North Korean Crisis Reveals America’s Dangerous Economic Dependence on China
When President Trump said on Sunday that America would consider stopping all trading with countries doing business with North Korea, critics responded by saying this would mean economic ruin for the United States.
This is a shocking admission that the cost of economic globalism has been the compromise of American independence.
And it should rally Americans to the cause championed by Donald Trump as he campaigned for the presidency, the cause of economic nationalism.
Consider that after decades of indoctrination about the blessings of global trade, Americans are now told that our economic prosperity is dependent on trade with foreign nations, particularly China. Free trade has shackled us from taking serious action to thwart North Korea’s nuclear ambitions.
The numbers are startling. China is North Korea’s largest trading partner–and Trump’s talk of cutting off trade was clearly aimed at China. But China is also the largest trading partner with the U.S., with nearly $650 billion in goods and services traded between the two nations. Countless more products in America contain parts assembled by Chinese workers. You may even be reading this on one of them.
“If bilateral trade between the U.S. and China goes away, American stores shelves are empty,” former Bush administration Treasury spokesman Taylor Griffin told NBC News recently. You’re not going to have anything to sell in Walmart…There’ll be no iPhone 8 for you.”
According to Griffin, if the U.S. cuts off trade with China, the consequences would be “apocalyptic.”
Trade dependency is not usually thought of as a feature of a free, independent nation. It is the property common to colonies dominated by empires. It is the condition that we rejected as a people in 1776.
Alexander Hamilton knew first hand the dangers of economic dependency. The Caribbean islands where he grew up manufactured nothing and were forced to import all of their supplies. As a result, they were easily dominated by far-off colonial powers. Even as the U.S. fought for its independence, our country depended on France and the Netherlands for manufactured goods. Our political independence won, Hamilton set out to establish our economic independence as well.
In an incredibly short period of time, that independence has been forsaken. We have become so dependent on trade with China, according to the president’s critics, that we face economic disaster if we try to break free from it. The country that defeated Hitler’s Germany, Imperial Japan, and Soviet Communism is not strong enough to cut off trade with China, they say.
Whatever the benefits of globalism may be, they have come at the cost of economic fragility and constrained American sovereignty.
Just as the weakness of subprime mortgage lenders and Bear Stearns illuminated the weakness at the heart of the American financial system, the crisis brought on by North Korea’s nuclear test has revealed an even deeper crisis for America. And just as we responded to our financial crisis by strengthening our banks and our financial safeguards to avoid ever again facing such peril, we should respond to this crisis by rebuilding America’s economic independence.
Otherwise, we might as well take down the statue of Hamilton that stands outside of the U.S. Treasury. Or at least drape it in a shroud to mourn the death of American independence.
You want a real infrastructure program that works, raise incomes and achieve independence? Enact a national 20 year goal of economic independence. The US energy revolution is an import replacement project. Just do it.ReplyDelete
You have two choices for the future:Delete
1. Pay the majority of the population for not working and create a global democratic socialist paradise. Every freeloader on the planet will want to come to the Less Than United States of America
2. Import substitution that will bring to heel all the big monopolies and create a nation of freedom loving working people and politicians accountable to those people
What does this situation say to Ash's continual accusations of American Imperialism ?ReplyDelete
My wife and I drive a Japanese car, and this computer was Made in China.
Some time ago I couldn't find an American made shotgun at Wal-Mart sporting goods section.
When I asked the older clerk he said:
"We're losing our country"
Also, if I can't buy something made here, I'd much rather buy something Made in India than something Made in China.
Our Japanese car, a Nissan, has been super, by the way. Zero trouble, zero oil use, quiet, 130,000 miles now.
It was disgusting. While it may have said Remington, or Winchester, on closer inspection it was......Made in China.Delete
Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson, he just doesn't want to make America Great.
He'd rather buy Japan's exports, than a vehicle made in the USA, to save a dime or two.
Condi Rice has made a talk in which she declared her basic support for Trump's approach to the Korean situation.ReplyDelete
Drawing "Red Lines" that Mr Trump then ignores ...
If Ms Rice supports that, good reason for her to no longer be in the US government.
The Donald tweets - two minutes ago -ReplyDelete
Congress, get ready to do your job - DACA !
Question for the Day:ReplyDelete
If an illegal immigrant is a "Dreamer", what is a:
* User of false documents?
* Law abiding tax payer?
Ask Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson, he is forger, signing his Auntie's name to those credit card cash advances.
Which part of this is malleable?ReplyDelete
Equality before the law, also known as: equality under the law, equality in the eyes of the law, or legal equality, is the principle that establishes that each independent human being must be treated equally by the law and which all people are subject to the same laws of justice.
Which part is unclear?
The words are clear. The execution not so much.
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States."ReplyDelete
Where is the qualifying clause? Where is the ambiguity? Where is the footnote?
At the end of the day, with boots on the ground and everything on the table, does that include a clear understanding of the English language and the rule of law?
I dream of not paying taxesReplyDelete
I dream of jumping in my Aston Martin and seeing if it really will do 180 mph.
Are all dreamers equal under the law?
I got an old Cadillac up to 110 mph once in Nevada.ReplyDelete
That's my top.
No speed limit on that road then.
70 I think.
You might try Montana.
Make certain your tires are good to go.Delete
Senior WH Aide To Politico: Trump Is Bluffing On Canceling DACA After Six MonthsReplyDelete
ALLAHPUNDITPosted at 11:21 am on September 5, 2017
Heh. Well, look at it this way: Schumer was never going to compromise on this anyway, even without knowing from the president’s own team that he’s bluffing. He holds too many political cards: National polling supports DREAM legalization, the media will be even deeper in the tank on this issue than they are for most Democratic priorities, and there’s a brutal GOP intraparty battle royal brewing if Dems push hard here.
Schumer agreeing to fund the wall in return for a DREAM Act would mean letting Trump out of a very tight spot politically, as the wall money might appease right-wing populists who otherwise dislike the idea of any form of amnesty. Insisting that only a “clean” DREAM Act bill will pass with Democratic votes would be Schumer playing hardball. Then Trump would be forced to decide: Does he surrender and sign a standalone DREAM bill, infuriating his base, or does he veto it, which would mean taking full political ownership of the fallout?
Anyway. At least one “senior” member of his own White House staff predicts he’ll choke:
The president is buying himself time on a difficult matter and has complained privately to friends and associates that he has few good options. He doesn’t like ending the program for the “kids,” but also chafes at hearing that “New York Democrats” are powering his administration, according to several people who have spoken to the president in recent days…
[A] senior White House aide said that if Republican lawmakers fail to agree on a plan, he didn’t expect Trump to follow through on terminating DACA — a prospect that would test Bannon’s commitment to support his former boss from the outside.
There’s a double-barreled irony to this political trap. One: For all the hand-wringing about Trump violating constitutional norms, this is a flashy example of POTUS following a constitutional norm that had been violated by Obama. Says Rich Lowry, “You can reasonably argue that he’s exercised his powers foolishly at times, and perhaps Robert Mueller will end up contending that he has even exercised them corruptly. But he’s done nothing remotely on the order of the brazen lawlessness of President Obama’s two unilateral amnesties. Which makes it all the more instructive that the same Left complaining about Trump trampling our system is shocked and outraged that he would turn to the nation’s law-making body to make law on the matter of DACA.” The media freakout of the past 24 hours is being driven by the horrifying idea that the president is asking the legislature to deal with an Article I issue of national import. And it’s not even an issue on which congressional Republicans and Democrats are implacably opposed. This is the easiest compromise they’ll ever be asked to make. All Pelosi and Schumer need to do to get it done is give Ryan and McConnell some sort of fig leaf on security measures, ideally funding for the border wall. Virtually anything except a “clean” DREAM bill will make it happen.
Two: For all the abuse he’s about to take from the left, Trump very clearly doesn’t want to end DACA. He’s resisted the grumbling from border hawks for seven months about continuing the program and would probably go on resisting if not for the lawsuit threat from Republican state attorneys general. Key members of his own base, like the evangelical leaders who stood by him after his Charlottesville comments, are urging him not to pull the plug. Trump himself has spoken famously and repeatedly of showing “heart” towards DREAMers. Today the Times claims that he’s been agonizing for months over a “way out” of ending the program without angering the right wing too much. In fact, if you believe ABC, the plan that Jeff Sessions will announce this morning not only will keep DACA going for another six months, it’ll allow DACA enrollees to renew their status if they fall under a certain timetable:Delete
The administration won’t consider new applications for legal status dated after Sept. 5.
If you are not already protected by the program, you are out of luck, although applications filed before Tuesday that are pending will continue to be processed.
Anyone who has a DACA permit expiring between now and March 5, 2018, can apply for a two-year renewal. That application must be submitted by Oct. 5.
Some Dreamers, those with permits that expire between now and March 5, will be eligible for legal status for another two-plus years. For others, legal status ends as early as March 6.
He’s not “shutting down” DACA, he’s phasing it out. Some enrollees will end up being protected all the way to March 2020. Many more will be protected beyond the March 2018 deadline, with their enrollment lapsing sometime between then and March 2020. Next March is a drop-dead expiration date on legal status only for a relatively small number of DACA registrants. And even for those people, per ABC, “Officials say the priority for deportation will continue to be undocumented immigrants who have committed crimes.” DREAMers might begin to lose their legal right to remain in the U.S. next spring but Trump could issue an executive order emphasizing that they’re the absolute lowest priority for deportation. Maybe that’s what the mysterious senior official quoted by Politico meant. It’s hard to imagine President Alpha Male cravenly caving if Schumer called his bluff by backing off his threat to end the program, but there are various ways to “end it” that don’t really require ending it. Another possibility: So long as there’s some sort of activity in Congress regarding a DREAM bill, even rudimentary stuff like informal discussions between Dems and GOPers, Trump could point to that as progress worthy of suspending his termination of the program while “negotiations” play out. And if “negotiations” just so happen to continue through the rest of 2018, hey.
Besides, if he whiffs on ending the program on schedule in March, congressional Republicans will bring intense pressure on him afterwards to delay cancellation past the midterms. The longer he waits to pull the plug, the closer Election Day will be. It’s one thing to do it in March, when voters will have eight months to process (and maybe forget about) the end of DACA, it’s another to do it in, say, September, when it would land like a mortar in the GOP ranks. Either he does it next spring when he’s claiming he’ll do it or he chokes and doesn’t do it at all.
Mr Trump is not going to cut the economic ties to EIGHTY countries around the globe.
That is how many are providing "aid" to the NorKs.
He tells the world one thing, then does another.
Time and again.
Worldwide aid (a few $millions) and trade (a few $billions) with North Korea is insignificant. Trade with NK only reaches the $billions level with China and there it is only a few $billion. NK's biggest export is charcoal briquettes.
China is the only country that counts and I seem to recall its trade with the US amounts to around $650 billion. With no other considerations, China would kick NK to the curb without a thought. However, there are other considerations. China is unlikely to give in on NK or its current regime willingly, given the potential humanitarian crisis, the potential flood of immigrants to Russia, and the loss of the buffer state between them and the US, SK, and Japan. Therefore, pressing them on this becomes a bit of a crap shoot.
On US/China trade, the US would survive better than China. However, it's unlikely this situation wouldn't quickly expand beyond trade. Will Trump take that risk? As the rat pointed out, past history would suggest the answer is no.
See below ...
I see psycho ass is back.ReplyDelete
Having been up all night, time to get some sleep eye anyway.
The moral and physical coward of the Elephant Bar runs away ...
Time and again
b00bie's are afraid, very afraid, of rats.Delete
Psychotically cathected war criminal, dead beat dad, liar and anti-semiteReplyDelete
Lame brained potato sprout
B O R I N G
That's all you've got, "Draft Dodger" ?
Afraid to use your own sign-in ... proving my point ... actions typical of a coward
Mr Trump tweeted that any trade with North Korea equals "aid" to North Korea, one assumes he speaks for US.
Well, that is unless he doesn't.
At least 10 of the top 30 trading partners of the US do some level of business in North Korea.
Those 10 nations include five of the top 10 US trading partners, and two of those are in the top three.
Ending all trade with those nations would lead to the halting of roughly $1.6 trillion in total trade, according to 2016 data, and of more than $520 billion in US exports.
Other countries that would be affected by such a move include India, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, Chile, Brazil, France, Germany, Thailand, and Russia.
2015 data showed that those countries were importing goods such as silver, fork-lifts, and computers from North Korea while exporting pesticides, felt machinery, and sculptures.
India, Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson's favorite foreign country provides aid to North Korea.
Wonder if that reality will change his tune towards that country's regime ?
Trump tears up TPP. It isn't looking like they will reach agreement on changes to NAFTA. Trump is threatening the South Korean free trade deal. This does not bode well for the US economy.Delete
Another reliable source tells us ...Delete
Aside from China, a few other countries trade with North Korea as well. Pyongyang also did business with India, Pakistan, Russia, Thailand and the Philippines, according to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Observatory of Economic Complexity citing data as of 2015.
North Korea's top export destinations include China at $2.3 billion,
India at $97.8 million,
Pakistan at $43.1 million,
Burkina Faso at $32.8 million and a handful of other Asian countries at $26.7 million.
Imports largely come from China at $2.95 billion,
India at $108 million,
Russia at $78.2 million,
Thailand at $73.8 million
and the Philippines at $53.2 million.
RT, the Russian news network on Direct TV, said there were 80 countries that traded with North Korea.
One would assume they know.
You haven't put up any numbers that disagree with what I said above.
As for this,
Ending all trade with those nations would lead to the halting of roughly $1.6 trillion in total trade, according to 2016 data, and of more than $520 billion in US exports.
How many of the countries you mentioned other than China wouldn't give up a few $million in trade with NK in order to stay off the US hit list?
Let's face it, NK is unlikely to make any top 10 list of most popular4 countries any time soon.
I should have said the 'US shit list'.
WHO COULD HAVE KNOWN?ReplyDelete
CNBC - DACA deportations could cost US economy more than $400 billion
Trump's decision to remove of hundreds of thousands of young immigrants from the workforce could cost the economy hundreds of billions of dollars over the next 10 years.
The Trump administration announced the "wind down" over the next six months of the DACA program, which shields some 800,000 young immigrants from deportation.
Unless Congress acts to replace the Obama-era program with similar protections, those people would no longer be allowed to work in the U.S..
If we bring in another 10 million illegal dreamers he can reduce the national debt by 50% every ten years.
OUTFUCKINGSTANDING I SAY
... and here I thought they came here to do work real Americans did not want to do.ReplyDelete
no, they came as little kids who then grew up in the US and now appear to be very similar to other American kids their age.Delete
Which part of this is malleable?Delete
Equality before the law, also known as: equality under the law, equality in the eyes of the law, or legal equality, is the principle that establishes that each independent human being must be treated equally by the law and which all people are subject to the same laws of justice.
Which part is unclear?
Can Bernie Madoff's grand kids keep the money. It wasn't there fault that Bernie broke the law.
Can US kids who dream stay in the house that was foreclosed upon because of their parent's bad decisions?Delete
Will you take part in my life, my loveReplyDelete
That is my dream
Life is but a dream; it's what you make it
Always try to give; don't ever take it
Here we thought Europe was getting the shaft with the Million Dreamer March into Europe. Those lucky bastards.ReplyDelete
My God, the Euro must be flying.
The DACA program, created under former President Barack Obama by means of a memo issued by Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano in June 2012, says that in order to be eligible for DACA, a person must have come to this country before age 16, lived here continuously for five years, been present in the country at the time the memo was issued, not have committed a felony or a "significant" misdemeanor, and not have committed "multiple misdemeanor offenses."ReplyDelete
This means that certainly, some percentage of the 886,000 people who've been approved for DACA — and have been able to live without fear of deportation and work legally in the U.S. for a two-year period — have criminal records.
John Manely, an immigration lawyer in Los Angeles, instructs potential DACA applicants on his website to consult with an attorney if they have a criminal record. He points out that the federal government has emphasized that it has discretion when making decisions about DACA eligibility.
"It basically means that [the Department of Homeland Security, or DHS] can look at the totality of circumstances when analyzing a criminal record," he writes. "My interpretation is that DHS can look at the underlying conduct and not merely the conviction to deny a DACA application."
He goes on to write that "significant" misdemeanors, including domestic battery, would usually disqualify someone from DACA, but that a less serious domestic battery charge in California that does not involve violence and does not involve a sentence of more than 90 days would not count as a "significant" misdemeanor and therefore would not disqualify someone from DACA.
"A battery could be the slightest bit of force, or an unwanted touching. This should qualify as a non-significant misdemeanor in that it is not an offense of domestic violence and typically does not have a sentence of more than 90 days," he writes on his website.
Over the next ten years, will the marvelous dreamers bring $400 billion to the US economy?ReplyDelete
Over the next 50 years will they vote Democratic? Oh Yea, and they arrive No deposit - No-Return
My dream is a tax cut.ReplyDelete
Just read an article by some presidential historian bemoaning the decline of the US since the days of FDR. Near the end he was indulging in a bit of fantasy or wishful thinking if you like comparing the political demise of Trump to that of Richard Nixon. He had kind words for Jerry Ford who replaced Nixon but had this to say about Mike pence...
Donald Trump’s place in the White House, by contrast, would be taken by a strange, Tea Party-aligned, right-wing, anti-federal government, anti-immigrant amnesty, anti-abortion, anti-Medicare, anti-smoking regulation, anti-environmental protection, anti-federal social security, anti-campaign reform, pro-Iraq War, pro-mandatory minimum prison sentencing, Christian fundamentalist vice-president: Michael Richard Pence.
That was about the only insightful thing the guy had to say.
If we send nuclear weapons back to S. Korea, just think of them as 'gift packages' for Fatso Kim III.ReplyDelete
When Obama created DACA, Republicans were against it.ReplyDelete
Now Trump is President: Republicans are for it.
“It is a bad idea,” said James Acton, co-director of the nuclear policy program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He said it wouldn’t significantly strengthen nuclear deterrence and might spark protests in South Korea that weaken its U.S. alliance.ReplyDelete
If the Trump administration were to return U.S. nuclear weapons to the peninsula, they probably would be bombs for delivery by what the Pentagon calls “dual capable” aircraft. These include F-16 and F-15 fighter jets configured to perform either nuclear or conventional attack missions.
Security requirements to safely store and maintain the weapons also would require upgrades or additions to U.S. military facilities in South Korea.
Donald Trump’s place in the White House, by contrast, would be taken by a strange, Tea Party-aligned, right-wing, anti-federal government, anti-immigrant amnesty, anti-abortion, anti-Medicare, anti-smoking regulation, anti-environmental protection, anti-federal social security, anti-campaign reform, pro-Iraq War, pro-mandatory minimum prison sentencing, Christian fundamentalist vice-president: Michael Richard Pence.ReplyDelete
That was about the only insightful thing the guy had to say.
How would one describe the actual historical record of the real eight years of Barack Obama as opposed to the hypothetical musing of a British academic?
Shall we take a stroll from comma to comma, beginning with "strange" and ending with "vice-president", substituting the appropriate adjective?ReplyDelete
With Seoul expecting another North Korean missile test, South Korean warships conducted live-fire exercises at sea on Tuesday in a second straight day of military swagger from a nation still rattled by the North’s biggest-ever nuclear test.ReplyDelete
Russian President Vladimir Putin on Tuesday condemned North Korea’s nuclear test but also warned against using military force against the country, calling it a “road to nowhere” that could lead to a “global catastrophe.”
“Whipping up military hysteria makes absolutely no sense in this situation,” Putin said in a news conference in China. He stopped short of expressing willingness to impose more sanctions on North Korea, saying Moscow views them as “useless and ineffective.”
The author, Nigel Hamilton, wrote a book about the slickster himself, Wiley Willy Clinton. Hamilton's biography starts with the obvious restrained criticism of Clinton feeling his pain, but eventually Nigel slathers Willy's praises as thick as treacle in January.ReplyDelete
Nigel is a constant hack on c-span.Delete
FROM THE GUARDIANDelete
Bill Clinton: Mastering the Presidency
by Nigel Hamilton
In episode two of Nigel Hamilton's scintillating biography, our hero has left behind the hick town of Hope, Arkansas - and his humble roots - and travelled, with his lady, to Pennsylvania Avenue. It has not been a journey without incident (or other ladies strewn in various states of undress across his path). But Mrs C, as ever, has stood by her man - which is when she enjoys most traction over this slovenly, sheepish political genius. So here we are in the White House, sorting out office space. That's the Vice-President's room over there. Oh no it's not! says Hillary angrily. That's the office you said was mine, 'you motherfucker'. Whereupon, before stunned witnesses, the 42nd President of the United States calls his wife a 'fucking bitch'. Yes: we have transition ... The shambles begins.
Hamilton's speciality, with a few nods to psychoanalysis, lies not just in telling us what happened but why and how it happened. As he follows William Jefferson Clinton from straitened beginnings to glorious success, he tries to burrow inside the man, to think as he thought, to see through his eyes the decisions that had to be made. But, frankly, the first hundred rotten days were, and remain, an almost inexplicable mess.
Since we are speculating, let's substitute the Trumps for the Clintons in this little, not so private, tête-à-tête:Delete
So here we are in the White House, sorting out office space. That's the Vice-President's room over there. Oh no it's not! says Hillary angrily. That's the office you said was mine, 'you motherfucker'. Whereupon, before stunned witnesses,
Can you imagine?
... the 42nd President of the United States calls his wife a 'fucking bitch'.Delete
Oh my good lord, the first feminist couple no less!
Parents pull children from prestigious school after transgender ‘indoctrination’ in kindergartenReplyDelete
At the end of the last school year, a kindergarten teacher read her class two books espousing transgender ideology:
“I am Jazz,” by the transgender reality TV star Jazz Jennings, and
“Red: A Crayon’s Story,” about a blue crayon that identifies as a red crayon.
The books were read at the prompting of the parents of a male student in the class. At some point that day, the boy left the classroom to change into girls’ clothing, whereupon he was reintroduced to the class as a girl.
Parents found out about the incident only after their children came home from school and told them about it. Some parents reported that their children were upset by the demonstration and were afraid that they would turn into the opposite sex.
"I am a woman."ReplyDelete
Meghan Fredrick's declaration is unequivocal. But in the five years since she notified her bosses at California State Prison, Sacramento, often called New Folsom Prison, she say's the discrimination, name calling and harassment haven't stopped.
"I've filed complaints against sergeants for misgendering me, and lieutenants for misgendering me and captains for misgendering me," said Fredrick, a transgender corrections officer at the prison.
"I have a great heart for these folks we're talking about," Trump said. "I have a love for these people and hopefully now Congress will be able to help them and do it properly.ReplyDelete
And then Tuesday night, with a new tweet, Trump opened door to further executive action.
"Congress now has 6 months to legalize DACA (something the Obama Administration was unable to do). If they can't, I will revisit this issue!"
Texas is still recovering from Hurricane Harvey, but an even more powerful storm is already bearing down on the United States.ReplyDelete
This time, it's Florida that's in a state of emergency in anticipation of catastrophic winds and floods that could reach the state by this weekend.
Let's put this into context. Hurricanes are considered category five if they have winds of over 252 kilometres per hour.
According to America's National Hurricane Centre (NHC), Irma has already reached maximum sustained winds of up to 295 km/h, with even higher gusts.
In case you're wondering why there's no category six for it to go into, it's because the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale is designed to estimate property damage, and this is already the warning for category five storms:
Catastrophic damage will occur: A high percentage of framed homes will be destroyed, with total roof failure and wall collapse. Fallen trees and power poles will isolate residential areas. Power outages will last for weeks to possibly months. Most of the area will be uninhabitable for weeks or months.
Shall we take a stroll from comma to comma, beginning with "strange" and ending with "vice-president", substituting the appropriate adjective
If you'd like. We don't have to hold hands do we?
How about just an amalgamation of the 1st and last?Delete
Much less hand holding.
Targeted by Trump, Mexico Courts Putin's Russia, Xi's China
Faced with repeated rhetorical broadsides from the U.S. president and the possible scrapping of a decades-old trade agreement governing much of its international commerce, Mexico appears eager to bolster its relationships with key American rivals.
Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto joined Chinese President Xi Jinping, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, among other world leaders, at the site of an economic summit that wrapped up Tuesday in southeastern China. The summit coincided with the end Tuesday of a second round of trade discussions between the U.S., Mexico and Canada on retooling the North American Free Trade Agreement – a 1990s-era free trade deal that President Donald Trump has said he feels will "probably" need to be scrapped.
Separate meetings between Pena Nieto and both Putin and Xi – leaders of two countries with which the U.S. has tense international relationships – further enhance the optics of Mexico casting a wide net to potentially offset trade losses that would come from a destroyed NAFTA, while also shoring up diplomatic ties.
"Mexico wants to trade more with the world. Free trade is an essential part of their growth strategy. Of course, if NAFTA collapses, the Mexican economy could take a hit in the short term … risking macroeconomic stability," Dany Bahar, a fellow in the Global Economy and Development Program at The Brookings Institution, said during a podcast Friday. "But in the medium to long term, Mexico has plenty of opportunities to trade with other partners."
Pena Nieto joined leaders from Egypt, Guinea, Tajikistan and Thailand in Xiamen, China, as participants in an emerging markets dialogue that occurred alongside a summit of the BRICS nations: Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. Officials also were expected to discuss a possible "BRICS Plus" expansion plan that would open up the bloc to more countries...
I don't think these guys realize we have the greatest negotiator ever leading us
"We'll see how efficient the much-praised American judiciary is," Putin said.ReplyDelete
Indeed, Mexico appears to have found company in its grievances with the U.S. – and its push this week to get closer to Russia and China appears to be aimed at strengthening trade and commerce bridges as the U.S. threatens to burn those of its own. A Russian government release on the meeting between Pena Nieto and Putin stated the two presidents discussed issues of trade as well as "cooperating on foreign policy matters, including within various international organisations and on pressing regional issues."
"I would like to note that our countries do share long-standing relations," Pena Nieto told Putin, according to the readout, "and despite the geographical distance, we have been able to develop our relations in the spirit of friendship and good-heartedness."
Mexico and the US have a long tortured past. Bad relations and bad faith did not start with Trump.ReplyDelete
It is laughable and disingenuous to blame seven months of Trump for pushing Mexico into the arms of China and Russia in the past 15 years.ReplyDelete
Up until 1990 China-Latin America trade increased from almost negligible in 1990, to $10 billion in 2000. (George Herbert Walker Bush was President of the United States from 1989 to 1993)
From 2000, China- Latin American trade went from $10 billion to $270 billion in 2012. ( Bill Clinton 1993 - 2001)
After 2001 we get genius George W. Bush and are tortured with him for 8 years followed by more torture and incompetence with Barack Obama until 2017.
By 2017 ( under the foreign policy of Bush/Obama) the trade goes over $350 billion. Chinese investment was over $500 billion.
China uses its investment in Latin America as a source of jobs for Chinese workers. All of the infrastructure projects in Latin America that China finances come with a caveat: Chinese workers get the job. Many of them have since illegally crossed the Mexican border into the US.
While the US went on the Middle Eastern 18 year war,
China has become the most significant new economic actor in Latin America and the Caribbean.
None of that happened under Trump.
Untwist your knickers.
China extracts four things from Latin America, timber, minerals, oil and rent. China has not done anything to improve the lot of Latin American workers. Notice they do not go to China. Where do they go? By the way, they are followed by Chinese who would rather go to hell than go back to China.ReplyDelete
The US should have and could have had the greatest balanced trade relationship within the Americas.
There is nothing we need from anywhere that we can't get from the Aleutians to Terra del Fuego.
The US elites and Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama/Cinton led us through hell and financial ruin with Black Obama responsible for over half of all US govt debt and wars all over the African and Middle Eastern map, millions dead and wounded, incalculable financial damage, ISIS and millions of migrants in Europe with Islamic terror on three continents.
You brothers do stick together.Delete
Clearly, now that you bring it up, Obama was decidedly more on the African tribal side of politics than the American legal side.
I don't know of any American politician that played racial politics more than Barack Hussein , except maybe George Wallace. No president in my lifetime except Hussein and possibly Milhouse.Delete
Barack did go full ghetto when he panicked and realized Trump had a chance of winning. The always lovely Michelle and Barack couldn't get to the Philly hood often enough to play full blood to try and hold Pennsy.Delete
Yo, ya diggin that hole deeper and deeper masta!Delete
NEWS SEP 5 2017, 5:06 PM ETReplyDelete
Earthquake Swarm Continues to Rattle Idaho
by ASSOCIATED PRESS
BOISE, Idaho — More than 100 aftershocks have rattled southeastern Idaho since a 5.3 magnitude quake hit near the town of Soda Springs late last week, and experts say they could continue for another week or so.
The 5.3 quake hit was the second in the series, and it hit about 6 p.m. Saturday. There were no reports of injuries or damage, though officials say 17,000 people reported feeling the 5.3 quake from as far away as Salt Lake City, Utah.
Soda Springs resident JoAnna Ashley was in nearby Georgetown visiting her parents when the biggest earthquake hit. She grabbed onto the shaking refrigerator and watched as a bottle of tiki torch fuel perched on top wobbled toward the edge. Her kids, ages 5 and 8, grabbed onto Ashley during the shaking.
"They didn't scream, but were all, 'Momma, what's happening?' in that worried voice," Ashley said.
Image: Welcome To Idaho Sign.
Welcome to Idaho Sign. Education Images / UIG via Getty Images
The family spent the rest of the weekend camping, and they eventually started giggling whenever an aftershock would start rocking their camper.
"It kind of became commonplace. You'd be sitting there in the chairs, everyone talking, and all of a sudden you'd start to see the water shaking inside the bottle," she said.
By noon on Tuesday, more than 102 additional earthquakes had been recorded in the region by the U.S. Geological Survey, all at magnitudes of 4.5 or less.
They'll likely taper off by the end of next week, said John Bellini, a geophysicist with the U.S. Geological Survey in Golden, Colorado. "They can go on for days or weeks, and they'll get smaller in size and frequency," Bellini said.
Small magnitude earthquake swarms are common near the fault lines scattered throughout central and southeastern Idaho.
"Do we expect a larger one? No, we don't," said Bellini, though he noted that forecasting earthquake risk can be difficult.
"You don't have earthquakes every day like in California — they're feel-able just a few times a year in Idaho," he said. "It's harder to make generalizations like that in areas that don't have as much seismicity. Idaho has had larger earthquakes in the past, but how often they repeat is not known."
Idaho's biggest earthquake, a 6.9 temblor, was recorded on Oct. 28, 1983. The small towns of Challis and Mackay rocked for about a minute as the Lost River Fault beneath Borah Peak (Idaho's tallest mountain) pushed upward and the Thousand Springs Valley dropped.
Two schoolchildren were killed in that quake when a brick storefront collapsed. Aftershocks continued for more than a year — one reaching a magnitude of 5.8 — and the mountains and neighboring valley shifted nearly 14 feet apart in some places.
Ashley has experienced other earthquake swarms in the region, but she said the current one feels unusual because of the magnitude and frequency of the temblors.
"This is unprecedented for everybody. But if they say a bigger one is unlikely, then I think we'll all be fine," Ashley said. "The only concern is that we'll get a big enough one to do damage — most of us here don't have earthquake insurance."
I don't think these guys realize we have the greatest negotiator ever leading usReplyDelete
I think we get it.
It's difficult to negotiate with a devil with a nuclear weapon.Delete
What a hell of a situation.
"What a revoltin' situation"
Check out the excellent pic of Antifa thugs -ReplyDelete
TWO MAJOR ANTIFA GROUPS SPOUT NORTH KOREAN PROPAGANDA
And yet they operate unmolested.
September 6, 2017 Matthew Vadum
Two leading anti-Trump resistance groups, Refuse Fascism and the Workers World Party, are siding with the gulag-filled Stalinist hermit state of North Korea that has threatened to incinerate the American homeland with nuclear weapons, evidence suggests.
Both of these extreme-left organizations have organized demonstrations against the Trump administration that have turned violent, including those around Inauguration Day. Both groups are also part of the violent “Antifa” coalition of leftist groups that portray themselves as anti-fascist but embrace fascistic tactics like beating up political adversaries to intimidate them into silence.
Both groups are also spouting pro-North Korean propaganda talking points, and in at least one case, copying and pasting official North Korean statements into communiques.....
What will the Democrats do if/when Senator Robert Menendez (D) is convicted of the corruption charges he is now in court defending ?ReplyDelete
Will they vote to kick him out of the Senate ?
If he doesn't leave voluntarily ?
It takes a 2/3 vote to do that.
I imagine he will appeal his almost certain conviction so we won't have an answer for awhile.
Corruption Trial For Name-That-Party Senator Begins TomorrowReplyDelete
ED MORRISSEYPosted at 8:01 pm on September 5, 2017
When the New York Times first published its curtain-raiser on the corruption trial of Senator Robert Menendez, a curious detail was missing from its thirty-plus paragraphs. The omission caught the attention of conservatives, and even non-conservatives. Evan Smith, former editor of the progressive Texas Monthly, conceded that the information left out was “odd.” And that information was …
SEE ALSO: Poll: Heavy majority supports letting DREAMers stay and become legal residents, 76/15
The New York Times provoked mockery from conservatives on social media after the paper published a lengthy story on Sen. Bob Menendez’s (D-N.J.) corruption trial without providing his party affiliation on Tuesday. …
But the original 1,288-word story didn’t mention that Menendez is a Democrat at any point throughout the piece.....
Haven't read much about Menendez but I would bet he was in tight with Bill and Hill on some things.Delete
Good Grief !ReplyDelete
Miami-Dade, Florida Keys To Residents: Get Out
ED MORRISSEYPosted at 8:41 am on September 6, 2017
The news looks grim for Floridians as Hurricane Irma makes its way across the Caribbean. Forecasters now predict that Irma, possibly the most powerful storm ever recorded in the Atlantic, will take a sharp turn shortly right into Florida in the next few days. The news is especially bad for the Keys, which could wind up under water for the storm’s duration:
Hurricane Irma is expected to make a sharp turn toward Florida this weekend. Hurricane Wilma, 12 years ago, was the last big storm to hit Florida head-on. That Category 3 hurricane killed 23 people and caused around $20 billion in damage.While Irma is threatening all of the state, the low-lying islands of the Florida Keys could be swamped by a catastrophic storm surge. …
Florida Gov. Rick Scott also issued several urgent warnings Tuesday.
“Storm surge and extreme winds are the biggest concern right now,” Scott said.
Storm surge is especially a concern in the Keys, which are, on average, about six feet above sea level. The surge during Hurricane Irma has potential to be more than nine feet high.
“We could be looking at wave heights that could literally put the ocean over the islands,” Senterfitt warned....
One more idea on Korea -ReplyDelete
September 6, 2017
Make North Korea a Chinese Protectorate
By Bruce Walker
The Latest Jaw-Dropping Numbers From the Opioid CrisisReplyDelete
Overdose deaths rose by more than a fifth from 2015 to 2016.
JULIA LURIESEP. 6, 2017 6:00 AM
Michelle Holley of Fort Lauderdale holds a photograph of her daughter Jaime Holley, 19, who died of a heroin overdose in November 2016.Lynne Sladky/AP
About 64,000 Americans died from drug overdoses last year—a staggering 22 percent increase from the 52,404 in 2015—according to the first government estimate of drug deaths in 2016. Overdoses now kill more Americans than HIV did at its peak in 1995, and far more than guns or cars do today.
The numbers, released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, are provisional and will be updated monthly, according to the agency.
Fueling the rise in deaths is fentanyl, a synthetic opioid up to 100 times more potent than morphine, and fentanyl analogs, or slight tweaks on the fentanyl molecule. This has not always been the case: As the chart below shows, the drivers of the opioid crisis have changed from prescription painkillers to heroin, and then to fentanyl.
As Dan Ciccarone, a professor University of California-San Francisco School of Medicine, recently wrote in the International Journal of Drug Policy:
This is a triple epidemic with rising waves of deaths due to separate types of opioids each building on top of the prior wave. The first wave of prescription opioid mortality began in the 1990s. The second wave, due to heroin, began around 2010 with heroin-related overdose deaths tripling since then. Now synthetic opioid-related overdoses, including those due to illicitly manufactured fentanyl and fentanyl analogues, are causing the third wave with these overdose deaths doubling between 2013 and 2014 .
The epidemic is straining the capacity of morgues, emergency services, hospitals, and foster care systems. Largely because of prevalent drug use and overdose, the number of children in foster care nationwide increased by 30,000 between 2012 and 2015.
This spring, President Trump created a commission led by New Jersey Governor Chris Christie to advise the administration on how to respond to the epidemic, but the administration has yet to act on its recommendations.
Much of this stuff comes in via our southern border, another good reason to build a wall. It would at least help.Delete
Most of it, "Draft Dodger" Peterson is manufactured in the US, sold through pharmacies, legally.
It is the US pharmaceutical industry that has pushed thee opiods, not Mexicans.
Your bigotry is showing, once again
Jeez, the Glacier Chalet Resort Hotel in Glacier National Park has been burned down in a forest fire.ReplyDelete
If you haven't been to Glacier National Park, you haven't lived.
A good question -ReplyDelete
How Can Trump “Revisit” DACA In Six Months If It’s Unconstitutional?
ALLAHPUNDITPosted at 11:21 am on September 6, 2017
A related question: How can he continue the program for six more months if DACA is “an unconstitutional exercise of authority by the Executive Branch,” as Jeff Sessions claimed yesterday? Why not end it today?
Also related: Er, how could he have kept the program going for the past seven months if it’s been unconstitutional the whole time?....
It is not, nor was not, ever declared unConstitutional, "Draft Dodger".
The Supremes have not heard the case
Before you conclude what USA ought to do, read this -ReplyDelete
Korea Nuclear Test Furthers EMP Bomb
The official communist party newspaper, Rodong Sinmun, published a report Monday on “the EMP might of nuclear weapons,” outlining an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack produced by detonating a nuclear warhead in space.
“In general, the strong electromagnetic pulse generated from nuclear bomb explosions between 30 kilometers and 100 kilometers [18.6 miles and 62 miles] above the ground can severely impair electronic devices, electric machines, and electromagnetic grids, or destroy electric cables and safety devices,” said the article authored by Kim Songwon, dean of Kim Chaek University of Technology in Pyongyang.....
Unnecessarily disturded -ReplyDelete
UPDATE: Woman who forced Dali exhumation 'not his daughter'....DRUDGE
Shocking news for the Trumpettes ..
How do you get Republicans to grow a set of balls ...
Align with the Democrats.
President Trump confounded leaders from his own party on Wednesday by siding with Democrats on plans to fund the government and raise the debt ceiling, upending negotiations on a variety of crucial policy areas this fall and further damaging relationships with Republicans on Capitol Hill.
Trump made his position clear at a White House meeting with congressional leaders, agreeing with Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) by voicing support for a three-month bill to fund the government and raise the debt ceiling for the same amount of time.
“We had a very good meeting with Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer,” Trump told reporters ...
Funny stuff from our Reality TV Presidency.
“The president agreed with Sen. Schumer and Congresswoman Pelosi to do a three-month [funding extension] and a debt ceiling into December, and that’s what I will be offering based on the president’s decision, to the bill. And we’ll try to get 60 votes and move forward,” McConnell told reporters
The president’s decision came barely an hour after House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) panned the idea of a brief debt hike, accusing Democrats of “playing politics” with much needed aid for Hurricane Harvey victims by trying to create pressure for their agenda.
“Let’s just think about this: We’ve got all this devastation in Texas. We’ve got another unprecedented hurricane about to hit Florida, and they want to play politics with the debt ceiling?,” Ryan told reporters. “I think that’s ridiculous and disgraceful that they want to play politics with the debt ceiling at this moment when we have fellow citizens in need, to respond to these hurricanes so we do not strand them.”
Trump, apparently, disagreed.
You are cathecting again, Dead Beat Dad, Liar & War Criminal.ReplyDelete
Get some help through TMS here:
Deuce, why not put this arse in the Dunce Box for a couple of months.
It helped Ash.
Our thief and liar has not run off, yet.
It'll happen, soon.
It always does.
Now that Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson, the dumbest Trumpette on the world wide web has to bow to the will of Chock Schumer ...
His head just may explode
Law Professor: Don't Bash Trump Over DACA; What He Did Was ‘Paramount’ For Our System Of GovernmentReplyDelete
Matt Vespa Matt Vespa |Posted: Sep 06, 2017 1:15 PM
There’s a lot of hysteria going on after the Trump administration decided on a gradual phasing out of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. The program, which was created by executive order under Barack Obama, allows illegal aliens who entered the U.S. as minors to be shielded from deportation if they meet the criteria for a deferment. If they do, they’re eligible for work and study permits. The cost of an application fee is $495, and deferments need to be renewed every two years. In short, one could argue that this is a separation of powers issue, that the executive overreached and created law by decree, and that all DACA is just a way for illegal aliens to bribe the government not to enforce immigration law. Yet, Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, argues that all President Trump is doing is returning immigration law to Congress, which should have been done in the first place. He’s just reeling in Obama’s overreach by using the same method the former president used to enact it.
There is nothing controversial about how Trump went about terminating DACA:
President Trump’s expected announcement that he is terminating the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program has met with widespread criticism over the potential cost to roughly 800,000 children of undocumented parents. While I agree with the same concern over the status of these individuals, I do not agree with the same criticism of sending DACA back to Congress. DACA was unilaterally ordered by President Obama after Congress refused to approve the program.
Some of us criticized the action as a circumvention of the legislative branch that undermined our system of the separation of powers. But because they liked the result, Democratic members yielded their institutional power to the White House and helped create an unchecked presidency. With Trump using the same authority to pursue his own policies, Democratic leaders now want to radically expand the powers of the judiciary to block an uber presidency of their own making. They have become constitutional short sellers who dump core principles as soon as they raise political costs.
New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D-N.Y.) announced that they would challenge Trump’s decision in federal court. While they declined to give details of this extraordinary challenge, they would presumably be asking a court to say that Trump could not use the same power to rescind DACA that Obama used to create it. Since the power is the same, what remains is the merits of the policy, something courts have long avoided under the political question doctrine. They would have to say that undocumented individuals can be allowed to stay but not ordered to leave by executive order.
Trump’s decision will return this question to where it should have remained: Congress. Presidents do not have the option to go it alone in our system. Obama failed to pass DACA in Congress, and he was left with only two choices. He had to either compromise or change Congress. Sometimes when the country is politically divided, less gets done until we can reach a consensus. However, that consensus is found in the legislative process, not through presidential or judicial proclamations.
Where Obama used this authority to circumvent Congress on DACA, Trump is using it to return DACA to Congress. After failing to pass this program earlier, members may now be able to succeed by reaching a compromise with their Republican colleagues. Regardless of the outcome, however, the importance of re-establishing an equal legislative branch is paramount for our system and our future.Delete
Oh, and the hot takes on why Obama had to circumvent Congress were also highly entertaining. In short, folks were saying that the Republicans in Congress killed immigration deals, which meant that Obama just had to act. He just had to. Yeah, remind me where in the Constitution does it say that if the president doesn’t get his way, he should just hijack the powers of the legislature? Oh, that’s right it doesn’t exist.....
Gregg Jarrett: Trump, in DACA decision, restores constitutional sanity to immigration lawsDelete
By Gregg Jarrett Published September 05, 2017 Fox News
By executive fiat, President Obama granted amnesty to immigrants living illegally in the United States.
It was an unconstitutional act, to be sure. Obama had previously admitted he had no authority to end deportations of illegal aliens when he said, “The notion that somehow I can just change the laws unilaterally is just not true.” Then he went about doing it anyway, conjuring a new breadth of hypocrisy.
His successor, President Trump, is now taking the first step toward restoring sanity to the rule of law as it applies to the Constitution and immigration.
By rescinding the Obama-created Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (“DACA”) program that gave a deportation reprieve to illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. as children, Trump is returning legislative authority to the legislature. He is reinstating the separation of powers that are fundamental to our democracy.
Usurping Legislative Authority
Under the Constitution, congress is vested with writing laws and the president is charged with executing those laws. This is especially true when it comes to immigration.
At the end of the 19th century, the U.S. Supreme Court declared that congress has “plenary power” (meaning full and complete) to regulate immigration. Derived from Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, the doctrine is based on the concept that immigration is a question of national sovereignty, relating to a nation’s right to define its own borders and restrict entrance therein.
As the high court observed,“Over no conceivable subject is the legislative power of Congress more complete.” (Oceanic Stem Navigation Co. v. Stranahan, 214, U.S. 320)
Nevertheless, Obama decided to usurp this power by unilateral directive, unconstrained by established checks and balances. In so doing, he granted himself extra-constitutional authority and upset the carefully balanced separation of powers. He also subverted the nucleus of our constitutional design: the rule of law.
The only exception to the power of congress in dictating immigration is the 1952 statute in which the legislative branch transferred its authority to the president in cases involving national security. The president is specifically empowered to restrict foreigners from entering the country to protect the safety and security of Americans. This law formed the basis for President Trump’s travel ban.
In all other immigration matters, only congress is authorized to make laws which the president must enforce. ...
The poison gas used by Assad in Syria was gotten from N. Korea -ReplyDelete
FDR's outlook -
FDR’s ‘rattlesnake’ rule & the North Korean threat
By John Bolton September 5, 2017 | 7:31pm |
“When you see a rattlesnake poised to strike, you do not wait until he has struck before you crush him.” By these words in a Sept. 11, 1941, fireside chat, Franklin Roosevelt authorized US warships to fire first against Nazi naval vessels, which he called “the rattlesnakes of the Atlantic.”
Roosevelt’s order applied whenever German or Italian ships entered “waters of self-defense” necessary to protect the US, including those surrounding US outposts on Greenland and Iceland.
Uttered 60 years to the day before 9/11, and less than three months before Pearl Harbor, Roosevelt’s words still resonate. North Korea’s sixth nuclear test last weekend, along with its significantly increased ballistic-missile testing, establishes that Pyongyang is perilously close to being able to hit targets across the continental United States with nuclear warheads, perhaps thermonuclear ones.
The Nazi threat to US shipping, both normal commercial traffic and war supplies destined for Great Britain, was undeniably significant, and the Axis powers’ broader totalitarian threat was existential. Nonetheless, right up to Dec. 7, 1941, many American leaders urged caution to avoid provoking the Axis and thereby risking broader conflict. Pearl Harbor followed.
In his chat, Roosevelt observed that others had “refused to look the Nazi danger squarely in the eye until it actually had them by the throat.” We shouldn’t commit that mistake today. North Korea’s behavior, and its lasting desire to conquer the South, have created the present crisis.
Letting Kim Jong-un’s bizarre regime “have America by the throat,” subjecting us and our allies to perpetual nuclear extortion, is not an acceptable outcome.
We have endured 25 years of US diplomatic failure, with endless rounds of negotiations, presenting North Korea with the choice between economic incentives or sanctions. During this time, which certainly constitutes “not looking the danger squarely in the eye,” North Korea has repeatedly breached commitments to abandon its nuclear-weapons program, often made in return for handsome compensation.
Nonetheless, we hear echoes from Roosevelt’s day that “there is no acceptable military option” when it comes to Pyongyang. This means, as Susan Rice said recently, “we can, if we must, tolerate nuclear weapons in North Korea,” as we did with the Soviets in Cold War days. The US should not accept such counsels of despair, based on dangerously facile and wildly inaccurate historical analogies.
Why accept a future of unending nuclear blackmail by Pyongyang, whose governing logic is hardly that of Cold War Moscow, and which would entail not that era’s essentially bipolar standoff, but a far-more-dangerous world of nuclear multipolarity?
If Washington lets Kim retain his nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles, his regime will happily sell these materials and technologies to Iran, other rogue states or terrorist groups for the right price. This is another key difference from the Cold War; Moscow was substantially more worried about nuclear proliferation than Pyongyang now is.....
This comment has been removed by the author.Delete
Golly, no one ever went to test the gas that was supposed to used by the Assad regime.Delete
Now it is claimed that the 'gas' was supplied by NorK.
But when it is said that the NorKs would use such gas against Seoul, fired by any number of the 21,000 artillery pieces in range of Seoul, Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson does not respond to that very real threat.
Guess he just does not care about the 22 million people in Seoul, perhaps because they are not "White Folks" ?
Speaking to Sputnik, Russian military expert Andrey Koshkin said that it is no accident that the alleged use of chemical weapons by Assad's government remains high on Washington's agenda even though no evidence has been provided.
"The United States and the whole of the West are writing a sort of detective saga titled 'Assad and the Chemical Weapons'. This is a very profitable theme to constantly draw the world’s attention to the allegations that Bashar Assad is a very bad president," Koshkin said.
He added that "today we see the successes of the Syrian government troops which come against the background of the fourth anniversary of the Ghouta chemical attack which was most likely conducted by the Syrian opposition."
"The US sees these two aspects as a 'new page' to make the global community believe that Assad is a 'fearful regime' that allegedly uses chemical weapons against his own people. But these allegations have never been confirmed," Koshkin said.
Reacting to the incident, Washington, which has not presented any proof of the use of chemical weapons by Damascus, launched 59 cruise missiles at the Syrian governmental military airfield in Ash Sha'irat on April 7.
All of you guys who voted for Mr Trump, because he was not a Democrat, have been played for fools, by a lifelong Democrat that hijacked the GOP.
Trump sides with Democrats on fiscal issues, throwing Republican plans into chaos
Voted, through their Trump proxy, for Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi.
Reality Television, it just doesn't get better than this.
Opioid Maker Bent Rules to Get Drug to Patients, Senate Report Says
A representative of Insys Therapeutics Inc. misled a health insurer into approving payment for a prescription of the company’s addictive fentanyl painkiller, and 14 months later the woman who received the prescription was dead at age 32 from complications related to the drug, according to a report by a U.S. Senate committee ...
Barbuda's Prime Minister says 90 per cent of buildings and vehicles in the Caribbean nation have been destroyed by Hurricane Irma.ReplyDelete
Four people have reportedly been killed by Irma, one of the most powerful Atlantic storms in a century, which has howled past Puerto Rico after thrashing several smaller Caribbean islands with roof-ripping winds, drenching rains and pounding surf on a collision course with Florida.
Irma, with top sustained winds of 300 kilometres per hour, was on track to reach Florida on Saturday or Sunday, becoming the second major hurricane to hit the US mainland in as many weeks.
Businesses throughout San Juan were closed and many buildings were covered with storm shutters.
Occasional shoppers were out making final purchases of water, ice and food to prepare for what they feared could be several days without power.
VIDEO CLIPS of O'bozo saying he doesn't have the power to do executive amnesty -ReplyDelete
Remember All The Times Obama Said He Didn’t Have The Power To Rewrite Immigration Laws?
ALLAHPUNDIT Posted at 10:01 pm on September 6, 2017
We all remember. This is probably the second-biggest lie he told as president, after all. (Not quite “lie of the year” material but close.) Still, via Conn Carroll, it’s something to kick back and watch eight minutes of soundbites unfurl as a reminder of the sheer volume of rhetoric he devoted during his first term to warning his base that his hands were tied on executive amnesty.
Obama would say that there’s no inconsistency here. He claimed he didn’t have the power to change immigration law and he didn’t change it; he merely exercised “prosecutorial discretion” in placing DREAMers at the back of the line. But that would also be a lie even if he hadn’t taken the extra step of granting DREAMers work permits. If the president deems an enormous class of people effectively exempt from enforcement of a federal statute, then functionally he’s changed the law itself. Imagine, for instance, Trump exercising “prosecutorial discretion” by declaring that anyone with a net worth of $5 million or over won’t be prosecuted for tax evasion as a rule. Technically that’s not a change to the law. Functionally it’d mean the president had unilaterally changed the marginal tax rate for the very rich to zero.
SEE ALSO: Obamacare insurer pulls out of rural Virginia leaving coverage gaps
DACA was dubious in other ways. Obama introduced the program five months before the 2012 election; for all the sonorous rhetoric dedicated to it over the past 48 hours, ultimately it was a pander aimed at protecting O himself first and foremost. The rationale for executive action, that Congress wasn’t acting “fast enough,” fed the pernicious progressive belief that somehow the president acquires extra constitutional authority to act unilaterally if the legislature doesn’t do what he wants in an expeditious way. (We may see a reprise of that if Congress whiffs on the DREAM Act and Trump keeps DACA going next March.) And of course, writ large, DACA was just a band-aid on a wound that Democrats themselves had allowed to go untreated when they had the power to address it. Victor Davis Hanson:....
Obamacare insurer pulls out of rural Virginia leaving coverage gapsReplyDelete
JOHN SEXTON Sep 06, 2017 9:21 PM
“Optima also said it would be raising premiums by 81 percent…”
Less than optimal.Delete
A hurricane with winds in excess of 180 miles per hour is scary enough. But some corners of the Internet are stirring additional panic -- and attracting additional clicks -- by referring to an extreme hurricane category that doesn’t even exist.ReplyDelete
The Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale was developed by Herbert Saffir, an engineer in Coral Gables, Fla., and Robert Simpson, who headed the National Hurricane Center from 1967 to 1973. The scale used wind speeds as a guide to predict the extent of structural damage.
From time to time, there has been discussion of whether a new category -- Category 6 -- should be added to the scale. That decision would likely fall to the National Hurricane Center after discussions with scientists in the field, said Jill Trepanier, a hurricane specialist in the Louisiana State University department of geography and anthropology.