The republican Nixon wanted to trade with China. The GOP is the party of unfair trade. Excepting Clinton and Obama, the Democratic party has largely been opposed to unfair trade. This explains why Dotard has to use executive action to impose his tariffs. As opposed to passing an official trade policy through Congress. Which would be the CORRECT way of fixing the trade problem.
The GOP tolerates Dotard's usurpation of their power because they got the tax cuts their oligarch donors demanded. As well as the judges. But they certainly have ZERO intention of helping Dotard on the trade front. Which is why there has been no discussion (at all) of Congressional action.
If Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren are elected president, they will work with a Democratic congress to change our trade policy. Then other nations will know we are serious and they have to change their behavior. Instead of simply waiting until Dotard leaves office - and then it's back to business as usual (under a president Biden, for example).
BTW, Dotard does what he is told in regards to tax cuts and judges because HE DOES NOT HAVE A CLUE. He has a small clue in regards to trade. But a little knowledge being dangerous is ABSOLUTELY true when it comes to Dotard and trade. I refer to his destruction of farmer's livelihoods and his poisoning of any future discussion on reforming trade.
The prospect of reforming trade would be more likely if Bernie Sanders were president NOW. President Bernie Sanders certainly would be making forward progress. Instead of the damage (both to our economy and to the possibility of REAL future trade reform) that Dotard is doing.
What refutes your thesis are the SECRET codiciles to the Pacific Trade Agreement. Congress was over-riding the US Constitution w/o the majorities needed to ratify Constitutional Amendments.
We can thank Julian Assange and Wikileaks for showing us just how corrupt the neoliberal UNIPARTY was.
Meanwhile, they shipped millions of US jobs to Europe and the turd world.
I don't support the TPP. I know there is bad stuff in it. That was the ONE link you gave, when there are other things you claim that I'd like to see some evidence of. republicans are for shipping jobs to the "turd world" (aka the third world). As I stated, trade with China was Nixon's doing. Ronald Reagan was very liberal on trade as well. republicans being the party of the wealthy and big corporations, they support outsourcing jobs to low wage countries. This is why Democrats have traditionally been against job killing free trade agreements.
I have no idea how you deduced that "Warren is a neoliberal Free Trader too", when Warren herself has said "For decades, the leaders of both parties preached the gospel that free trade was a rising tide that would lift all boats. Great rhetoric — except that the trade deals they negotiated mainly lifted the yachts — and threw millions of working Americans overboard to drown".
As per the Executive Director Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch, Lori Wallach (an expert and activist in global trade issues), "...the truth is Beto O'Rourke, Joe Biden, Pete Buttigieg, Kamala Harris - those guys are basically in the same place that Clinton and Obama were on trade. They're not good on trade. You have Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and Tim Ryan [who] have been real champions on trade." (see my 7/13/2019 post for more information and links).
Julian Assange is an asshole. He knows the source of the stolen DNC data was Russia, yet he helped the trumper right spread the false Seth Rich story. Assange supports Dotard because they're both White Supremacists.
There have been faction within the RNC that were against open trade. Pat Buchanan and the "paleocons" being the most prominent example.
But the DNC has it's "Clintonesque" neoliberal free traders that are today allied with the Never_Trumper Neocons. So all your "crap" about the DNC being pro-worker is exactly THAT.
And your wrong about Warren. She's a wolf in sheep's clothing. And I don't have a clue how Tim Ryan is. I'll have to read your link.
In your "alternative facts" world, things aren't "fucking nonsense" simply because you want them to be. Bernie Sanders is not a Communist. And Pat Buchanan is a racist as well. A well known racist, in fact. This is but one reason why I'll stick with the anti-Globalist faction of the Democratic party. There is no need to pair anti-Globalism and racism. US Citizen workers should all be on the same side, no matter their skin color.
And we should be welcoming to immigrants (who are here legally). Those who are here illegally deserve compassion, given the FACT that they were lured here by corporations who wanted them for their cheap labor. Note that the chicken processing factories that were recently raided under Dotard's ICE was to spread fear among workers only. Why there have been no prosecutions of the employers who hired anyone illegally. In this regard Dotard is like ALL republicans who came before him (as he is like all republican potuses who came before him on MOST issues).
You cram your racism down the throats of people and you expect them to just ignore it? Because you follow it with a false denial? THAT is what is stupid and YOU have naught but shit between YOUR ears if you think that's a strategy that is going to work. Dotard is a racist and everyone knows it.
Dotard is deranged. And there is something wrong (mentally) with everyone who supports him. BTW, the Democrats are the big tent party. You're the one with the purity standards. You were HAPPY that so many people left the republican party because of Dotard (Never trumpers).
Are you are a true believer in the "no collusion" lie or a true believer in the power of disinformation (and think it will win out in the end)? Either way it shows how full of rot your brain is.
The impeachment is coming. Democrats are accumulating the evidence, which could be overwhelming. If Deutsche bank records show Russia and Saudi backing of tRump loans Senate republicans may have no choice but to vote to convict. Will you stop laughing then, or do you have some medical/psychological issue, of which a symptom is frequent (very frequent) LOL-ing?
It "could be" overwhelming, but, to date, it's HARDLY been that.
The Deutsche Bank records have thus far shown NOTHING, no "oligarch co-signers". Until they do, you Democrats should hold your tongues in shame. You've been wagging them incessantly and incorrectly for going on three years.
If gathering the evidence on the criminal takes too long, the criminal should be allowed to go free? It will be "hardly" and "nothing" until it isn't. BTW, you've seen the Deutsche bank records? Do you work there? As far as I know Congressional Democrats have not seen them yet.
Democratic tongues have been "wagging" incessantly and CORRECTLY for going on three years.
1. Co-conspirator of "Individual One" sentenced and serving time for felony campaign finance law violations.
2. Muller report proves collusion and obstruction.
3. Serious and ongoing Constitutional Emoluments Clause Violations (the latest involving a trump property in Scotland).
4. (TBA) Deutsche bank records and IRS returns prove financial lies, misdeeds, and crimes.
magaturds such as yourself are the ones who should be to ashamed to defend the most corrupt president in our nation's history. Yet you continue to do so... so you can STUFF your "you Democrats should hold your tongues in shame". We will CONTINUE incessantly wagging our tongues about the criminal in the White House and there is NOTHING you can do about it!
The money laundering, campaign finance law breaking, and colluding with Russia the illegitimate president engaged in before he became president abso-f*cking-lutely CAN be cause for an Impeachment Investigation. Anyway, the Emollients violations (as I already pointed out) are ongoing.
High crimes and misdemeanors cannot be done by the "lowly" (who are NOT presidents).
from Wikipedia: The charge of high crimes and misdemeanors covers allegations of misconduct peculiar to officials, such as perjury of oath, abuse of authority, bribery, intimidation, misuse of assets, failure to supervise, dereliction of duty, unbecoming conduct, and refusal to obey a lawful order.
As for emoluments: A federal appeals court on Wednesday ordered the dismissal of claims alleging President Donald Trump’s continued interest in his private business entities is violating the U.S. Constitution’s check against foreign and domestic influence of the White House.
Dotard isn't president? That's good news. When is he going to vacate the White House?
Your Wikipedia quote does not say the "high crimes and misdemeanors" have to be committed after becoming president, only that the charge is applicable to someone who IS an official. According to your stupidity, the federal campaign finance law violations can't be included in the articles of impeachment (because he wasn't president yet when those crimes were committed). But they WILL be.
Also, NEW emoluments violations can certainly result in another lawsuit. Not that it matters, given the fact that impeachment is a political process, not a legal one. So the court case you reference does not (in ANY WAY) preclude emoluments violations being included in the impeachment articles. They WILL be.
A case dismissed based on "standing" does not demonstrate "the invalidity of the charges". I Googled the words you cut and pasted and found the following...
Quote: The three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit said attorneys general for Maryland and the District of Columbia do not have "standing" to pursue claims that Trump is violating the Constitution's emoluments clause. [end quote].
Blumenthal v. Trump is currently pending. A dismissal based on standing is not the last word on SHIT. And corruptly using the office of the presidency to make money (in violation of the emoluments clause) is not "the very definition of America".
"Standing" = this court declines to rule. Find another defendant and try again.
40 comments:
The republican Nixon wanted to trade with China. The GOP is the party of unfair trade. Excepting Clinton and Obama, the Democratic party has largely been opposed to unfair trade. This explains why Dotard has to use executive action to impose his tariffs. As opposed to passing an official trade policy through Congress. Which would be the CORRECT way of fixing the trade problem.
The GOP tolerates Dotard's usurpation of their power because they got the tax cuts their oligarch donors demanded. As well as the judges. But they certainly have ZERO intention of helping Dotard on the trade front. Which is why there has been no discussion (at all) of Congressional action.
If Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren are elected president, they will work with a Democratic congress to change our trade policy. Then other nations will know we are serious and they have to change their behavior. Instead of simply waiting until Dotard leaves office - and then it's back to business as usual (under a president Biden, for example).
BTW, Dotard does what he is told in regards to tax cuts and judges because HE DOES NOT HAVE A CLUE. He has a small clue in regards to trade. But a little knowledge being dangerous is ABSOLUTELY true when it comes to Dotard and trade. I refer to his destruction of farmer's livelihoods and his poisoning of any future discussion on reforming trade.
The prospect of reforming trade would be more likely if Bernie Sanders were president NOW. President Bernie Sanders certainly would be making forward progress. Instead of the damage (both to our economy and to the possibility of REAL future trade reform) that Dotard is doing.
What refutes your thesis are the SECRET codiciles to the Pacific Trade Agreement. Congress was over-riding the US Constitution w/o the majorities needed to ratify Constitutional Amendments.
We can thank Julian Assange and Wikileaks for showing us just how corrupt the neoliberal UNIPARTY was.
Meanwhile, they shipped millions of US jobs to Europe and the turd world.
ps - Warren is a neoliberal Free Trader too.
Yes Bernie would change things. But turning America into Venezuela isn't a very good idea.
This is why you need to bone up on Trade Agreements.
pps- Liz Warren is only in the race to ensure that Bernie loses to Biden.
I don't support the TPP. I know there is bad stuff in it. That was the ONE link you gave, when there are other things you claim that I'd like to see some evidence of. republicans are for shipping jobs to the "turd world" (aka the third world). As I stated, trade with China was Nixon's doing. Ronald Reagan was very liberal on trade as well. republicans being the party of the wealthy and big corporations, they support outsourcing jobs to low wage countries. This is why Democrats have traditionally been against job killing free trade agreements.
I have no idea how you deduced that "Warren is a neoliberal Free Trader too", when Warren herself has said "For decades, the leaders of both parties preached the gospel that free trade was a rising tide that would lift all boats. Great rhetoric — except that the trade deals they negotiated mainly lifted the yachts — and threw millions of working Americans overboard to drown".
As per the Executive Director Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch, Lori Wallach (an expert and activist in global trade issues), "...the truth is Beto O'Rourke, Joe Biden, Pete Buttigieg, Kamala Harris - those guys are basically in the same place that Clinton and Obama were on trade. They're not good on trade. You have Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and Tim Ryan [who] have been real champions on trade." (see my 7/13/2019 post for more information and links).
Julian Assange is an asshole. He knows the source of the stolen DNC data was Russia, yet he helped the trumper right spread the false Seth Rich story. Assange supports Dotard because they're both White Supremacists.
There have been faction within the RNC that were against open trade. Pat Buchanan and the "paleocons" being the most prominent example.
But the DNC has it's "Clintonesque" neoliberal free traders that are today allied with the Never_Trumper Neocons. So all your "crap" about the DNC being pro-worker is exactly THAT.
And your wrong about Warren. She's a wolf in sheep's clothing. And I don't have a clue how Tim Ryan is. I'll have to read your link.
Nope, nothing on Ryan there.
I agree that Bernie's different, but only because he's a stupid old-style commie.... proponent of a failed bureaucratic state run economy.
Assange is Alt-Right?
That's fucking nonsense.
In your "alternative facts" world, things aren't "fucking nonsense" simply because you want them to be. Bernie Sanders is not a Communist. And Pat Buchanan is a racist as well. A well known racist, in fact. This is but one reason why I'll stick with the anti-Globalist faction of the Democratic party. There is no need to pair anti-Globalism and racism. US Citizen workers should all be on the same side, no matter their skin color.
And we should be welcoming to immigrants (who are here legally). Those who are here illegally deserve compassion, given the FACT that they were lured here by corporations who wanted them for their cheap labor. Note that the chicken processing factories that were recently raided under Dotard's ICE was to spread fear among workers only. Why there have been no prosecutions of the employers who hired anyone illegally. In this regard Dotard is like ALL republicans who came before him (as he is like all republican potuses who came before him on MOST issues).
Racism, blah, blah, blah. You've got nought but sh*t between your ears if you believe ANY of THAT.
Why don't you go blog someplace else. You've been stuck on stupid longer than anyone with a brain has a right.
You cram your racism down the throats of people and you expect them to just ignore it? Because you follow it with a false denial? THAT is what is stupid and YOU have naught but shit between YOUR ears if you think that's a strategy that is going to work. Dotard is a racist and everyone knows it.
And Bernie's a Commie. There. We're even.
I told the truth about Dotard and you told a lie about Bernie. That is far from "even".
Only in your deranged mind.
Shouldn't you be out purging racists from the Democrat Party that don't meet your ideological purity standards?
We could use another 100 million Republicans.
Dotard is deranged. And there is something wrong (mentally) with everyone who supports him. BTW, the Democrats are the big tent party. You're the one with the purity standards. You were HAPPY that so many people left the republican party because of Dotard (Never trumpers).
I'll be happier once Trump has purged the Deep State of Neo-Libs. It'll be easy enough for even Bernie to govern, then. :)
A neo-lib is someone who thinks American political candidates shouldn't collude with foreign powers to "win" elections? Who knew?
That you could still believe THAT shows just how much rot your brain can't shake.
muh-Russia stole Miss Popular Vote's "election"! BWAH!
Are you are a true believer in the "no collusion" lie or a true believer in the power of disinformation (and think it will win out in the end)? Either way it shows how full of rot your brain is.
If there HAD been collusion, wouldn't Trump have been impeached? lol!
The impeachment is coming. Democrats are accumulating the evidence, which could be overwhelming. If Deutsche bank records show Russia and Saudi backing of tRump loans Senate republicans may have no choice but to vote to convict. Will you stop laughing then, or do you have some medical/psychological issue, of which a symptom is frequent (very frequent) LOL-ing?
It "could be" overwhelming, but, to date, it's HARDLY been that.
The Deutsche Bank records have thus far shown NOTHING, no "oligarch co-signers". Until they do, you Democrats should hold your tongues in shame. You've been wagging them incessantly and incorrectly for going on three years.
If gathering the evidence on the criminal takes too long, the criminal should be allowed to go free? It will be "hardly" and "nothing" until it isn't. BTW, you've seen the Deutsche bank records? Do you work there? As far as I know Congressional Democrats have not seen them yet.
Democratic tongues have been "wagging" incessantly and CORRECTLY for going on three years.
1. Co-conspirator of "Individual One" sentenced and serving time for felony campaign finance law violations.
2. Muller report proves collusion and obstruction.
3. Serious and ongoing Constitutional Emoluments Clause Violations (the latest involving a trump property in Scotland).
4. (TBA) Deutsche bank records and IRS returns prove financial lies, misdeeds, and crimes.
magaturds such as yourself are the ones who should be to ashamed to defend the most corrupt president in our nation's history. Yet you continue to do so... so you can STUFF your "you Democrats should hold your tongues in shame". We will CONTINUE incessantly wagging our tongues about the criminal in the White House and there is NOTHING you can do about it!
What the President did BEFORE he became President can hardly be "cause" for an Impeachment Investigation. Democrats, heal thyselves!
The money laundering, campaign finance law breaking, and colluding with Russia the illegitimate president engaged in before he became president abso-f*cking-lutely CAN be cause for an Impeachment Investigation. Anyway, the Emollients violations (as I already pointed out) are ongoing.
*Emoluments*
High crimes and misdemeanors cannot be done by the "lowly" (who are NOT presidents).
from Wikipedia: The charge of high crimes and misdemeanors covers allegations of misconduct peculiar to officials, such as perjury of oath, abuse of authority, bribery, intimidation, misuse of assets, failure to supervise, dereliction of duty, unbecoming conduct, and refusal to obey a lawful order.
As for emoluments: A federal appeals court on Wednesday ordered the dismissal of claims alleging President Donald Trump’s continued interest in his private business entities is violating the U.S. Constitution’s check against foreign and domestic influence of the White House.
:)
Dotard isn't president? That's good news. When is he going to vacate the White House?
Your Wikipedia quote does not say the "high crimes and misdemeanors" have to be committed after becoming president, only that the charge is applicable to someone who IS an official. According to your stupidity, the federal campaign finance law violations can't be included in the articles of impeachment (because he wasn't president yet when those crimes were committed). But they WILL be.
Also, NEW emoluments violations can certainly result in another lawsuit. Not that it matters, given the fact that impeachment is a political process, not a legal one. So the court case you reference does not (in ANY WAY) preclude emoluments violations being included in the impeachment articles. They WILL be.
...the courts having demonstrated the invalidity of the charges. :)
Making money, in America at least, is no "emolument". It IS the very definition of America.
A case dismissed based on "standing" does not demonstrate "the invalidity of the charges". I Googled the words you cut and pasted and found the following...
Quote: The three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit said attorneys general for Maryland and the District of Columbia do not have "standing" to pursue claims that Trump is violating the Constitution's emoluments clause. [end quote].
Blumenthal v. Trump is currently pending. A dismissal based on standing is not the last word on SHIT. And corruptly using the office of the presidency to make money (in violation of the emoluments clause) is not "the very definition of America".
"Standing" = this court declines to rule. Find another defendant and try again.
Nobody is being forced to stay at the Trump Plaza. :)
Post a Comment