Former Mexican President Vicente Fox Says of Trump’s Wall, “I’m Not Going to Pay For That F*cking Wall” (VIDEO) … Trump Resonds, “It just got 10 feet taller!”
FORMER MEXICAN PRESIDENT HAS SOME WORDS FOR DONALD TRUMP AND HIS WALL …
Wow, in an interview with Fusion, former Mexican President Vicente Fox had some strong words for Donald Trump and Hispanics that would vote for the would be US presidential candidate. Fox stated regarding Trumps proposed building of a border wall between Mexico and the United States, “I declare — I’m not going to pay for that f—ing wall. [Trump] should pay for it. He’s got the money.” But that was not the half of it. Fox went on to call Trump a crazy man and that Trump was neither a Republican or a Democrat. He went on to say that Trump is ego-concentric. Fox compared Trump to a false prophet and warned fellow Hispanics to be very careful.
Video warning: Adult language
Former Mexican President Vicente Fox says his nation will not pay for Donald Trump’s proposed border wall.
“I declare — I’m not going to pay for that f—ing wall,” he told Fusion’s Jorge Ramos during an interviewThursday. “[Trump] should pay for it. He’s got the money.”
“This nation is going to fail if it goes into the hands of a crazy guy,” Fox added of the U.S. “Democracy can’t take us to crazy people that don’t know what’s going on in the world today.”
Fox said he was shocked by exit polls from the Nevada GOP presidential caucuses showing some Hispanic support for Trump.
“It worries me, this last caucus in Nevada,” he said. “[He won] 44 percent of Hispanics. I’d like to know who those Hispanics are because they’re followers of a false prophet.
“He’s going to take them to the desert,” Fox continued. “If they think they would benefit from an administration led by Donald Trump, they are wrong. Please, you Hispanics, Latinos in [the] U.S., open your eyes. It’s not to defend our race. It’s not to defend our creed. It’s to defend this very same nation that is hosting you.
UPDATE I: Trump Responds to Vincente Fox at GOP Debate … The wall “just got 10 feet taller!”
The wall Donald Trump would build at the U.S.-Mexican border “just got 10 feet taller” was the the Republican presidential front-runner’s response to a former Mexican president that Mexico’s “not paying for that f***ing wall.”
Trump also called upon the former Mexican president to apologize for dropping the f-bomb at the CNN GOP presidential debate in Houston Thursday.
THE POPE SAID WHAT, HEY FRANCIS … STICK TO RELIGION AND MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS?
It would appear that now Donald Trump and the Pope are now in a war of words, but this time it was not of Trump’s doing. Pope Francis said Thursday that Donald Trump was “not Christian” if he wants to address illegal immigration by building a wall. Really Your Holiness, you mean the Vatican does not have walls around it that keep people out? Really? Whats the difference? Why don’t we just let all the illegals go to the Vatican? A note to the Pope, you might want to stay out of the sovereign affairs of other countries.
Remember when the Pope said, “who am I to judge?” You do remember that, right Pope Francis? Maybe you might want to follow your own words for all and not just some.
Thrusting himself into the heated American presidential campaign, Pope Francis declared Thursday that Donald Trump is “not Christian” if he wants to address illegal immigration only by building a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.
Trump fired back ferociously, saying it was “disgraceful” for a religious leader to question a person’s faith.
“A person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian,” he said. While Francis said he would “give the benefit of the doubt” because he had not heard Trump’s border plans independently, he added, “I say only that this man is not a Christian if he has said things like that.”
Donald Trump fired back at Pope Francis questioning why a religious leader would question an individuals faith. I have been highly critical of Donald Trump and his all too often disrespectful name calling and his lack of focusing on the bigger picture than getting to often bogged down in the weeds, but I am with Trump on this one. What the hell was the Pontiff thinking? This is a Pope that has embraced socialist and leaders like the Castro brothers but has the nerve to call Trump anti-Christian. WTH!!! In the end, the Pope probably just gave Trump more votes heading into this weekends South Carolina primary and Nevada caucus. How often is it that you get into a dust up with the Pope and win? Trump probably just did.
“For a religious leader to question a person’s faith is disgraceful,” he said at a campaign stop in South Carolina, which holds a key primary on Saturday. “I am proud to be a Christian, and as president I will not allow Christianity to be consistently attacked and weakened.”
Trump also raised the prospect of the Islamic State extremist group attacking the Vatican, saying that if that happened, “the pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been president because this would not have happened.”
Trump eased off later Thursday, saying he thought the pope’s comments were “probably a little bit nicer” than first reported.
The American Thinker makes some very important points and advice for the Pope in evaluating the comments made and how and why he would make such foolish ones. I have to say, I second the American Thinker on every point.
First, El Papa should stay away from presidential elections, here, there, and everywhere.
Second, the Vatican is one gigantic place surrounded by walls.
Third, is a border now un-Christian? How did we get to the point that defending borders and promoting legal immigration is now inhumane?
Fourth, El Papa has given Mr. Trump a huge gift. I am not a Trump supporter, but I believe that the U.S. has every right to protect and defend its borders. I don’t know whether building a wall from Laredo to San Diego is the best answer. However, it may work in some isolated regions currently used by cartels to bring drugs and people.
Last, but not least, El Papa just visited Cuba. He hugged and embraced Raúl Castro, a man who has executed priests, harassed religious leaders, and closed Christian schools years ago. Did he call the Castro brothers un-Christian?
Pope Francis is a good man, but he needs a few people around him to protect him from himself.
ITS TOO BAD THIS COMMANDER IN CHIEF DID NOT TAKE TERRORISM AS SERIOUS …
The Washington Times is reporting that the Pentagon is ordering its top commanders to incorporate climate change into virtually everything they do, from testing weapons to training troops to war planning to joint exercises with allies. Guess who they get their directive from? The directive, “Climate Change Adaptation and Resilience,” is in line with President Obama’s view that global warming is the country’s foremost national security threat. This fool cannot be replaced soon enough before he does any more damage to this country. Let’s hope it is not permanent.
Oh yes Mr. President, ISIS is the JV, but global warming is the United States greatest national security threat. Lord help us.
The Pentagon is ordering the top brass to incorporate climate change into virtually everything they do, from testing weapons to training troops to war planning to joint exercises with allies.
A new directive’s theme: The U.S. Armed Forces must show “resilience” and beat back the threat based on “actionable science.”
To four-star generals and admirals, among them the regional combatant commanders who plan and fight the nation’s wars, the directive tells them: “Incorporate climate change impacts into plans and operations and integrate DoD guidance and analysis in Combatant Command planning to address climate change-related risks and opportunities across the full range of military operations, including steady-state campaign planning and operations and contingency planning.”
It turns out that Hillary Clinton’s emails are not a “nothing burger” as Clinton and her surrogates would want you to believe.
This Hillary Clinton scandal gets worse and worse and it makes one wonder just how long Democrats and the liberal MSM can ignore the obvious? Hillary Clinton is damaged goods and the latest revelation that the Top Secret emails found on Hillary’s “unclassified” personal bathroom server was colossally damaging to our national security and has put lives at risk. Everyone who defends Ms. Clinton asks, what difference does this scandal make? Really?
What Difference Does It Make That I Put Lives At Risk and Threatened National Security?
Nevertheless, Hillary has upped the ante by demanding that the twenty-two Top Secret emails that have been withheld by the State Department be released to the public so Americans can see that they are in fact innocuous, as Ms. Clinton and her defenders maintain. Yet this is pure political theater: she surely knows that the emails are not going to be released on security grounds anytime soon, probably not for several decades, at least.
What, then, is in those twenty-two emails? Contrary to the assertions of Team Clinton that the information was benign, a “nothing-burger” to cite her allies, implying that the overzealous Intelligence Community has classified information that doesn’t need protection, their contents are Top Secret with good reason. Hillary has opted for cries of “overclassification” as her last line of defense in EmailGate, notwithstanding that’s the choice of any officials in Washington, DC, who have broken secrecy laws and have no leg left to stand on.
Today FoxNews has reported that those twenty-two Top Secret emails included “operational intelligence” that involves espionage sources and methods, adding that lives have been put at risk by Hillary’s mishandling of this information.
The Right Scoop opines and quotes Joe Biden, “This is a BFD.”
I have to agree with Q and O 100%, because “any one who has ever worked in or around classified material understands how draconian the rules concerning their use are.” I have personally done so for years. When one does, you are provided continual education on how to handle material and asked to sign endless compliance forms that you have done so properly and will continue to do so. Anything Hilary Clinton did with regards to her emails and a private server circumventing the government process was an intentional act to hide things. There can be no other explanation. We are witness to the emails that have been deemed top secret; however, can you imagine what was on the emails that she destroyed, knowing how damning they were? How this woman is running for president is criminal and so are her actions.
State Department Announces that Nearly 2 Dozen Emails on Hillary Clinton’s Private Server are So Secret and “Too Damaging” to National Security to Release Under any Circumstances
HILLARY CLINTON SHOULD BE IN LEG IRONS, NOT RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT … I GUESS WE KNOW WHO OBAMA’S FIRST PARDON WILL BE FOR.
State Depart confirms that some of the emails on Hillary Clinton’s private server are so top secret and “too damaging” to national security that they will never see the light of day. This is a far cry from Hillary’s claims that there were no top secret emails on the server. What a shock, Hillary Clinton lied. According to Intelligence agencies, the information was top secret when it was sent and hit the Clinton’s servers, it was not upgraded after the fact (Watch Video below). However, the State Department continues to spread lies when it comes to this fact.
UNREAL, HILLARY CLINTON NEEDS TO BE INDICTED AND FOUND GUILTY. SHE KNOWS DAMN WELL WHAT SHE DID WAS WRONG AND KNEW SO AS SHE CONTINUED TO DO IT. WHICH BEGS THE QUESTION … WHAT DID SHE DESTROY AND WHAT WAS SHE HIDING?
The intelligence community has deemed some of Hillary Clinton’s emails “too damaging” to national security to release under any circumstances, according to a U.S. government official close to the ongoing review. A second source, who was not authorized to speak on the record, backed up the finding.
The determination was first reported by Fox News, hours before the State Department formally announced Friday that seven email chains, found in 22 documents, will be withheld “in full” because they, in fact, contain “Top Secret” information.
The State Department, when first contacted by Fox News about withholding such emails Friday morning, did not dispute the reporting – but did not comment in detail. After a version of this report was first published, the Obama administration confirmed to the Associated Press that the seven email chains would be withheld. The department has since confirmed those details publicly.
The decision to withhold the documents in full, and not provide even a partial release with redactions, further undercuts claims by the State Department and the Clinton campaign that none of the intelligence in the emails was classified when it hit Clinton’s personal server.
Just curious, can a President pardon some one before they have been found guilty of a crime?
Fox News reporter Catherine Herridge asked whether the State Department disagreed with the intelligence community’s determination that Clinton’s email contained information that was highly-classified when it hit the server. The Clinton campaign has argued that the information was only classified retroactively.
“The ICIG’s letter from January 14, we’ve confirmed that it was the finding of the agencies who own the intelligence that they were top secret, even containing SAP information, when they hit the server,” Herridge said, using an acronym for Special-Access Programs, among the most closely-guarded secrets of government. “So this is a settled matter, this is not something that is still being pursued. Do you accept that?”
Kirby would not speak to the letter.
“I’m not going to speak specifically to that letter or the ICIG’s findings. You’d have to talk to them about that,” Kirby said.
Kirby insisted that the State Department would continue its review to determine if information in Clinton’s emails needed to be classified and redacted.
“It is the State Department’s responsibility to make the final adjudication on classification,” Kirby said.
Herridge said it was the responsibility of the intelligence agencies who own the information, not the State Department.
“No, that’s not correct,” Herridge said. “The agency that owns the information has final say over the classification, not the State Department, and these declarations relate to intelligence that was not State Department intelligence.”
Kirby conceded that the State Department had accepted the intelligence community’s decision to upgrade the information in this case.