Saudi Sharia Court Orders Two Women Flogged For Over Bad Language on Social Media

125px-Coat_of_arms_of_Saudi_Arabia.svgnicubunu_open_mouthWe have yet another example of the barbaric application of Islamic Sharia law — a medieval system that is used in many Muslim nations to impose Islamic values on citizens. The latest example comes from Saudi Arabia where two women were sentenced by a Sharia “judge” to 20 lashes after having been found guilty of using bad language over WhatsApp.

The women were jailed for 10 days and scheduled for flogging due to their use of “impermissible expressions” But the Sharia court reviewed the messages and found both women were equally at fault in using bad or objectionable language.

So the “enlightened” Islamic law now punishes potty mouth with floggings. Of course, since some Muslim clerics have concluded that global warming is the result of “immodest women” such flogging will likely continue until the reduction of global temperatures in the Paris Agreement is achieved.

55 thoughts on “Saudi Sharia Court Orders Two Women Flogged For Over Bad Language on Social Media

  1. I keep hoping that enough people in Saudi Arabia will finally say, “enough is enough,” but it hasn’t happened yet.

    Why do we keep supporting these clowns?

    • “We” support them because they contribute money to our politicians – including the Clinton Foundation of course. Saudi Arabia is a harsh country for those oridinary denizens who are not related to the House of Saud – many of them live in terrible poverty. The princes have formed a coalition with the hard-core Wahabist clerics who enforce sharia punishment at will. Royalty of course is not affected – they have all the liquor, woman (and boys) they wish to enjoy. SA is Sunni as well so that endears them to Israel which is constantly thumping on Iran and Syria.

      • “We” support them because they contribute money to our politicians – including the Clinton Foundation of course.

        Actually, we’ve had businesslike relations with Saudi Arabia since the Roosevelt Administration. There has never been any reason not to.

        • The US considers Saudi Arabia its Sunni ally – along with the other repressive Sunni regimes in the region)–not some benign foreign country. This is why it assists the Saudis with military and logistical support. The Saudis are committing war crimes in Yemen which mainstream media is not covering.

          • And who do you think supplies the weapons with which the Al Saud crime syndicate, er, excuse me, the “Kingdom of Saudi Arabia” (AKA “King Arthur’s Round Table” reborn) commits its war crimes in Yemen? Hint: his initials are Uncle Sam.

            To the extent that Americans don’t know and don’t care, Muslims across the globe know exactly who is at fault here. And they also know intimately the hypocrisy of the US lecturing Putin and the world on human rights.

            Below are the three US actions overseas that inspire Muslims to say good bye to the loving families thousands of miles away, and take up arms to kill Americans on the battlefield. Notice these are specific actions, not pathetic irrelevant concepts like “They hate our democracy!”
            1. US joined to the him w/Israel, a State of zero national interest to the US (how do you like giving one of the wealthiest nations on earth $4B/annually with which Israel purchases US military weapons?)
            2. US occupation of Mecca in the Al Saud crime syndicate.
            3. US military support of the most evil, blood thirsty, dictatorships in the ME, who rule over Islam w/an iron fist.

            The reason MSM in effect bans the three items above from public debate, the reason they repeat ad nauseam, “They hate us for our democracy,” is because TPTB would lose the ensuing debate, likely resulting in the US reversing course of the three items listed, thus removing the reason that OBL declared war against the US in 1996.

            BTW, Islam views the three US actions above as existential threat against Islam. Hence, there is nothing “extreme” about any Muslim desiring to take up arms and kill Americans. When US President Truman decided Japan was an existential threat, we incinerated a few hundred thousand Japanese civilians.

            Lastly, per American law, POTUS can legally kill every single non-American on the face of the earth and still be in compliance w/all US law. IOW, there is no particular number of civilian casualties beyond which POTUS can not kill.

            POTUS even has a private extra-judicial “Kill List” whereby he can drone kill American children and suffer no blow back (16 year old Anwar Al-Awlaki).

            • Again, ‘war crimes’ is simply an inflammatory term for conducting military operations. You’re both an intellectual fraud and a moral one.

              • Of course, the always brilliant (sic) toad away person is a hypocrite and lousy propagandist who knows full well what s/he is doing to deflect attention away from the truth.

        • The reason for the long-term connection to Saudis was all about oil. But today, that is no longer the case as the U.S.does not need to depend on the Saudis to any significant level–if at all. In fact, the Saudis and their other Islamic allies have conspired to attempt to destroy the U.S. energy business even at the risk of weakening their own empire by artificially depressing oil prices. They have gotten away with their their strategy so far only because the Obama administration has been so committed to helping the Saudis in their efforts. DJT, of course, could change all that and put the squeeze on the Saudis, who are completely dependent on the U.S. to defend themselves. (Remember what Iraq War I was about, anyone?) On the other hand, he too may be reluctant to do what is right for America given his business interests in Islamic nations.

    • Again, contrive a defensible definition of ‘support’ which actually applies to Saudi Arabia’s dealings with anyone. You cannot do it.

  2. Why not just use a swear word coin jar?

    What people grow up with as normal in these regions are so abhorrent compared with Western values. But I have absolutely no idea how to convince them that women matter equally, or to tolerate other religions, apostates, and gay people. Changing anyone’s core values is so difficult, I have no idea how to accomplish it.

  3. Dear Professor Turley. I love reading your commentary. Your cogent and thoughtful remarks are wonderful and they always provide food for thought. But, is it possible for someone to proof read your articles before they are printed on your site? Ex: “..Flogged for over bad language…”. Thank you sir.

  4. I did read the other day that women have pottier mouths than men. Who would have thought? btw, I thought WhatApp was supposed to be secret. I don’t use it, but that was my understanding.

    • I did read the other day that women have pottier mouths than men.

      Almost certainly not true for my mother’s contemporaries. Likely true today. My father cursed terribly, but not in mixed company. Among men, that used to be reserved for stag settings only.

  5. When will we stop supporting Saudi Arabia? Sharia law and bombing Yemen aren’t enough to show us they are not our friends. Our continued involvement in Syria is another example. Saudi Arabia wants Assad out not because he abuses his people but because he doesn’t abuse them based on the appropriate religious grounds. What is wrong with US!

  6. Notice there is a media blackout on the Saudi bombings in Yemen– which include US supplied illegal cluster bombs that kill and maim children . All we hear about are the atrocities taking place in Syria. The media takes its orders from Obama and the Pentagon to deceive and manipulate us.

    • There is no such thing as an ‘illegal’ bomb, nor are there bombs which miraculously spare civilians in the vicinity, much less juvenile civilians.

      • From Wiki the controversial authority on all sorts of obscure issues:

        “The Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM) is an international treaty that prohibits the use, transfer and stockpile of cluster bombs, a type of explosive weapon which scatters submunitions (“bomblets”) over an area. The convention was adopted on 30 May 2008 in Dublin,[6] and was opened for signature on 3 December 2008 in Oslo. It entered into force on 1 August 2010, six months after it was ratified by 30 states.[2] As of April 2016, 108 states have signed the treaty and 100 have ratified it or acceded to it.[3]

        Countries that ratify the convention will be obliged “never under any circumstances to”:[7]

        (a) Use cluster munitions;
        (b) Develop, produce, otherwise acquire, stockpile, retain or transfer to anyone, directly or indirectly, cluster munitions;
        (c) Assist, encourage or induce anyone to engage in any activity prohibited to a State Party under this Convention.”

        Now that that is clear, who wants to talk about land mines?

        • There is no such thing as ‘international law’. There is merely convention. There can be no such thing because there is no authority to define, enforce, and adjudicate such law.

      • BTW, cluster bombs have a reputation of posing a special threat to children because the bomblets which are about the size of soda can, and scattered scattered widely, seem to have special appeal to children.

        Some claim that maybe 10% to 25% of the bomblets do not explode at the initial distribution and remain a serious threat to anyone who touches or picks the bomblets up. The claim is that children are particularly prone to handle the bomblets.

        Bombs that remain in tack till explosion, rather than distributing small explosives over a wide area, do not pose the same kind of risk to children.

          • ““Have a reputation”. Thanks for your Google search.”

            Your are welcome, but that one is common knowledge to any one who bothers to read the news paper.

            But you are right. Google search beats drawing a blank any day.

            Now this, this is an example of googling:

            “Even though cluster bombs are designed to explode prior to or on impact, there are always some individual submunitions that do not explode on impact. The US-made MLRS with M26 warhead and M77 submunitions are supposed to have a 5% dud rate but studies have shown that some have a much higher rate.[58] The rate in acceptance tests prior to the Gulf War for this type ranged from 2% to a high of 23% for rockets cooled to −25 °F (−32 °C) before testing.[59] The M483A1 DPICM artillery-delivered cluster bombs have a reported dud rate of 14%.[60]

            Given that each cluster bomb can contain hundreds of bomblets and be fired in volleys, even a small failure rate can lead each strike to leave behind hundreds or thousands of UXOs scattered randomly across the strike area. For example, after the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict, UN experts have estimated that as many as one million unexploded bomblets may contaminate the hundreds of cluster munition strike sites in Lebanon.[61]”

        • That’s so heartbreaking. There are also many stories about the lost land mines of Afghanistan, which is supposed to be the most heavily land mined country in the world. There are layers of mines from the Soviets, mujahideen, and various other factions that keep laying new mines. Children still get maimed from stepping on old buried land mines. I read an article about men whose job is to seek out these old land mines and remove them, one of the most dangerous jobs, obviously, in the world, but also the most brave and altruistic.

          • And neglected to add that children are, indeed, most susceptible to triggering UXOs. They would be an object of curiosity to them, too young to understand the danger. Children do like to pick things up that they find and look at them. Or they are more likely to be running and playing out in a field.

            My family was on a picnic in Europe when I was little when another family found an unexploded bomb from WWII lying in a stream nearby. If I remember the story correctly, the parents had to drag the kids hurriedly away and go notify someone. Because of course they wanted to go look at it.

    • Dominionists are a useful bogey to liberals who want to raise money from their marks. Vichy evangelicals who would like to ruin congregations, denominations, and schools also find the dominionist bogey useful for advancing their rancid little projects.

  7. Probably 5 – 7 lashes would have been enough. I subscribe to the broken windows approach. Today it’s cussing on the net, and tomorrow its cussing in public. Twenty lashes seems kind of harsh, but that will probably nip the cussing in the bud.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

  8. Islamic Sharia law — a medieval system that is used in many Muslim nations to impose Islamic values on citizens.

    It’s a reasonable wager that the ‘values’ the courts are ‘imposing’ are congruent with popular values. Not everyone thinks like haut bourgeois in metro DC.

  9. Amazing that some on this thread seem to feel Saudi Arabia is an a ok “friend” and that one just redefines words to make them defensible.

    Theocrats are dangerous to all humans.

    • You mean by theocrats, people who have religious convictions. and insist their population live by them. Hmmm. Every society has convictions, and political correctness is all about making the rest of the population live by those convictions. Sometimes the convictions are religious. Other times they are just political.

      I notice the political theocrats don’t like the religious theocrats.

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

    • Saudi Arabia is a foreign country, not a ‘friend’. We have ordinary diplomatic and trade relations with them and have had some co-operative projects undertaken for reasons of state. They’re a coldly repressive society, not a charnel house like Baathist Iraq. The House of Saud have been consequential players in the rough-and-tumble politics of the subregion for 200 years or more. There isn’t much about Saudi Arabia that is not the issue of the organic evolution of the society in question. They’re not a revanchist regime, have never initiated hostilities with any other party, have limited their entaglements to assisting neighboring states with counter-insurgency operations. The most irritating thing they do is sponsor Islamic schools abroad and the like (something schematically similar to what the USIA used to do).

      Of course all the blather about ‘support’ is utter humbug, a way to assess responsibility on the U.S. Government. It’s contemptible, as are the people who talk that way.

  10. This is why God made rifles. You need to shoot the Catholics or Muslims whom you dislike. I did it. Then some dork shot me and while on TV. I got over it all when I got up to Heaven and The Lord let me do the entree for new arrivals. I hand them all a pistol.

  11. This is not a theoretical question of political vs religious theocrats. The rulers of Saudi Arabia behead those who differ with its religious convictions. And the US-which defines itself as the leader of the ” free world”– openly supports this government because it buys our military hardware.

    • Again ‘support’ means nothing except that ‘william self’ is striking poses as a moral tutor. ‘william self’ is repulsive.

  12. We should completely understand the anger and venom that the Saudi Sharia Court felt when they saw the two women expressing themselves.

    The Saudis have given tens of millions of dollars to the Hillary Clinton campaign fully expecting her to win the Presidential election, thereby giving them their sought after control and influence over U.S. policies. And their expectations were certainly reasonable, as these elections are usually bought and paid for.

    Unfortunately the American people failed to comply with the Saudis wishes and they failed to obey the mainstream media which usually gets them to vote they way the media wants. So, we should not be surprised that the Saudis would make some examples of these two women as an emolument to their distress over the election results. Plus, let’s face it, the Saudi always get a kick out of any kind of sadistic activity they can perpetuate to create fear in the population, and to thereby control their own population better.

    However, the Saudis should not feel too bad. After all, the Democrats appear to be on the brink of putting Keith Ellison — who is committed to implementing Sharia law in the U.S.A.– in charge of the DNC. So things are looking up for the Saudis down the line.

    • It also occurs to me that nobody has actually attempted to explain WHY the Saudis (and other Islamic nations) are compelled to enact laws and enforce those laws that result in beheadings and various misogynistic acts. The psychology of these acts have never been explained and this has been a mystery for most people.

      As a public service, I will do so for the first time, employing a branch of psychology that was discovered by the Jews: psychoanalysis.

      The psychological reason that Muslims are compelled to engage in beheadings and misogynistic acts is a really a very simple one. It is the unconscious Islamic response to the ritual of circumcision, a procedure that was invented by Jews and then imitated by the Muslims.

      And what could the ancient ritual of circumcision have to do with beheadings and misogyny, you ask? Good question. The answer is plenty. The ritual of circumcision is closely connected to the fear of castration or castration anxiety, buried in the unconscious of males. However, this poses a duality and a conflict that must be dealt with on the unconscious level.

      One way to deal with the duality/conflict is to take the high road: engaging in inventive activity, creativity, and humor. This is, in fact, the “Jewish” way of dealing with castration anxiety, and helps to explain why Jews have traditionally excelled in humor, show business, the arts, music, literature, etc.

      The other way to deal with the duality/conflict is the low road: i.e., to directly avoid those castration fears by imposing their own fears onto others. By beheading someone, the Muslim male symbolically castrates his opponent. In effect, he says, “I’m not the person who fears castration–I castrate others, and am therefore superior.” By carrying misogynistic acts, the Muslim male again says, “I am do not fear castration; for I punish women, who are already “castrated.” To the Muslim male, a female is always a reminder of the Muslim male castration anxiety, so violence against women helps them to deal with their anxiety and serves as way to overcome their sense of inferiority in connection with that castration anxiety.

      For a funny take on the “Jewish” response to castration anxiety, see the following clip from Woody Allen’s Bananas. Note Allen’s sexual attraction response to Louise Lasser, how he “accidentally” breaks the point of her pencil, and how he responds to Lasser’s comment that she’s “not one of those castrating bitches.”

      See, the world is simple to understand once you dig deeper.

  13. Beheading people is only a terrible thing if you believe beheading people is a terrible thing. Personally, I would be all in favor of the guillotine for murder, pedophilia, serial rape, treason, etc. FWIW, the guillotine was considered a very humane way to kill someone, which is why the French used it until 1977.

    I think it has a lot of advantages to both lethal injection and electrocution. Hanging is similarly humane if properly carried out, but quite often it is botched and the perp just hangs there and strangles.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

    • Squeeky, you misunderstand the psychoanalytic meaning of beheading in Islamic culture. When Muslims engage in death rituals like beheading, the objective is not merely to kill the subject of the beheading. The objective in the Islamic culture is to satisfy a vital unconsciously driven compulsion. So HOW the subject is killed is critical to Muslims.

      With a guillotine, the subject is swiftly killed by a machine, and the process is impersonal, in that the direct “executioner” is throwing the switch to set the machine in motion. But it is the machine itself that does the killing. Where is the visceral thrill in that for the Islamic culture? The connection to the concept of castration is much too remote with the guillotine. (Incidentally, the last person to be executed in France by the guillotine was, ironically enough, a Muslim, in 1977.)

      But with the Islamic style of beheading, we have the direct involvement of the executioner, reenacting a symbolic, deadly form of “circumcision,” like a demonic mohel. (A mohel is the name of the professional who performs the ritual of circumcision in the Jewish culture.)

      We must take note that according to Muslims, the Prophet Muhammad said: “The Prophet Ibrahim circumcised himself when he was eighty years old and he circumcised himself with an axe.” Thus, to satisfy the unconsciously driven compulsion to transform the execution into a perverse and deadly symbolic version of circumcision, the beheading must be performed in a very personal way, with an axe, a sword, or a knife. That is the only way that the Islamic culture can achieve the necessary emotional satisfaction, which other Muslims can also enjoy vicariously, imagining themselves as the demonic “mohel.”

      I must also point out that in many Islamic cultures, the males also insist on female “circumcision,” which is, in fact, an actual form of castration.

      So, back to your original point, the guillotine just doesn’t cut it for the Islamic culture (pun intended). The means of the execution don’t satisfy the unconscious connection to castration that is buried deep in the Islamic unconscious.

      • SkaterDude – it was the 2nd tweet that probably raised eyebrows. And universities get millions of dollars from the feds to protect their campus. Got to follow the federal guidelines. Rules are rules.

  14. I’ve heard that when Nixon was president he and Henry Kissinger negotiated an agreement with Saudi Arabia. The Saudis for their part of the agreement would only sell oil for US dollars. Also if the kingdom had extra money they could put it into US treasuries(buy our debt). On our side we we would protect Saudi Arabia(and the house of Saud) from all enemies both foreign and domestic. As far as I know, this agreement is still ineffect. The world seems to be a different place now.

    • Yes, Independent Bob, what you said about Nixon and Kissinger is correct. But that was a long time ago and things have changed dramatically since then.

      The U.S. then depended heavily upon the Saudis for oil. But the U.S. has foolishly bent over backwards to aid the Saudis for the personal profits of the Elite Establishment and its Military-Industrial Complex, but at the expense of Americans and America’s interests. For example, when Saddam Hussein (not to be confused with Barack Hussein) controlled Iraq, and Hussein attacked Saudi Arabia, the U.S. military, under the orders of George H.W. Bush, who was in bed with the Saudis, proceeded to rescue the Saudis, putting the lives of U.S. soldiers in harms way, and expending billions and billions of tax payer dollars to benefit the Elite Establishment.

      Of course, the smart thing to have done, if the Elite Establishment really cared about Americans and America, would have been to let Saddam Hussein go into Saudi Arabia, wipe out the Saudis, and THEN to have stepped in to ensure that Hussein did not get control of Saudi Arabia and it oil. But like I’ve been saying, the objective of the Iraq War I was not to act in the interests of Americans of America, but to act ONLY in the interests of the Elite Establishment and the Saudis.

      Similarly, the USA engaged in the “pointless” Iraq War II under George W. Bush, when the smart thing to do would have been to go into Saudi Arabia, not Iraq, and then to wipe out the Saudis for their direct role in the 9/11 crimes. But, again, doing the “smart” thing had no place in the strategic thinking at the time. The SOLE purpose of Iraq War II was to benefit the Elite Establishment and the Saudis, the same as with Iraq War I.

      But putting all this aside, Saudi Arabia no longer even serves a useful function as an oil supplier. The Saudis have been at war with America for some time now as they’ve attempted to destroy the US energy business by artificially causing the price of oil to plunge to and unprofitable level for the smaller US oil operations to function. The Elite Establishment and its puppet Obama have helped the Saudis every which way to Sunday with their plan to destroy American energy enterprises.

      Donald J. Trump has the opportunity to go AGAINST the Elite Establishment, by putting the interests of the smaller AMERICAN oil companies before the interests of the vile, despotic Saudis, who are NOT needed at all.

      But will DJT do the courageous and honorable thing by finally putting the Saudis in place? I find it hard to believe that he will, for many reasons. One, Trump has many business interests in Islamic nations, and he wouldn’t want to jeopardize those interests. Two, Trump knows that he would be going directly against the interests of the Elite Establishment, and he knows that the last U.S. President to actually do that was John F. Kennedy. And nobody has forgotten the Elite Establishment’s lesson in Dealey Plaza about what happens when a sitting US President goes against the Elite Establishment’s interests (which then involved the Elite Establishment’s plan to escalate the war in Vietnam, producing a decade of billion dollar cash flows for them).

    • We had some troops in Saudi Arabia from 1990 to 2002. The mean troop force consisted of 6,200 men. We’ve never had a garrison there otherwise.

      The notion that the dollar is an international reserve currency because of some off the books agreement with King Feisel or that Saudi Arabia does nothing with oil revenues but purchase U.S. Treasury issues is too stupid to take seriously.

    • Independent Bob….
      There is no question that the Kennedy administration gave the green light to the coup against Diem.
      If the coup had failed, arrangements were made for the escape of the coup plotters, with U.S. help.
      The hope was that with Diem out of the way that there would be more stability in the South Vietnamese government; instead, there was a series of coups and counter-coups for the next 2-3 years.
      Mostly after LBJ took office…Kennedy was killed 3 weeks after Diem was killed.
      There’s a story about somebody having to go into the Oval Office to tell Johnson that there had been yet another coup.
      People in the area heard LBJ yelling “Coup, coup, COUP. I’ve had it with this COUP SH*T!”
      There’s a great book called “A Death in November” dealing with Diem’s rule and his assassination.
      Probably out of print, but some libraries may have it.

  15. It’s ironic that this story about our “indispensable” ally is just a few entries before the death of Castro, who our government claimed we had a beef with for human rights abuses.

    Our government cannot be taken seriously about concerns over human rights abuses, lack of democracy, or even support of terrorism, so long as they support and arm Saudi Arabia, the worst at all of those.

    • Critics of our government are notable for being frivolous in ways this administration might shoot for in vain. No policy stance toward a given foreign government has just one vector. That aside, anyone who has bothered to observe working political societies in the Arab world over the last 70 years would immediately remark that the Arab world is not Latin America. Radically different political culture and radically different responses to given stimuli.

  16. Independent Bob, I can understand how you feel, not being “entirely sure about” JFK being murdered because he stood in the way of the CIA and Military-Industrial Complex (“MIC”) and their Vietnam plans for the future. Nobody wants to believe that their own government could be so vile and corrupt and traitorous.

    But the fact is that the coup against Diem was arranged by the CIA against Kennedy’s wishes. It also happened immediately before the assassination attempt against JFK in Chicago.

    Yes, there was a virtually identical type plan to kill JFK in early November 1963 in Chicago, just weeks before the scheduled Dallas trip. That plan even included an ex-Marine patsy named Thomas Arthur Vallee placed in a high-rise building (as the CIA loved to use patsies with three names at the time, like Lee Harvey Oswald and like James Earl Ray). Unfortunately for the Chicago assassination team, the murder plan had to be aborted because some members of the team were caught and the Chicago branch of the Secret Service had to get involved to hush everything up. The JFK Secret Service detail in Dallas was never told of the foiled Chicago plan and the Secret Service later destroyed all of its records of the Chicago plot in violation of the law.

    But if the Chicago had been successful, JFK’s murder would have seemed to be in response to the coup against Diem. JFK and RFK were shocked and angry to learn that the Diem brothers had been killed by the coup members and the blamed the CIA again for misleading them, just as they did earlier in the Bay of Pigs scheme.

    Did you ever wonder why Lyndon Johnson met with the team of generals virtually immediately after JFK was murdered to make arrangements to REVERSE JFK’s Vietnam policy and to ESCALATE the Vietnam war? Ever wonder why such increased involvement became such a matter of urgency for Johnson, who had hardly been involved at all in Vietnam policies prior to this, and why he immediately approved hundreds of millions of dollars in MIC contracts?

    Wonder no more.

    Had JFK lived and proceeded to “splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it into the winds” (New York Times. April 25, 1966), the world would have been a very different and better place today than it is. Instead, it would be parts of JFK’s skull and brains that would be splintered into a thousand pieces.

    Every President since JFK has remembered the lesson of Dealey Plaza and has obeyed the orders of the advisors of the CIA and the MIC. Donald Trump, for all his billions of dollars, will be no different. You can see that as he places Elite Establishment approved people in his administration, just like Clinton, Cruz, or Rubio would have done if they had “won.”

    Had Trump put in INDEPENDENT leaders and experts with proven track records of expertise, then I would say “Wow, things are really going to be different for a change.” But all of Trump’s appointments (except Bannon, who is really Trump PR and marketing point person–not a policy person) signal that things will be: Business (and politics) as usual.

    America lost again. Trump is right about one thing, though. The game IS rigged.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s