RabzonKhan
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2008
- Messages
- 4,289
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
US Politics
- Thread starter RabzonKhan
- Start date
RabzonKhan
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2008
- Messages
- 4,289
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
One more important Republican supports Hillary for president. 
Kori Schake is a fellow at the Hoover Institution. She was the director for defense strategy and requirements on the National Security Council staff, and deputy director for policy planning in the State Department of the George W. Bush administration.
Why Brexit Persuaded Me to Vote for Hillary Clinton
By Kori Schake July 01, 2016
Last Friday, people across the United Kingdom woke up shocked to learn that their nation had actually voted to leave the European Union. More than a million people now reportedly would like to change their vote from “leave” to “remain”; more than 3 million signed a petition for a second referendum. EU institutions and major corporations based in London announced they would move operations and jobs from Britain to EU countries.
My reaction was a little different: I decided to endorse Hillary Clinton for president.
It wasn’t an easy decision. As a conservative, I find Hillary Clinton stands for the opposite of a number of things I believe strongly: that our government is involved in too many areas of our lives, that its profligacy is spending our country into bankruptcy, and that it very often makes problems worse because it knows too little to keep pace with change. Clinton has a seemingly inexhaustible list of government programs to address every social concern, and no conceivable way to pay for it all.
So, I have deep misgivings about a Clinton presidency, but the anguish of British voters who cast a protest vote thinking it wouldn’t matter — that their vote wouldn’t be decisive — convinced me that something much bigger is at stake in this election. The unthinkable, I realized, was actually possible this year. In the British referendum, major polling firms had the “Remain” vote leading by as much as 8 percent. As little as five hours before results were announced, betting markets gave Remain a 96 percent chance of success. And I realized I didn’t want to wake up on November 9 to find Donald Trump elected president and wish I had done more to prevent it.
As one of the signatories of the national security experts’ “never Trump” letter, I genuinely believe the erratic statements Donald Trump has made would be disastrous if adopted as American policies. His candidacy is itself bad for our country: after watching him win primary after primary, our allies have already begun questioning the durability of long-standing American commitments. Governments reliant on our security guarantees, already worried by President Barack Obama’s passivity in “leading from behind,” see the presumptive Republican nominee taking even more reckless stances. They’re understandably hedging their bets. Regaining the confidence of America’s friends in the world will be the work of more than one presidency.
It is impossible to imagine Donald Trump doing the things an American leader is called to do in an insecure world: steadying an American ally after a terrorist attack (as President Bush did after the 7/7 attacks in London), Read more
Kori Schake is a fellow at the Hoover Institution. She was the director for defense strategy and requirements on the National Security Council staff, and deputy director for policy planning in the State Department of the George W. Bush administration.
Why Brexit Persuaded Me to Vote for Hillary Clinton
By Kori Schake July 01, 2016
Last Friday, people across the United Kingdom woke up shocked to learn that their nation had actually voted to leave the European Union. More than a million people now reportedly would like to change their vote from “leave” to “remain”; more than 3 million signed a petition for a second referendum. EU institutions and major corporations based in London announced they would move operations and jobs from Britain to EU countries.
My reaction was a little different: I decided to endorse Hillary Clinton for president.
It wasn’t an easy decision. As a conservative, I find Hillary Clinton stands for the opposite of a number of things I believe strongly: that our government is involved in too many areas of our lives, that its profligacy is spending our country into bankruptcy, and that it very often makes problems worse because it knows too little to keep pace with change. Clinton has a seemingly inexhaustible list of government programs to address every social concern, and no conceivable way to pay for it all.
So, I have deep misgivings about a Clinton presidency, but the anguish of British voters who cast a protest vote thinking it wouldn’t matter — that their vote wouldn’t be decisive — convinced me that something much bigger is at stake in this election. The unthinkable, I realized, was actually possible this year. In the British referendum, major polling firms had the “Remain” vote leading by as much as 8 percent. As little as five hours before results were announced, betting markets gave Remain a 96 percent chance of success. And I realized I didn’t want to wake up on November 9 to find Donald Trump elected president and wish I had done more to prevent it.
As one of the signatories of the national security experts’ “never Trump” letter, I genuinely believe the erratic statements Donald Trump has made would be disastrous if adopted as American policies. His candidacy is itself bad for our country: after watching him win primary after primary, our allies have already begun questioning the durability of long-standing American commitments. Governments reliant on our security guarantees, already worried by President Barack Obama’s passivity in “leading from behind,” see the presumptive Republican nominee taking even more reckless stances. They’re understandably hedging their bets. Regaining the confidence of America’s friends in the world will be the work of more than one presidency.
It is impossible to imagine Donald Trump doing the things an American leader is called to do in an insecure world: steadying an American ally after a terrorist attack (as President Bush did after the 7/7 attacks in London), Read more
RabzonKhan
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2008
- Messages
- 4,289
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
How the President of the United States is Elected
Start with the Constitution. The basic process of selecting the President of the United States is spelled out in the U.S. Constitution, and it has been modified by the 12th, 22nd, and 23rd amendments. Many additional steps have been added over the years, by custom and by state law -- the process has changed quite a bit over time.
Who Can Run? The President and Vice-President are elected every four years. They must be at least 35 years of age, they must be native-born citizens of the United States, and they must have been residents of the U.S. for at least 14 years. (Also, a person cannot be elected to a third term as President.)
How Do the Political Parties Choose Their Candidates? That's up to the political parties. Most political parties hold conventions, which are large meetings attended by "delegates." Some delegates are selected by state "primary" elections, some are selected by state caucuses (very much like primaries, except with public voting instead of secret ballots), and some are chosen for their prominence in the party. A majority of delegate votes is needed to win the party's nomination. In most cases, the delegates let their chosen presidential candidate select a vice-presidential candidate.
Candidates for President and Vice-President Run Together. In the general election, each candidate for President runs together with a candidate for Vice-President on a "ticket." Voters select one ticket to vote for; they can't choose a presidential candidate from one ticket and a vice-presidential candidate from another ticket.
The Electoral College. The national presidential election actually consists of a separate election in each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia; in these 51 elections, the voters are really voting for "electors" pledged to one of the tickets. These electors make up the "Electoral College." (In most cases, the names of the electors aren't written on the ballot; instead the ballot lets voters choose among "Electors for" each of the tickets, naming the presidential and vice-presidential candidates each slate of electors is pledged to.)
Each state has the same number of electors as it has senators and representatives (there are two senators from each state, but the number of representatives depends on the state population in the most recent census). The District of Columbia, although it isn't a state, also participates in presidential elections -- it currently has three electors.
The People in Each State Vote for Electors in the Electoral College. In most of the states, and also in the District of Columbia, the election is winner-take-all; whichever ticket receives the most votes in that state (or in D.C.) gets all the electors. (The only exceptions are Maine and Nebraska. In these states, just two of the electors are chosen in a winner-take-all fashion from the entire state. The remaining electors are determined by the winner in each congressional district, with each district voting for one elector.)
The Electoral College Votes for the President. The Electoral College then votes for President and for Vice-President, with each elector casting one vote; these votes are called electoral votes. Each elector is pledged to vote for particular candidates for President and Vice-President. In most elections, all the electors vote in accordance with the pledge they made; it is not clear what would happen in the unlikely event that a large number of electors violated their pledge and voted differently.
Normally, one of the candidates for President receives a majority (more than half) of the electoral votes; that person is elected President. That candidate's vice-presidential running mate will then also receive a majority of electoral votes (for Vice-President), and that person is elected Vice-President.
Start with the Constitution. The basic process of selecting the President of the United States is spelled out in the U.S. Constitution, and it has been modified by the 12th, 22nd, and 23rd amendments. Many additional steps have been added over the years, by custom and by state law -- the process has changed quite a bit over time.
Who Can Run? The President and Vice-President are elected every four years. They must be at least 35 years of age, they must be native-born citizens of the United States, and they must have been residents of the U.S. for at least 14 years. (Also, a person cannot be elected to a third term as President.)
How Do the Political Parties Choose Their Candidates? That's up to the political parties. Most political parties hold conventions, which are large meetings attended by "delegates." Some delegates are selected by state "primary" elections, some are selected by state caucuses (very much like primaries, except with public voting instead of secret ballots), and some are chosen for their prominence in the party. A majority of delegate votes is needed to win the party's nomination. In most cases, the delegates let their chosen presidential candidate select a vice-presidential candidate.
Candidates for President and Vice-President Run Together. In the general election, each candidate for President runs together with a candidate for Vice-President on a "ticket." Voters select one ticket to vote for; they can't choose a presidential candidate from one ticket and a vice-presidential candidate from another ticket.
The Electoral College. The national presidential election actually consists of a separate election in each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia; in these 51 elections, the voters are really voting for "electors" pledged to one of the tickets. These electors make up the "Electoral College." (In most cases, the names of the electors aren't written on the ballot; instead the ballot lets voters choose among "Electors for" each of the tickets, naming the presidential and vice-presidential candidates each slate of electors is pledged to.)
Each state has the same number of electors as it has senators and representatives (there are two senators from each state, but the number of representatives depends on the state population in the most recent census). The District of Columbia, although it isn't a state, also participates in presidential elections -- it currently has three electors.
The People in Each State Vote for Electors in the Electoral College. In most of the states, and also in the District of Columbia, the election is winner-take-all; whichever ticket receives the most votes in that state (or in D.C.) gets all the electors. (The only exceptions are Maine and Nebraska. In these states, just two of the electors are chosen in a winner-take-all fashion from the entire state. The remaining electors are determined by the winner in each congressional district, with each district voting for one elector.)
The Electoral College Votes for the President. The Electoral College then votes for President and for Vice-President, with each elector casting one vote; these votes are called electoral votes. Each elector is pledged to vote for particular candidates for President and Vice-President. In most elections, all the electors vote in accordance with the pledge they made; it is not clear what would happen in the unlikely event that a large number of electors violated their pledge and voted differently.
Normally, one of the candidates for President receives a majority (more than half) of the electoral votes; that person is elected President. That candidate's vice-presidential running mate will then also receive a majority of electoral votes (for Vice-President), and that person is elected Vice-President.
RabzonKhan
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2008
- Messages
- 4,289
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
What Is The Electoral College? How It Works And Why It Matters
The Electoral College will dominate the airwaves and the headlines on Election Day Tuesday. But what exactly is the Electoral College? Below is a quick guide on what it does and why it matters.
What is the Electoral College?
The Electoral College is made up of 538 electors who cast votes to decide the President and Vice-President of the United States. When voters go to the polls on Tuesday, they will be choosing which candidate receives their state’s electors. The candidate who receives a majority of electoral votes (270) wins the Presidency. The number 538 is the sum of the nation’s 435 Representatives, 100 Senators, and 3 electors given to the District of Columbia.
How does the Electoral College work?
Every four years, voters go to the polls and select a candidate for President and Vice-President. In all but two states, the candidate who wins the majority of votes in a state wins that state’s electoral votes. In Nebraska and Maine, electoral votes are assigned by proportional representation, meaning that the top vote-getter in those states wins two electoral votes (for the two Senators) while the remaining electoral votes are allocated congressional district by congressional district. These rules make it possible for both candidates to receive electoral votes from Nebraska and Maine, unlike the winner-take-all system in the other 48 states.
How are the electors selected?
This process varies from state to state. Usually, political parties nominate electors at their state conventions. Sometimes that process occurs by a vote of the party’s central committee. The electors are usually state-elected officials, party leaders, or people with a strong affiliation with the Presidential candidates.
Do electors have to vote for their party’s candidate?
Neither the Constitution nor Federal election laws compel electors to vote for their party’s candidate. That said, twenty-seven states have laws on the books that require electors to vote for their party’s candidate if that candidate gets a majority of the state’s popular vote. In 24 states, no such laws apply, but common practice is for electors to vote for their party’s nominee.
What happens if no one gets a majority of Electoral College votes?
If no one gets a majority of electoral votes, the election is thrown to the U.S. House of Representatives. The top three contenders face off with each state casting one vote. Whoever wins a majority of states wins the election. The process is the same for the Vice Presidency, except that the U.S. Senate makes that selection.
Can you lose the popular vote and win the electoral college vote?
Yes, a candidate could lose the popular vote and win the electoral college vote. This happened to George W. Bush in 2000, who lost the popular vote to Al Gore by .51% but won the electoral college 271 to 266.
When does the Electoral College cast its votes?
Each state’s electors meet on the Monday following the second Wednesday of December. They cast their votes then, and those votes are sent to the President of the Senate who reads them before both houses of Congress on January 6th.
Why does the Electoral College matter?
The Electoral College determines the President and Vice-President of the United States. The Electoral College system also distinguishes the United States from other systems where the highest vote-getter automatically wins. This so-called “indirect election” process has been the subject of criticism and attempted reform, though proponents of it maintain that it ensures the rights of smaller states and stands as an important piece of American federalist democracy.
The Electoral College will dominate the airwaves and the headlines on Election Day Tuesday. But what exactly is the Electoral College? Below is a quick guide on what it does and why it matters.
What is the Electoral College?
The Electoral College is made up of 538 electors who cast votes to decide the President and Vice-President of the United States. When voters go to the polls on Tuesday, they will be choosing which candidate receives their state’s electors. The candidate who receives a majority of electoral votes (270) wins the Presidency. The number 538 is the sum of the nation’s 435 Representatives, 100 Senators, and 3 electors given to the District of Columbia.
How does the Electoral College work?
Every four years, voters go to the polls and select a candidate for President and Vice-President. In all but two states, the candidate who wins the majority of votes in a state wins that state’s electoral votes. In Nebraska and Maine, electoral votes are assigned by proportional representation, meaning that the top vote-getter in those states wins two electoral votes (for the two Senators) while the remaining electoral votes are allocated congressional district by congressional district. These rules make it possible for both candidates to receive electoral votes from Nebraska and Maine, unlike the winner-take-all system in the other 48 states.
How are the electors selected?
This process varies from state to state. Usually, political parties nominate electors at their state conventions. Sometimes that process occurs by a vote of the party’s central committee. The electors are usually state-elected officials, party leaders, or people with a strong affiliation with the Presidential candidates.
Do electors have to vote for their party’s candidate?
Neither the Constitution nor Federal election laws compel electors to vote for their party’s candidate. That said, twenty-seven states have laws on the books that require electors to vote for their party’s candidate if that candidate gets a majority of the state’s popular vote. In 24 states, no such laws apply, but common practice is for electors to vote for their party’s nominee.
What happens if no one gets a majority of Electoral College votes?
If no one gets a majority of electoral votes, the election is thrown to the U.S. House of Representatives. The top three contenders face off with each state casting one vote. Whoever wins a majority of states wins the election. The process is the same for the Vice Presidency, except that the U.S. Senate makes that selection.
Can you lose the popular vote and win the electoral college vote?
Yes, a candidate could lose the popular vote and win the electoral college vote. This happened to George W. Bush in 2000, who lost the popular vote to Al Gore by .51% but won the electoral college 271 to 266.
When does the Electoral College cast its votes?
Each state’s electors meet on the Monday following the second Wednesday of December. They cast their votes then, and those votes are sent to the President of the Senate who reads them before both houses of Congress on January 6th.
Why does the Electoral College matter?
The Electoral College determines the President and Vice-President of the United States. The Electoral College system also distinguishes the United States from other systems where the highest vote-getter automatically wins. This so-called “indirect election” process has been the subject of criticism and attempted reform, though proponents of it maintain that it ensures the rights of smaller states and stands as an important piece of American federalist democracy.
RabzonKhan
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2008
- Messages
- 4,289
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
Racist demagogue does it again, this time his target are not the “rapist” Mexicans or the “terrorist” Muslims, but the Jews.
Trump tweets image depicting Clinton, cash and the Star of David
By Kristen East 07/02/16
Donald Trump shared an image depicting Hillary Clinton, a pile of cash and the Star of David on Twitter Saturday, drawing a rapid and critical response.
Trump tweeted “Crooked Hillary - - Makes History!” along with a photoshopped image of Clinton’s one-time avatar, which reads “History made.” Clinton’s face appears over a pile of hundred dollar bills, and a six-pointed star that reads, “Most Corrupt Candidate Ever!” Below the image was a screenshot of a Fox News poll that asked voters how “honest/trustworthy” or “corrupt” they found the presumptive Democratic nominee.
Many critics, including political commentators and journalists, were quick to point out the shape of the Star of David, questioning Trump’s motive for tweeting such an image. Trump later tweeted a new image that featured the same text over a red circle instead of a star. The original tweet and image has since been deleted.
Republican strategist and CNN contributor Ana Navarro brought up the fact that Trump often makes appeals to the Jewish community by saying he has Jewish grandchildren. His daughter, Ivanka Trump, converted to Judaism before marrying her husband, Jared Kushner.
“‘I have Jewish grandchildren’ is the new, ‘Some of my best-friends are black’ defense to an offensive comment,” she tweeted in response to the image.
Marc Lamont Hill, host of BET News and a CNN commentator, said the image Trump shared “is textbook anti-Semitic imagery. #louderthanadogwhistle.”
Desertfalcon
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2009
- Messages
- 2,249
- Reaction score
- 10
- Country
- Location
I'm not a Hillary Clinton supporter, (Nor Trump.), but I enjoy your posts, @RabzonKhan
Mugwop
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 29, 2013
- Messages
- 6,730
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
Embrace yourselves people this will be the worst election ever in US history
I'm not a Hillary Clinton supporter, (Nor Trump.), but I enjoy your posts, @RabzonKhan
Desertfalcon
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2009
- Messages
- 2,249
- Reaction score
- 10
- Country
- Location
You can't blame the eagle. It was just afraid of whatever furry animal that is on top of Trump's head.
Falcon29
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2013
- Messages
- 31,647
- Reaction score
- -10
- Country
- Location
There is a global shift occurring in all societies, and it will be no different in the US. So don't bother wasting your time trying to alter the coming change, that came as a result of impatient and tyrannical leaders pushing their agenda across the world. We saw the results in the UK, we see the shift occurring in the Middle East, and it is coming to the US too. The old leaders will go out, the new will come on. It will be a bumpy ride.
pakdefender
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2009
- Messages
- 5,671
- Reaction score
- -8
- Country
- Location
Seems like Trump is gaining on Clinton
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...k-poll-voters-alarmed-trump-clinton/86632526/
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...k-poll-voters-alarmed-trump-clinton/86632526/
RabzonKhan
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2008
- Messages
- 4,289
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
Case closed! told you so, she was not going to be charged, what she did was highly irresponsible, but not a crime.
F.B.I. Recommends No Charges Against Hillary Clinton for Use of Personal Email
By MARK LANDLERJULY 5, 2016
WASHINGTON — The F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, said on Tuesday that the bureau would not recommend criminal charges in Hillary Clinton’s handling of classified information, lifting an enormous legal cloud from her presidential campaign, hours before her first joint campaign appearancewith President Obama.
But Mr. Comey rebuked Mrs. Clinton as being “extremely careless” in using a personal email address and server for sensitive information, declaring that an ordinary government official could have faced administrative sanction for such conduct.
To warrant a criminal charge, Mr. Comey said, there had to be evidence that Mrs. Clinton intentionally sent or received classified information — something that the F.B.I. did not find. “Our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case,” he said at a news conference.
The Justice Department is highly likely to accept the F.B.I.’s instruction. Attorney General Loretta Lynch said on Friday that she would accept the recommendation of the F.B.I. and career prosecutors in the case, after questions were raised about an impromptu meeting between her and former President Bill Clinton at an airport in Phoenix.
Mr. Comey’s statement came three days after F.B.I. investigators interviewed Mrs. Clinton, a sign that the case was winding down. He described an elaborate yearlong investigation, in which the F.B.I. examined multiple servers, read 30,000 emails and interviewed dozens of people. Read more
F.B.I. Recommends No Charges Against Hillary Clinton for Use of Personal Email
By MARK LANDLERJULY 5, 2016
WASHINGTON — The F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, said on Tuesday that the bureau would not recommend criminal charges in Hillary Clinton’s handling of classified information, lifting an enormous legal cloud from her presidential campaign, hours before her first joint campaign appearancewith President Obama.
But Mr. Comey rebuked Mrs. Clinton as being “extremely careless” in using a personal email address and server for sensitive information, declaring that an ordinary government official could have faced administrative sanction for such conduct.
To warrant a criminal charge, Mr. Comey said, there had to be evidence that Mrs. Clinton intentionally sent or received classified information — something that the F.B.I. did not find. “Our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case,” he said at a news conference.
The Justice Department is highly likely to accept the F.B.I.’s instruction. Attorney General Loretta Lynch said on Friday that she would accept the recommendation of the F.B.I. and career prosecutors in the case, after questions were raised about an impromptu meeting between her and former President Bill Clinton at an airport in Phoenix.
Mr. Comey’s statement came three days after F.B.I. investigators interviewed Mrs. Clinton, a sign that the case was winding down. He described an elaborate yearlong investigation, in which the F.B.I. examined multiple servers, read 30,000 emails and interviewed dozens of people. Read more
faithfulguy
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2009
- Messages
- 13,651
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
"Laws" only apply to the plebs. Carry on, nothing to see here folks.
Very true. Clinton is above the law. That is for sure.
Nilgiri
BANNED
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2015
- Messages
- 24,797
- Reaction score
- 81
- Country
- Location
A message from one of my American friends:
A bad day for the Republic Yes, but so was the day Obama was elected and re-elected.
911 was also a bad day for the Republic as was Dec 7, 1941, April 12, 1861 and we have had many, many other bad days but we have always come back and I give us a fair chance of coming back this time.
Friends of the US Constitution, this is no time to lose our nerve. We have lost a battle, not the war. Now is the time to screw up our courage and redouble determination to carry on the fight against those forces who would destroy our 240 year old Republic. I, for one, am now totally committed to seeing Donald trump as President. Not because I am enthralled with him but because he is the best bet we have of defeating Hillary. Being a very pig headed, and very Ugly American I say
to you all; you are either For the US constitution and the rule of law or against us. To those with us I say "Stout Hearts".
Now turn too, we have work to do.
Also worth watching if you have about 30 minutes:
A bad day for the Republic Yes, but so was the day Obama was elected and re-elected.
911 was also a bad day for the Republic as was Dec 7, 1941, April 12, 1861 and we have had many, many other bad days but we have always come back and I give us a fair chance of coming back this time.
Friends of the US Constitution, this is no time to lose our nerve. We have lost a battle, not the war. Now is the time to screw up our courage and redouble determination to carry on the fight against those forces who would destroy our 240 year old Republic. I, for one, am now totally committed to seeing Donald trump as President. Not because I am enthralled with him but because he is the best bet we have of defeating Hillary. Being a very pig headed, and very Ugly American I say
to you all; you are either For the US constitution and the rule of law or against us. To those with us I say "Stout Hearts".
Now turn too, we have work to do.
Also worth watching if you have about 30 minutes:
RabzonKhan
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2008
- Messages
- 4,289
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
Though you have a point, but I think you’re being too overconfidence. The success of Brexit is certainly a concern for those of us who are opposed to Trump, but that doesn’t mean Trump will win.
In the latest, July 1-5 Reuters/Ipsos opinion polls released on Tuesday, Hillary widened her lead over Trump to 13 percentage points. Poll showed that 46% of likely voters supported Clinton, while 33% backed Trump. Link
One or two polls do not make a difference, it has to be several polls to analyze a trend, the fact is, Hillary has been winning in head to head polls since June 1, 2015:
2016 General Election: Trump vs. Clinton
Currently tracking 535 polls from 31 pollsters
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
Bajwa calls Bushra's allegations against Saudi Arabia 'baseless'
- Latest: Novus ordu seclorum
-
-
-
Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts
-
Bajwa calls Bushra's allegations against Saudi Arabia 'baseless'
- Latest: Novus ordu seclorum
-
-
-
-
