Tag Archives: country

Ted Cruz Calls for Security Patrols in America’s "Muslim Neighborhoods"

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In the wake of the Brussels terror attacks Tuesday morning, GOP presidential candidate Ted Cruz suggested that the United States “empower law enforcement to patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods before they become radicalized.”

Here is the full statement from the Cruz campaign:

Cruz: We Can No Longer Surrender to the Enemy Through Political Correctness
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, presidential candidate Ted Cruz responded to the horrific terrorist attacks in Brussels:

“Today radical Islamic terrorists targeted the men and women of Brussels as they went to work on a spring morning. In a series of coordinated attacks they murdered and maimed dozens of innocent commuters at subway stations and travelers at the airport. For the terrorists, the identities of the victims were irrelevant. They –we—are all part of an intolerable culture that they have vowed to destroy.

“For years, the west has tried to deny this enemy exists out of a combination of political correctness and fear. We can no longer afford either. Our European allies are now seeing what comes of a toxic mix of migrants who have been infiltrated by terrorists and isolated, radical Muslim neighborhoods.

“We will do what we can to help them fight this scourge, and redouble our efforts to make sure it does not happen here. We need to immediately halt the flow of refugees from countries with a significant al Qaida or ISIS presence. We need to empower law enforcement to patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods before they become radicalized.

“We need to secure the southern border to prevent terrorist infiltration. And we need to execute a coherent campaign to utterly destroy ISIS. The days of the United States voluntarily surrendering to the enemy to show how progressive and enlightened we are are at an end. Our country is at stake.”

See the article here:

Ted Cruz Calls for Security Patrols in America’s "Muslim Neighborhoods"

Posted in alternative energy, Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, solar, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Ted Cruz Calls for Security Patrols in America’s "Muslim Neighborhoods"

Trump says nuclear weapons are the riskiest kind of climate change

Trump says nuclear weapons are the riskiest kind of climate change

By on 21 Mar 2016commentsShare

National embarrassment and presidential hopeful Donald Trump met with The Washington Post’s editorial board on Monday and spouted some nonsense about climate change, among many other topics. The takeaways: He’s “not a big believer” in human-caused climate change; instead, he believes “our biggest form of climate change we should worry about is nuclear weapons.”

Here’s the full climate exchange:

FRED HIATT, WASHINGTON POST EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR: You think climate change is a real thing? Is there human-caused climate change?

DONALD TRUMP: I think there’s a change in weather. I am not a great believer in man-made climate change. I’m not a great believer. There is certainly a change in weather that goes – if you look, they had global cooling in the 1920s and now they have global warming, although now they don’t know if they have global warming. They call it all sorts of different things; now they’re using “extreme weather” I guess more than any other phrase. I am not – I know it hurts me with this room, and I know it’s probably a killer with this room – but I am not a believer. Perhaps there’s a minor effect, but I’m not a big believer in man-made climate change.

STEPHEN STROMBERG, EDITORIAL WRITER: Don’t good businessmen hedge against risks, not ignore them?

DONALD TRUMP: Well I just think we have much bigger risks. I mean I think we have militarily tremendous risks. I think we’re in tremendous peril. I think our biggest form of climate change we should worry about is nuclear weapons. The biggest risk to the world, to me – I know President Obama thought it was climate change – to me the biggest risk is nuclear weapons. That’s – that is climate change. That is a disaster, and we don’t even know where the nuclear weapons are right now. We don’t know who has them. We don’t know who’s trying to get them. The biggest risk for this world and this country is nuclear weapons, the power of nuclear weapons.

FREDERICK RYAN JR., WASHINGTON POST PUBLISHER: Thank you for joining us.

No, thank you, Frederick Ryan Jr. and the WaPo editorial board, for reminding us to check out Mexico’s immigration policies. We hear the food’s great and there’s going to be a really big wall. Maybe that’ll keep Trump out.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

More:

Trump says nuclear weapons are the riskiest kind of climate change

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Trump says nuclear weapons are the riskiest kind of climate change

China’s new 5-year plan is out, and it doesn’t sacrifice the environment for the economy

Harvest in Yili, Xinjiang Autonomous Region. REUTERS/China Daily

China’s new 5-year plan is out, and it doesn’t sacrifice the environment for the economy

By on 18 Mar 2016commentsShare

On Wednesday, Chinese lawmakers approved the country’s 13th Five-Year Plan, the high-level document that will guide policymaking through 2020, including the country’s approach to climate and energy policy. As the world’s second-largest economy and the largest emitter of greenhouse gases, China necessarily plays a role in shaping global climate policy — and if it can deliver on the goals outlined in the plan, that role will undoubtedly expand.

The plan is the first to set a national cap on energy consumption — 5 billion tons of standard coal equivalent for 2020 — as well as offering new visions for energy efficiency and air pollution. A World Resources Institute analysis concluded that this FYP sets China on a path to a 48 percent reduction in carbon intensity levels by 2020, compared to 2005 levels. (Carbon intensity refers to the ratio of CO2 emissions to GDP.) For reference, China’s pledge to the Paris Agreement has the country slashing carbon intensity by 60-65 percent of 2005 levels by 2030.

All told, it’s the “greenest Five-Year Plan that China has ever produced,” said Barbara Finamore, director of NRDC’s Asia program, on a press call.

Click to embiggen.World Resources Institute

There’s a lot more to the FYP than energy policy, but many of the other pieces are complementary when it comes to the climate. New standards on air quality indicators like PM 2.5, for example, will no doubt rein in the country’s rampant coal burning.

But it’s not all about coal, either. While China saw a cut in coal use of around 3 percent in 2015, it increased its oil consumption by 5.6 percent in the same year. “If China is going to peak its CO2 emissions, it cannot just rely on [cutting] coal,” said Finamore. “Transportation emissions and oil consumption are going to be exceedingly important.” And they are: The FYP addresses vehicle emissions and public transportation in cities, in addition to allocating new money to high-speed rail initiatives.

Advertisement – Article continues below

It’s easy to raise questions about China’s ability to follow through on these kinds of ambitious plans in the face of slowing economic growth. The FYP outlines a target GDP growth rate of 6.5 percent through 2020 — speedy by global standards, but a far cry from the 10 percent growth rate of yesteryear.

But that’s not the right way to think about it, said Paul Joffe, senior foreign policy counsel at WRI. “China envisions a ‘new normal’ level of growth,” explained Joffe to press. “At that level, they view the economic and environmental targets as entirely compatible.” In other words, anyone wildly gesticulating at China’s flagging growth rate needs to take a chill pill. Ten percent is simply not sustainable.

Joffe’s description of coinciding economic and environmental goals bucks the conventional economic logic that says “you need to consume more to grow more,” said Kate Gordon, a vice chair at the Paulson Institute. That logic is faltering. Earlier this week, the International Energy Agency released data suggesting energy-related emissions and global GDP growth are decoupling. Indeed, Gordon argues that China’s energy-efficiency savings have in part allowed for that kind of decoupling. As the economy transitions to a larger focus on services — which the FYP has growing from 50.5 to 56 percent of the Chinese economy by 2020 — and a lesser emphasis on industry, the split between GDP growth and emission trends becomes even more apparent.

A reasonably glaring omission in China’s FYP is the lack of an explicit goal for new renewable energy installed, though it’s conceivable that new goals for solar and wind capacity could find their way into the sub-plans that will be released over the coming months. Existing targets include 150GW of new solar capacity and 250GW of wind by 2020. Of course, it’s also not just about capacity, said Gordon. You’ve also got to get that electricity on the grid. In its Paris Agreement pledge, China committed to raising its share of renewables to 20 percent of its energy mix by 2030.

The plan’s ambition gives post-Paris climate-action further momentum, and can only serve to strengthen the recent U.S.-China climate pact. As with all ambitious plans, though, implementation will be key — and the country is outlining some stark transitions. Upwards of 1.8 million workers in the coal and steel industries are expected to lose their jobs due to changes outlined in the FYP, and those workers will need to be retrained and reemployed. Truly delivering on those goals will require an unprecedented degree of foresight and coordination.

Or to put it in Finamore’s own words: “It’s going to be tough.”

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

More: 

China’s new 5-year plan is out, and it doesn’t sacrifice the environment for the economy

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on China’s new 5-year plan is out, and it doesn’t sacrifice the environment for the economy

Huzzah! The economy keeps growing while energy emissions stay flat

Huzzah! The economy keeps growing while energy emissions stay flat

By on 16 Mar 2016commentsShare

Uncork the champagne: We solved that whole carbon emissions thing. The International Energy Agency (IEA) announced Wednesday that 2015 saw global energy-related emissions stall for the second year in a row, despite continued 3 percent growth of global GDP. Zooming the lens in, the same was true of energy powerhouses like the U.S. and China, which both reported a drop in energy-related carbon emissions over the same time period.

International Energy Agency

The flattening of energy sector emissions can largely be attributed to an expansion in global renewable capacity, suggests the IEA. Renewables accounted for about 90 percent of all new electricity generation last year, and wind energy alone accounted for more than 50 percent of this figure. With global GDP growth continuing to hover around 3 percent, the numbers appear to confirm what coalitions like New Climate Economy have long argued: There’s no such thing as a tradeoff between the environment and the economy.

Energy-sector emissions have only declined three other times in the past 40 years — see the highlighted time-points in the chart above — and each of those were during an economic slowdown. Two years of flat emissions means we’re getting somewhere.

Advertisement – Article continues below

Of course, this is the real world, and nothing’s quite so black and white. You’ll notice some intentional phrasing here: “energy-related CO2 emissions.” The energy sector will always be a big slice of the carbon-pollution pie — the biggest! — but it’s not the only slice. What about all the other emissions; say, from the agricultural sector? From land-use changes? From landfills?

While we won’t have up-to-date information on a lot of these other indicators for another few months, we do know that deforestation, El Niño, and rampant wildfires have already lent themselves to spikes in atmospheric CO2 levels. In Indonesia, for example, emissions due to October wildfires often eclipsed the average daily emissions from the entire U.S. economy. Land use in Indonesia accounts for more than 60 percent of the country’s annual greenhouse gas emissions.

And while energy-related emissions may have fallen in China, they have increased in the Middle East and Europe.

So yes, the IEA figures are reason to celebrate (go ahead, take a sip of that champagne), but they’re also a reason to double down on renewables.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

Original post: 

Huzzah! The economy keeps growing while energy emissions stay flat

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, hydroponics, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, wind energy | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Huzzah! The economy keeps growing while energy emissions stay flat

Russia Decides It’s Time to Declare Victory and Get Out of Syria

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Vladimir Putin announced today that he would begin withdrawing most of his forces from Syria. The move came as a complete surprise—sort of:

But U.S. officials also said that there had been evidence over the last several months that appeared to suggest that Moscow didn’t have plans for a long-term stay at the bases it used in Syria.

For instance, the Russian military didn’t appear to be rotating its equipment—tanks, aircraft and artillery—among bases throughout the country in a way that would be consistent with a military’s plans for a sustained presence. Equipment wasn’t being withdrawn for maintenance, for example, and Russian forces weren’t being rotated in and out, according to U.S. officials.

It’s unlikely that Putin ever really intended to stay for a long time in the first place. His goal wasn’t to help Assad win his civil war, but merely to prevent him from losing—just as there’s a reasonable case to be made that this is basically our goal too on the other side of the fight. It’s realpolitik at its nastiest and most cynical. And while the recently convened peace talks in Geneva provided Putin with a convenient pretext to get out, there was more to the timing than just that:

Russia is also facing deepening economic problems caused by the collapse in global oil prices, and the announcement may reflect Mr. Putin’s desire to declare victory and extricate his country from a costly military venture….There have been growing signs of differences between Russia and the Syrian government over the Geneva talks, which Moscow has pressed hard for, along with Washington. And for Mr. Assad, the prospect of Russia’s leaving him to fend for himself is sure to focus his mind on following its lead — advice that Russian officials have publicly offered him in recent days.

In the end, Putin managed to prop up Assad for a little while longer and reassert control over Russia’s only military base outside of its own territory. He also earned a place at the negotiating table and, perhaps, kept Iran’s influence over Syria at bay. In terms of pure military achievement, however, it was a modest affair. The maps below, from ISW, show what’s happened over the past six months. Syrian forces have made progress toward retaking Aleppo, which is significant but hardly tide turning. And that’s about it. What’s more, with Russian air support gone and Kurdish forces also advancing on Aleppo, it’s unclear if Assad can hold this ground in the long term. Stay tuned.

Continued – 

Russia Decides It’s Time to Declare Victory and Get Out of Syria

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Russia Decides It’s Time to Declare Victory and Get Out of Syria

The US Solar Market Is Growing Ridiculously Fast

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

At the end of 2015, the solar industry experienced something of a Christmas miracle when Congress unexpectedly extended a package of vital tax credits for renewable energy that were set to expire. Overnight, 2016 went from looking like it was certain to be a bust to looking like one of the biggest growth years on record.

New analysis from the energy market research firm GTM paints a picture of the awesome year solar installers in the United States have ahead of them. GTM predicts solar installations to jump 119 percent in 2016, adding 16 gigawatts of new solar by year’s end. (For reference, in 2011 there were only 10 gigawatts of solar installed total across the country.) Most of that is utility-scale solar farms, with the remainder coming from rooftop panels on homes and businesses.

This clean energy boost isn’t just a boon for the industry; as a result of the tax credit extension, greenhouse gas savings from solar and wind installations could add up by 2030 to the equivalent of taking every car in the country off the road for two years, a recent study found.

Here’s the chart from the report. Show this to anyone who still thinks solar is some kind of fringe, hippie pipe dream:

GTM Research/SEIA

Excerpt from – 

The US Solar Market Is Growing Ridiculously Fast

Posted in Anchor, Bragg, FF, GE, green energy, LG, ONA, Radius, solar, solar panels, solar power, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The US Solar Market Is Growing Ridiculously Fast

China’s greenhouse emissions might already have peaked

China’s greenhouse emissions might already have peaked

By on 7 Mar 2016commentsShare

This story was originally published by Mother Jones and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

China is the world’s leading emitter of greenhouse gases, the heat-trapping pollution that is causing global warming. So what China spews into the air — how much, and when — is crucial to the planet’s future.

There might be some optimistic news on that front today.

For years, experts have expected China’s greenhouse gas emissions to continue growing over the next couple decades. But according to a new study, Chinese emissions may have actually peaked in 2014 — and could soon begin a steady decline. And if those emissions didn’t peak in 2014, researchers say, they definitely will by 2025, years ahead of China’s official 2030 goal. (Researchers say the pace and scale of change in China’s economy make it hard to pinpoint the exact year emissions will peak — or to say for sure if they already have.)

Advertisement – Article continues below

The new findings appear in a paper released Sunday night by the U.K.’s Center for Climate Change Economics and Policy and the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics. It was authored by Fergus Green and the famous climate change research economist, Nicholas Stern.

China’s current peak-emissions target of 2030 was enshrined in the historic U.S.-China climate agreement reached at the end of 2014. That deal paved the way for the global Paris agreement late last year.

But there has been a growing body of research suggesting that China could reach that goal much sooner. The new analysis is based on economic forecasts that take into account the shifting and contracting nature of the Chinese economy, which is moving away from energy-intensive industries like construction and steel-making and towards service-related sectors. The Chinese government has instituted a three-year moratorium on approving new coal mines, and is scrambling to alleviate the country’s air pollution crisis.

The study follows Chinese statistics published last week showing the country’s coal consumption dropping 3.7 percent in 2015, marking the second year in a row that the country has slashed coal use and greenhouse gas emissions, as well as news the country will close 1,000 coal mines this year alone.

As part of China’s 13th Five-Year Plan — a blueprint used by the Chinese government to lay out economic and social priorities — China announced last week it will attempt to reduce its carbon dioxide intensity by 18 percent between now and 2020, according to the Washington Post.

The new research is putting pressure on Chinese officials to do even more to fight climate change.

“China’s international commitment to peak emissions ‘around 2030’ should be seen as a highly conservative upper limit from a government that prefers to under-promise and over-deliver,” the report says.

China was put in an awkward position Monday when it was forced by news of Green and Stern’s report to say its emissions were, in fact, still growing, in order to defend its 2030 target as appropriate. Chinese leaders are famously sensitive about the country’s slowing economy, and fearful that scrutiny of its economic and environmental policies could lead to widespread discontent.

“You asked whether our emissions had peaked in 2014 — certainly not,” said Xie Zhenhua, the country’s top climate change envoy, according to Reuters. “In fact, our carbon dioxide emissions are still increasing.”

Last week, America’s own top climate official, Todd Stern, told reporters in Beijing that there could be international pressure if China’s targets appeared to be too easy to achieve. “It will be up to the Chinese government whether they increase their target but there will obviously be a lot of international opinion looking forward to additional measures — whether it is China or anyone else,” he said, according to Reuters.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.Climate on the Mind

A Grist Special Series

Get Grist in your inbox

Read this article – 

China’s greenhouse emissions might already have peaked

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, ONA, Radius, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on China’s greenhouse emissions might already have peaked

Norway is building a billion-dollar bicycle superhighway

Norway is building a billion-dollar bicycle superhighway

By on 4 Mar 2016commentsShare

There’s goes Norway, making the rest of us look like lazy, gas-guzzling, emission-belching, planet-wrecking Neanderthals again.

The country announced last week that they will be investing 8 billion Kroner — or nearly $1 billion — in an extensive network of superhighways. For bikes.

The system, as CityLab reports, will include 10 two-lane bike roadways around Norway’s largest cities, designed for both in-city travel and long distance trips. While the new bike infrastructure will surely be good for growing strong lungs and tights buns in Norway, the investment is more about addressing climate change than encouraging exercise: The Norwegian government wants to increase the annual number of bike trips by up to 20 percent by 2030 as part of their plan to reduce the transportation sector’s carbon emissions by half.

There, is however, some resistance: Cycling is less common in Norway than it is in most of Scandinavia, not in small part due to the climate (frigid) and the landscape (mountainous), and some leaders say bikeways are a waste of good Kroner that should be spent rebuilding the nation’s road and rail systems. Besides, much of the country is pitch black and covered in ice for most of the year.

Regardless of the cost, Norway is making moves to invest in infrastructure for the future. The country’s massive fossil fuel industry has been hit by the global downturn in the price of crude oil, leading to a devaluation of their currency and an unbalanced economy. Since oil prices plummeted, fossil fuel employers in Norway have cut 30,000 jobs, and investment in the economy has dropped by a third. Norway, according to economists, must diversify their revenue sources to avoid collapse. And with the investment in biking, they’re diversifying their transit options, too.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.Climate on the Mind

A Grist Special Series

Get Grist in your inbox

View article: 

Norway is building a billion-dollar bicycle superhighway

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Norway is building a billion-dollar bicycle superhighway

Quote of the Day #2: "I wasn’t being held hostage"

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Chris Christie a few minutes ago:

OMG. Can you imagine a supposedly serious politician actually having to say something like this? The humiliation just never ends.

Originally from: 

Quote of the Day #2: "I wasn’t being held hostage"

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Quote of the Day #2: "I wasn’t being held hostage"

Donald Trump and the True Meaning of "I Disavow"

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

I’ve now written my quota of one non-Trump post this morning, and surely that’s enough? So let’s move on. I’m fascinated to see that Joe Weisenthal picked up on something that I noticed too during Trump’s late-night press conference on Tuesday:

Here’s what happened. A reporter asked Trump once again to comment on the David Duke/KKK endorsement, and Trump whined that he had already written a Facebook post and a tweet and, really, just how many times was he supposed to disavow the guy? But as Weisenthal points out, Trump repeatedly said “I disavow, I disavow, I disavow,” without ever mentioning who he was disavowing. And since the reporters weren’t given mics, you really couldn’t hear what the question was about. You’d only know if you’ve been following this controversy.

I don’t think this was a mistake. Trump has done it too many times. On Facebook, on Twitter, on Good Morning America, and then again last night. His ritualistic phrase is “I disavow” without providing a clear, simple soundbite about who or what he’s disavowing. Nor does he ever say anything more in the way of condemnation. His Twitter and Facebook posts, for example, had merely this terse comment: “As I stated at the press conference on Friday regarding David Duke- I disavow.”

It’s pretty clear what’s going on here. Technically, Trump is in the clear. He has disavowed David Duke. But there is no soundbite or video snippet that shows him clearly criticizing either Duke or the KKK or white supremacist groups in general. And as Trump knows better than anyone, it’s audio and video excerpts that really matter. That’s what people see, not brief Twitter or Facebook posts.

Trump now has the best of all worlds. He can truthfully say that he’s repeatedly denounced David Duke. He can mock the media for unfairly making a big deal out of it. But for his less savory supporters, there’s no video of him clearly and unequivocally condemning the Duke or the KKK—and they understand perfectly well what this means. They’re old hands at the wink and the nod.

If it were anyone else, I’d say this was all carefully calculated. But Trump has such an instinctive grasp of TV that I wouldn’t be surprised if this just came naturally to him without any real thought. He is truly a master of the modern media era.

UPDATE: This is fascinating. One minute after publishing this, I wandered over to The Corner and read a Jonah Goldberg post making exactly the same point I did. Goldberg doesn’t think Trump’s phrasing is an accident either:

It is obvious to me that Trump didn’t want to denounce David Duke and the Klan in the Jake Tapper interview. The “bad earpiece” explanation is a transparent lie….And when Tapper mentioned the KKK, Trump still didn’t say, “Wait a second . . . ” and rip into the Klan. The question is, Why?

….Denouncing the Klan should be easy. You shouldn’t have to think about it….The one thing you shouldn’t do is sound like you’re reluctant to condemn the Klan(!) or that you’re dog-whistling that you don’t really mean it when you do. Yet when you watch the Tapper interview, it becomes clear what is really going on: He think condemning the Klan will hurt him with conservatives or southerners or both….In other words, the issue isn’t that conservative opponents of Trump think he’s a Klan supporting racist, it’s that Trump thinks many of his conservative supporters are. And that’s just one reason I don’t want this guy speaking for me.

Yep. And when was the last time Goldberg and I agreed about something? It just goes to show that Trump really does bring people together.

Originally posted here: 

Donald Trump and the True Meaning of "I Disavow"

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Donald Trump and the True Meaning of "I Disavow"