For the past few days, Trump has been retweeting conspiracy theories regarding Obama's involvement in the probe into Russia's interference in the 2016 presidential elections.
Without informing Congress, as US Constitution and the War Powers Resolution require, Obama launched airstrikes against Libyan armed forces in March 2011.
Nitish Kumar has mastered the rhythm of renewal in Bihar. In a democracy of churn and chance, endurance may be the rarest—and most refined—form of political art.
While the move could free up grid capacity struggling to keep up with rapid renewable rollout, it would be a major setback for green ambitions. India aims to double clean power capacity to 500 gigawatts by the end of the decade.
This world is being restructured and redrawn by one man, and what’s his power? It’s not his formidable military. It’s trade. With China, it turned on him.
Totally agree with all the comments previously posted, honest journalism and this news media business which pretends to be honest don’t go hand in hand, that’s why they are not fit to be called a news organization
Unfortunately I only found one piece of information in this “article” worth noting, The rest is just slanted biased goobily nothingness which at best misleads the reader. “There is no precedent that anybody can find for someone who has been charged with perjury just getting off scot-free,” Obama reportedly said in the leaked call. That statement is false. It is Categorically false, in fact all one has to do is look at President Clinton who lied under oath regarding Monica Lewinsky. Many times people get off scot-free after committing perjury, So the real question is why would a newspaper not offer the truth along side a clearly false statement. Newspapers are supposed to be for news. The news was that President Obama clearly told a falsehood regarding perjury charges. Now perhaps President Obama mis-spoke which politicians do from time to time (they always have to think and respond on the fly about numerous complicated topics) So any legitimate news organization would try to get a follow up/clarity. If the Print attempted a follow up then they should state so. People need news, real news, facts not a bunch of B.S.
Totally agree with all the comments previously posted, honest journalism and this news media business which pretends to be honest don’t go hand in hand, that’s why they are not fit to be called a news organization
I guess you fools are still in denial.
You are fake news.deceving people for your personal hatred for trump
Cowardly journalism.
Unfortunately I only found one piece of information in this “article” worth noting, The rest is just slanted biased goobily nothingness which at best misleads the reader. “There is no precedent that anybody can find for someone who has been charged with perjury just getting off scot-free,” Obama reportedly said in the leaked call. That statement is false. It is Categorically false, in fact all one has to do is look at President Clinton who lied under oath regarding Monica Lewinsky. Many times people get off scot-free after committing perjury, So the real question is why would a newspaper not offer the truth along side a clearly false statement. Newspapers are supposed to be for news. The news was that President Obama clearly told a falsehood regarding perjury charges. Now perhaps President Obama mis-spoke which politicians do from time to time (they always have to think and respond on the fly about numerous complicated topics) So any legitimate news organization would try to get a follow up/clarity. If the Print attempted a follow up then they should state so. People need news, real news, facts not a bunch of B.S.