on a frightened America for your plunder.”

Omar also addressed herself directly to Trump in a tweet, writing: “You are stoking white nationalism (because) you are angry that people like us are serving in Congress and fighting against your hate-filled agenda.”

Pelosi announced Monday that the House would be holding a vote on a resolution condemning Trump’s comments.

Meanwhile, Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, a close ally of the president who golfed with him over the weekend, advised him to “aim higher” during an appearance on “Fox and Friends,” even as he accused the members in question of being “anti-Semitic” and “anti-American.”

US Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Senator Lindsey Graham (Republican-South Carolina) during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, May 1, 2019, on the Mueller Report. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

“Don’t get personal. Don’t take the bait,” said Graham. He said Ocasio-Cortez and her colleagues “are American citizens” who were “duly elected,” while adding: “We all know that AOC and this crowd are a bunch of communists. They hate Israel. They hate our own country.”

Trump’s words may have been meant to widen the divides within the Democrat caucus, which has been riven by internal debate over how far left to go in countering him, and over whether to proceed with impeachment proceedings against the president. Instead, the president’s tweets, which evoked the trope of telling black people to go back to Africa, brought Democrats together.

Former Vice President Joe Biden, the Democratic presidential front-runner, tweeted Sunday that Trump “continues to spew hateful rhetoric, sow division, and stoke racial tensions for his own political gain.”

“Let’s be clear about what this vile comment is: A racist and xenophobic attack on Democratic congresswomen,” tweeted Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a Democratic presidential candidate.

Among the few GOP lawmakers commenting, Rep. Pete Olson of Texas said Trump’s Sunday tweet was “not reflective of the values of the 1,000,000+ people” in his district. “We are proud to be the most diverse Congressional district in America. I urge our President immediately disavow his comments,” he wrote.

It was far from the first time that Trump has been accused of holding racist views.

In his campaign kickoff in June 2015, Trump deemed many Mexican immigrants “rapists.” In 2017, he said there good people on “both sides” of the clash in Charlottesville, Virginia, between white supremacists and anti-racist demonstrators that left one counter-protester dead. Last year, during a private White House meeting on immigration, Trump wondered why the United States was admitting so many immigrants from “shithole countries” like African nations.

Repeatedly, Trump has painted arriving immigrants as an “infestation” and he has been slow in condemning acts of violence committed by white supremacists. And he launched his political career with false claims that President Barack Obama was not born in the United States.

Fearful of his Twitter account and sweeping popularity among many Republican voters, GOP lawmakers have largely tried to ignore the provocative statements.

READ MORE:

Kamala Harris, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez And Donald Trump, All Racist Bitches?

Kamala Harris, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez And Donald Trump, All Racist Bitches?

 

If you have been paying any attention at all lately to the U.S. news then you have heard a lot about ‘race’ or racism in the conversations within the news programs. First I would like to talk with you about Senator Kamala Harris who is now considered to be one of the front runners (top 5) in the Democratic Presidential debates. Ms. Harris up until the first debate was nothing much more than a ‘also ran’ but it was this debate that has propelled her upward on the ladder. Mainly there was just one question, one moment that did this for her. She was able to slam the front runner Joe Biden on his record about bussing fifty years ago. I am not a fan of Mr. Biden but when a person has been in politics for the past 50 years there are going to be plenty of areas to be critical of a person’s record, it’s just reality, in 50 years a person is going to change their opinions on different issues sometimes. Ms. Harris is a first term Senator from the state of California, her political record is much shorter.

 

This one question was a trap for Mr. Biden for someone to use as being a race issue whether race had anything to do do with his vote back then or not. Ms. Harris was able to use this as a race issue and the media, correct or not, jumped onto the side of Ms. Harris. I had heard of Ms. Harris ever since she became a member of the U.S Senate, but, basically everything that I had heard from or about her has had to do with race. It seems to me via the things that I had heard from Ms. Harris is that she is like a one trick pony and that the pony she is riding is race. I consider myself a moderate, sort of like an old southern conservative Democrat mixed with a liberal Republican. In other words I don’t like either political party at all, this is why I have been a registered independent for decades now. I had always taken Ms. Harris to be a Black person, just a lightly skinned person but evidently I was wrong on this issue. I can’t stand the Trump family but Don Jr. posted a tweet about her race so I started to check out her linage a little bit. Turns out her Mom is from India and her Dad is from Jamaica, so, if this is the truth, she isn’t Back at all. Yet she does seem to cater to the base of the Black voters. Yes she is a ‘person of color’ as is every human on the planet, even White is a color you know. But I do understand where that term came from as racists Whites used to call Black folks ‘colored’. Stupid of them then and now as is reversing the term. Personally I do not care what paint job a person has on their bones, I only care about what is between their ears and if any racism is there, I do not want them to hold any political position, especially not the Presidency. To me, I believe that Ms. Harris is a blatant racists so I would never vote for her.

 

Now I am going to gripe abit about the Bronx’s new Congresswoman Ms. Cortez or ‘AOC’ for short. She and a few of her Freshmen Congress ladies ‘of color’ have been playing the race issue to the hilt it seems, especially Ms. Cortez. She is in a running feud with the Democratic head of the Congress Ms. Pelosi who happens to be a White lady. I very much do not like Ms. Pelosi either but by all accounts I have ever heard including from other Congressmen and women of color, Ms. Pelosi is not a racist person. Yet as soon as AOC started getting shut down on some of her ideas she then went straight to calling Ms. Pelosi a racists because she wasn’t jumping on AOC’s ‘progressive’ bandwagon. To me, this is like the folks who talk about how much they hate haters, in other words, if you don’t agree with me, then you are a hater. Or, if you don’t follow me and my ideas, then you are a racists. Ms. AOC to me seems to be one of these people. To me, it appears that Ms. Harris and Ms. AOC have no other ideas or agenda accept race which to me is the bottom of the basement of human ignorance. Have you noticed during your life that the people who scream the loudest about racism are almost always extremely racist themselves?

 

Now, concerning our “racists, cowardly President”, Mr. Trump. First, I do believe that he is nothing more than a piece of trash as a person. I do believe that he is blatantly racists as well as a cereal rapists and a habitual liar and about as wise as a dead dog in the street. He always plays to the very lowest IQs he can find, it seems that they flock to this cowardly habitual liar. That the so called ‘Christian’ right support him or ‘Tea Party’ support him I find quite disgusting as he is anything but Christian. I call him a coward because of his Daddy getting him six deferrals from military service during the Vietnam war. He could have gone into a reserve unit like George W. Bush did, at least George W. didn’t seem to be ashamed to put on our Nations Uniform. Mr. Trump appears to not only have used his daddy’s money and influence to keep out of combat he didn’t even have enough guts to join the Reserve and with his College credits he could have gone in as an Officer like George W. did. Or is it possible that he simply loathed the U.S. military, or maybe it was just that the Uniform wasn’t “his color”?

 

Now in case you are wondering why I used the title that I did here are the reasons. One I guess was to get your attention, whether for or against my thoughts. Two, I do believe that all three of these people are blatant racists that everyone should totally discard as being credible. Three, from a Christian moral standpoint I believe that anyone who is racist has lowered themselves to the level of dead rabid dog. Also you may be wondering why I used the term ‘bitches’ for these three people is simple, in our U.S. slang it is common to call a hate filled woman a bitch, not meaning that they are actually a dog. Then why did I call Mr. Trump a bitch? That is simple also, in our U.S. slang it is also common to call a man who is considered to be a total coward a Pus-y, and that is exactly what I believe Mr. Trump is, a loud mouthed, racist, coward. Like it or hate it, this is my comment letter to you today. I know that some will hate what I wrote, some because they think I am to critical and some because they think I am not being critical enough. Either way, when I write these letters to you what I am mainly trying to get you to do is to think about the issues listed within the letter.

Turkey takes delivery of Russian S-400 systems defying US

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF SHANGHAI CHINA’S ‘SHINE’ NEWS NETWORK)

 

Turkey takes delivery of Russian S-400 systems defying US

Xinhua
Turkey takes delivery of Russian S-400 systems defying US

Xinhua

A Russian Antonov military cargo plane, carrying parts of the S-400 missile defense system from Russia, is unloaded after landing at the Murted Air Base in Ankara, Turkey, on July 12, 2019. The first batch of Russian S-400 air defense system was delivered in Turkish capital city of Ankara on Friday, the Turkish Defense Ministry said.

Turkey began taking the delivery of Russia’s S-400 air-defense system on Friday, completing a much-debated deal that is likely to trigger sanctions from the United States and test the NATO alliance.

The first components for the state-of-the-art system arrived aboard three Russian military planes at the Murted air base, located at a distant suburb of Ankara, the Turkish Defense Ministry said in a statement.

“Turkey received the first batch of S-400 air defense systems. The deliveries are sent to the Murted air base,” the ministry said. Two more deliveries are expected in the coming days.

Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu told reporters in Ankara that “there is no problem in the deliveries,” adding that “the process will also continue in a healthy pace in the future.”

The purchase, which is the fruit of a controversial agreement inked between Ankara and Moscow in 2017, signals, according to observers, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s willingness to coordinate more with Russia and could set off a new crisis in relations between Turkey and the US, two major NATO allies.

The US President Donald Trump’s administration had given mixed signals about how it might respond if Turkey went through with the deal, but US officials had warned of repercussions, including canceling sales of around 100 high-tech US-made F-35 fighter jets to Ankara and the imposition of sanctions under a 2017 law in cooperation with adversaries.

During a visit to NATO headquarters in Belgium in June, acting US Defense Secretary Mark Esper said “if Turkey accepts delivery of the S-400s, they will not receive the F-35.”

However, Trump has been publicly supportive of the Turkish president and expressed recently sympathy for Erdogan’s decision to purchase the surface-to-air S-400s. Erdogan, after meeting Trump at the G-20 Summit in June in Osaka, said he did not believe that the United States would sanction Turkey.

Erdogan has refused to back down on the S-400 deal and defended the 2.5 billion US dollar acquisition of the Russian system as part of Turkey’s sovereign right to defend itself, and said he tried to purchase the US-made Patriot air defense system but was not offered favorable terms in the past.

US officials fear that Turkey’s possession of the S-400 could give Russia access to secrets of the F-35’s stealth technology and argued that it would create interoperability problems inside NATO.

Ankara has ruled out such a possibility, saying that it is a long standing NATO country, since 1952, and that the S-400 would not be integrated in NATO capabilities.

Nevertheless, Turkey’s purchase of F-35 planes could be compromised as a concrete move last month, the Pentagon said it would halt the training of Turkish pilots to fly the warplane.

Possible US economic sanctions would mark a new standoff in Turkish-American ties. Last year, Washington imposed sanctions on Turkey over its detention of an American pastor, triggering a currency crisis. Sanctions were lifted after Ankara released the clergyman.

Following the arrival of the first S-400 components to the Turkish capital, the Turkish lira dropped about 1.5 percent against the greenback, trading at 5.76 lira.

The deal with Russia also raised some concerns in Western circles that Turkey is drifting away, closer to Moscow’s sphere of influence.

Deliveries of the S-400 components to Turkey would continue “in the coming days,” according to a statement by Turkey’s defense industries authority, which did not say when or where the completed system would ultimately be deployed.

“Once the system is completely ready, it will begin to be used in a way determined by relevant authorities,” said the statement.

An official close to the matter said to Xinhua that the first battery could be deployed at Murted base and a second one likely in southeastern Turkey, near the Syrian and Iraqi border and be operational by October.

“Assessments are underway at several levels to decide on the issue, but everything is going according to plan,” said the official on the condition of anonymity.

India: On World Population Day, Giriraj demands 2 child norm, links it to religion

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF THE HINDUSTAN TIMES OF INDIA)

 

On World Population Day, Giriraj demands 2 child norm, links it to religion

The Begusarai BJP MP said that there should be a rule of having only two children in the country for every religion and those who violated it, should be debarred from the right to vote.

INDIA Updated: Jul 11, 2019 17:33 IST

Vijay Swaroop
Vijay Swaroop
Hindustan Times, Patna
Giriraj Singh,population explosion,2 child norm
Union Minister of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries, Giriraj Singh, initially posted his comments on population explosion on social media and later spoke to the media.(HT FILE PHOTO.)

Union minister Giriraj Singh, known for his controversial statements, has linked the rising population of the country with religion. On World Population Day, on Thursday, Singh initially tweeted his views and later told the media that population explosion was disturbing the social harmony and balance of the country.

The Begusarai BJP MP said that there should be a rule of having only two children in the country for every religion and those who violated it, should be debarred from the right to vote.

The minister, without naming any community, said that the rising population was posing threats to resources and harmony. “It’s ruining the economy,” he said.

Singh’s tweet in Hindi said, “Population explosion in India is disturbing social harmony and balance. Religious interference is also a reason related to population control. Like in 1947, India is heading towards division on the basis of culture. Every political party should come forward to make laws regarding population control.”

He requested all parties to mull over the issue seriously. “A strict law should be made to control the population. There is a need to raise the issue in Parliament,” he said.

Singh, three years ago, had demanded laws for sterilization in the country.

The firebrand BJP leader has always been in the news for the wrong reasons. During the parliamentary elections, he had demanded a ban on green flags, which he said, “tend to create hatred in the society and gives one a feeling of being in Pakistan.” This had caused huge embarrassment to BJP’s alliance partner, JD(U), as both JD(U) and the main opposition party, RJD, have green flags.

If that was not enough, he triggered another row during the Lok Sabha polls when during an election meeting he said, “Muslims will have to say Vande Mataram if they need three yards of land for a graveyard.” A comment that had angered key ally JD(U) which in turn asked the Election Commission (EC) to take cognizance of his comments.

Singh has been known for his controversial remarks in the past too. Only last year, he had embarrassed the Nitish Kumar-led NDA government in Bihar, when he demanded renaming Bakhtiarpur town, where Nitish Kumar was born. The minister also wanted the name of Akbarpur in his current Lok Sabha constituency of Nawada changed, saying it was named after Mughal emperor Akbar.

Singh’s latest comments on population found support from NDA MLAs in Bihar. “For the sake of the country, we need to control population, irrespective of religion. If not controlled today, it is bound to create food and water scarcity in the country,” said JD (U) MLA, Lallan Paswan. BJP’s MLA Sachindra Kumar, too, supported the union minister’s demand for population control.

The opposition, however, snubbed the demand. “This shows the narrow-mindedness of the union minister,” said RJD’s MLA, Bhola Yadav. Congress MLC Premchandra Mishra wondered how one can seize anybody’s voting rights. “He is in the habit of saying weird things,” Mishra said.

First Published: Jul 11, 2019 17:19 IST

Brazil: Presidents Son To Become Ambassador To the U.S.

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF BRAZIL’S 247 NEWS)

 

Eduardo Bolsonaro signs to accept Brazil embassy in Washington

Aligned with Donald Trump and Steve Bannon, Eduardo Bolsonaro is about to become Brazil’s ambassador to the United States; without any formation to the position, Eduardo will be the symbol of a historical humiliation for all the Itamaraty and tends to aggravate the condition of Brazil like colony of the United States

(Photo: Paola De Orte / Agência Brasil)

247 – Federal Deputy Eduardo Bolsonaro (PSL-SP), son of President Jair Bolsonaro (PSL), positively signaled a possible invitation to take over the Brazilian embassy in the United States. 

Asked about the issue raised by his father, in an interview on Thursday (11), Eduardo said that there is no definition, but that if the invitation was officially made, he would not deny.

“The mission that President Bolsonaro gives to me will certainly work in the best way,” he said. “There is nothing formal, nothing official.

Why do we fly flags at half-staff?

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF TRIVIA GENIUS)

 

Why do we fly flags at half-staff?

In somber times, we recognize the flag at half-staff as a symbol of a nation in mourning. The practice is observed in nearly every country across the world in mourning of important figures or events and is always related to death. Theories regarding the origins of the practice are contentious, but it has a long history extending to at least the 17th century.

In the United States, one of the earliest accounts of the flag being flown at half-staff was to mourn the passing of none other than George Washington himself by the Vessels of the Navy. However, the practice dates back even further than the birth of the United States.

An unfortunate venture

Credit: jimfeng / iStockPhoto

In the early 1600s, King Christian IV of Denmark sent out expeditions to locate ancient Norse settlements and take them in the name of his country. William Hall led one of these expeditions in search of the Northwest Passage when he came upon a group of Inuit. Unbeknownst to Hall, he was following in the steps of Scottish explorer John Cunningham, who had taken four Inuit as prisoners during his expedition. When Hall encountered the Inuits, he was attacked and killed. His crew members retreated. The rest of his crew steered the ship away to flee. Upon their return, the crew members hung the flag at half-staff, accounting for the earliest account of the practice, to commemorate their captain’s death.

The black flag

Credit: tzahiV / iStockPhoto

Hall’s story still relies upon some inherent symbolic meaning behind lowering the flag. Historians are divided on the initial symbolism behind the practice, but one popular theory proposes that it was to signify that the invisible flag of death flies above the lowered flag. This theory explains why the British only lower the flag by one flag-width rather than halfway down the staff as we do in America. It is thought that this practice grew from an earlier one in which a black flag was placed above the normal flag during times of mourning, but carrying the additional flag for rare use may have become cumbersome or seen as a bad omen for sailors. Other theories posit that the unkempt nature of flying the flag at half-staff signifies grief. Finally, it may have started as a symbolic salute to the fallen.

Across the world

Credit: Steven_Kriemadis / iStockPhoto

Flying the flag at half-staff is a widespread practice across world cultures to signify mourning. Some countries also place a black ribbon above their flag. The deaths of leaders are frequently signified by half-staff, but it may also signify historical or religious tragedies. In Russia, the flag is lowered on June 22 to commemorate the Nazi invasion of the USSR. In Israel it is lowered for Holocaust remembrance day. Almost every country in the world has a procedure or tradition in which they lower the flag to half-staff, but Saudi Arabia is one rare exception. The Saudi flag is an inscription of the Shahada, signifying the message of Islam. Because of this, lowering the flag is seen as blasphemous and therefore never practiced.

At home

Credit: Thomas Shanahan / iStockPhoto

In the United States, the flag is lowered to half-staff for a series of occasions including Memorial Day, September 11, and for deaths of members of congress, the Supreme Court, or the executive branch. Outside of these occasions, the President of the United States can issue an executive order to fly the flag at half-staff across all government buildings, public schools, and military bases. Governors may also issue a similar order within the boundaries of their state. Failing to comply with either order does not incur a fine, as doing so would violate the First Amendment.

Presidents: How Old Is Just To Damn Old?

Presidents: How Old Is Just To Damn Old?

 

I just finished reading a CNN article on the Democratic candidates for President and I would like to share some ideas with you. Being there are at least 23 people vying for this job within the Democratic Party I have chosen the top five candidates (what the polls say) to discuss with you today.

 

As I am sure that you have garnered from the title I am going to talk with you about the ages of these candidates. Simply put, in your opinion does age matter? Via the U.S. Constitution you must be at least 35 years of age to hold the Office yet there is no maximum age set.

 

The ages I am going to give you are the age these people would be on the day they would be sworn into Office on January 20th of 2021. It is just my personal opinion that if a person will reach their 72nd birthday during an term for any Office, they should be barred from being able to seek the Office. As I said earlier, these five folks are leading in the Democratic Presidential polls. I have added one person to the list as he just announced his candidacy yesterday. He is the California Billionaire who has been paying out of his own pocket for the commercials saying that President Trump needs to be impeached. His name is Tom Steyer.

Name:                                                         Day Born:                                 Age as of January 21st of 2021:

Tom Steyer                                                  June 27, 1957                           63

Bernie Sanders                                           September 8, 1941                   79

Joe Biden                                                    November 20, 1942                  78

Kamala Harris                                             October 20, 1964                     56

Elizabeth Warren                                         June 22, 1949                           71

Pete Buttigieg                                             January 19, 1982                      39

 

I am only going to mention two other people who are on the Republican side.

Donald Trump                                             June 14, 1946                           74

Mike Pence                                                 June 7, 1959                              61

 

I am a registered independent voter who personally does not like the Democratic nor the Republican Parties. I don’t believe that either Party cares at all about the American people as a whole. But today’s Republican Party of Donald Trump, Mike Pence and Mitch McConnell totally discuss me. So, in the next Presidential election cycle I would vote for a dead dog before I would vote for any Republican. Personally, of the candidates that I mentioned my top two choices would be Tom Steyer or Elizabeth Warren. If my 72 guideline were the law Mrs. Warren could not be on the ballot. But then neither could Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden or Donald Trump.

 

This article is just the thoughts and ideas of an old man. But personally I am sick and tired of these old fart career politicians with there way out of date ideas running/ruining our Country. The old folks whom many of them have been in office for 40-50 years need to be made to retire. Do you/we really want people running our Country who are in their 80’s? I just don’t, I am sick and tired of their partisan B.S..

 

These two people are not running for the office of President but they are the two leaders of the House and the Senate who pretty much tell all the members of their political party how to vote on every issue, every bill. First, Nancy Pelosi who was born on March 6th of 1940.  She will be 80 when the next President takes Office. Then there is Mitch McConnell who is the top Republican in the Senate, he was born on February 20th of 1942. So, he will be 78 when the next President is sworn in and he has already stated just like Nancy Pelosi has that he is running for reelection. So, one more term for each of them and Mrs. Pelosi will be 82 and Mr. McConnell will be 84.

 

What is your thoughts on this issue? Do you even care about this issue, or maybe is it not even an issue at all to you? If you would, please leave me a comment, I thank you for your time, I appreciate you taking of your time to read this.

 


 

Egypt Launches Platform on Human Rights Conditions

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF THE SAUDI NEWS AGENCY ASHARQ AL-AWSAT)

 

Egypt Launches Platform on Human Rights Conditions

Thursday, 11 July, 2019 – 11:00
Egyptian deputy of the human rights committee in parliament, Margaret Azer (Asharq Al-Awsat)
Cairo – Walid Abdul Rahman
Egypt launched a trilingual platform that provides information on the human rights conditions in the country.

The portal includes a database of all local, regional and international information about human rights, announced the State Information Service (SIS), adding that it is meant to promote a correct understanding of human rights, taking into consideration the economic, social, cultural and political aspects.

SIS also indicated that it will use the portal to confront attempts to politicize human rights’ conditions in the country.

The platform is part of a broad media activity being carried out to achieve Egypt’s goals in promoting and spreading the culture of human rights, according to SIS chairman Diaa Rashwan.

Egyptian deputy of the human rights committee in parliament, Margaret Azer told Asharq Al-Awsat that the new platform will use evidence to respond to “suspicious” organizations trying to politically exploit human rights issues in Egypt.

It will also respond to the questions and reports of international organizations on conditions in Egypt.

In March, Cairo responded to the US State Department’s annual report on the human rights situation in the world in 2018, saying it was “not objective” and makes unsubstantiated claims about the state of human rights in the country.

Egypt has repeatedly asked Human Rights Watch (HRW) to be accurate about its human rights reports.

Brazil: $178 million in parliamentary amendments released on the day of the reform vote

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF BRAZIL’S 247 NEWS)

 

Bolsonaro released $ 178 million in parliamentary amendments on the day of the reform vote

On the day of the vote on the basic text of the pension reform, Bolsonaro ‘released’ R $ 178 million for parliamentary amendments. In the package published in an extra edition of the “Official Gazette of the Union”, members of the following states were benefited: Alagoas, Amazonas, Bahia, Ceará, Maranhão, Pernambuco, Rio de Janeiro, Sergipe and Pernambuco

For foreign press, Bolsonaro is materialization of collective rage
For foreign press, Bolsonaro is materialization of collective anger (Photo: REUTERS / Leonardo Benassatto)

247 – On the day of the vote on the basic text of the pension reform, Bolsonaro ‘released’ R $ 178 million for parliamentary amendments. In the package published in an extra edition of the “Official Gazette of the Union”, members of the following states were benefited: Alagoas, Amazonas, Bahia, Ceará, Maranhão, Pernambuco, Rio de Janeiro, Sergipe and Pernambuco.

The Folha de S. Paulo newspaper reports that “on Monday (8), the Planalto Palace had released almost R $ 1 billion in parliamentary amendments also linked to the health area. destined to complement mayors’ expenses with basic assistance services, and of medium and high complexity. “

The article also adds that “asked on Tuesday (9), the president denied that the release of parliamentary amendments is an” old politics “practice criticized by Bolsonaro throughout the election campaign. I would like to release everything that is in the budget, and when such a situation happens, it is normal, as far as I can tell: Nothing was invented, no suitcase, no hidden conversation anywhere, it’s all This is what must be happening, “he said.

 

China’s social security funds to be replenished with state capital

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF SHANGHAI CHINA’S ‘SHINE’ NEWS NETWORK)

 

China’s social security funds to be replenished with state capital

Xinhua

China will replenish social security funds through the injection of state capital this year to make the funds more sustainable. Policies to reduce employers’ contributions to social insurance schemes will be further implemented to ensure that pensions are paid on time and in full.

The decision was made at the State Council’s executive meeting chaired by Premier Li Keqiang on Wednesday.

Li has set out measures for such capital transfer in the Government Work Report for four consecutive years.

The State Council issued the implementation program on replenishing social security funds with state capital in November 2017, deciding to pilot the measure in selected central and local state-owned enterprises.

It was decided in the guideline to set the transfer ratio at 10 percent of these enterprises’ state-owned equity, with the exception of state-owned enterprises serving public interest, cultural enterprises, policy and development financial institutions and those otherwise stipulated by the State Council.

“We need to ensure that work on this front progresses steadily and effectively and sends a reassuring message to the public,” said Li.

It was decided at the meeting that the pilot measures introduced will be extended nationwide this year.

Large and medium-sized state-owned and state-controlled enterprises at both central and provincial levels, as well as financial institutions, will see 10 percent of their state-owned equity transferred to the National Council for Social Security Fund and relevant local receiving entities who shall, as financial investors, enjoy the right to yields from the transferred equity.

“Old-age pensions must be paid on time and in full,” said Li.

The meeting also decided to lower social security contribution rates.

So far, various types of social insurance funds are in steady operation, and are competent in ensuring payments on time and in full. Policies to reduce social security contribution rates delivered notable effects in the first half of this year, as companies saw their spending on workers’ basic pensions, unemployment insurances and work-related injury insurances decreased by over 128 billion yuan (US$18.5 billion).

The meeting urged departments to gain firsthand information on delivery of the policies and corporate feedback, and promptly address new problems as they arise.

The payment format will remain consistent. While keeping the share borne by employers for workers’ basic aged-care insurance at no higher than 16 percent, no policy adjustment will be made this year regarding the varying payment rates and bases in certain provinces. Local authorities must earnestly shoulder their primary responsibilities of pension payments and ensure that no one is left unpaid.

“The tax and fee cuts we introduced early this year have boosted market confidence and delivered concrete benefits to market players. Such measures are fairest, most effective, and most direct in anchoring market expectations and spurring future development,” Li said. “We must ensure full implementation of our policies introduced early this year to reduce employers’ contributions to social insurance schemes.”