THIS IS REAL……AND CANADIAN GOVERNMENT KNOWS IT. TAKING THEIR GUNS…THEN WHAT? THE FIRST COMMIE CHINESE MILITARY BODY CROSSING INTO U.S. NEEDS TO BE POPPED……
STAY ALERT AMERICA, BIDEN’S CHINA……WANTS YOU!
Yes a victory despite of the Democrats.
The Democrats could not make an announcement that Mexico, Canada and the United States have agreed on some changes to the USMCA Trade Agreement (they’ll sign agreement today) with out taking political jabs at Trump. The Democrats HAD to point out that Trump’s administration presented a flawed USMCA agreement to them and it WAS the Democrats who perfected the agreement they now have. Basically the Democrats are taking full credit for the USMCA Trade Agreement.
Lets make something clear here. It was Donald Trump who initiated this trade agreement with Mexico and Canada, replacing a horrible agreement called NAFTA (from the Clinton administration) in the first place. At the time Democrats heavily criticized Trump for negotiating a new trade agreement with Mexico and Canada. Now they want everyone to know or believe that it was the Democrats that improved this flawed trade proposal from Trump, that the Democrats made it better. Of course they want us to believe it is better now because they held it on the shelf for nearly a year “perfecting” it. It will be voted on next week.
It would have been “BETTER” for all 3 countries if this agreement had been acted upon months ago. Interestingly, Pelosi makes the announcement that they have an agreement on USMCA an hour after they announced two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump. The articles: 1) abuse of power 2) obstruction of Congress. No article on “bribery”? Were these two announcements stacked one after the other minutes apart to show Americans that the Democrats can walk and chew gum. No, no politics here!
The Agreement is the result of a 2017–2018 renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) by its member states, which informally agreed to the terms on September 30, 2018, and formally on October 1. The USMCA was signed by United States President Donald Trump, Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto, and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on November 30, 2018 as a side event of the 2018 G20 Summit in Buenos Aires. Each country’s legislature still must ratify the agreement.
Negotiations “focused largely on auto exports, steel and aluminum tariffs, and the dairy, egg, and poultry markets. One provision “prevents any party from passing laws that restrict the cross-border flow of data”. Compared to NAFTA, USMCA increases environmental and labour regulations, and incentivizes more domestic production of cars and trucks. The agreement also provides updated intellectual property protections, gives the United States more access to Canada’s dairy market, imposes a quota for Canadian and Mexican automotive production, and increases the duty free limit for Canadians who buy U.S. goods online from $20 to $150.
Because the Left, the Democrats on this Judiciary Committee’s act II of impeachment believe We the People are too stupid to understand the Constitution. Therefore, the impeachment process must be explained to us. Not DUE PROCESS mind you, but the Left’s process.
Keep in mind today, the four “witnesses” are extreme (extremely liberal) Left Law professors. Which means we will get “their” interpretations and opinions, which also follows a path of their “political” ideals. They will and as we speak are giving us more than a lecture on the constitution. Three are stating they what they want us to believe as factual. That isn’t what they should be doing, but it is what Chairman Nadler hoped for. They are there solely for the purpose of convincing us that Trump is guilty and should be impeached. The problem is a fair process, due process has not been followed. Guess what folks, what they these liberal professors aren’t telling you is that it is unconstitutional to hold an impeachment hearing ‘WITHOUT DUE PROCESS’. These hearings handed off from corrupt Adam Schiff to Jerrod Nadler continue to be a railroad job to impeachment and is one of the greatest scandals in the history of our nation.
You do not get any more liberal than university professors. They are tainting students with their leftist ideas, ideals and policies they wish. They are part of the problem. They lecture us on the constitution, but what they really want to do is throw it out the window and re-write it, or abolish it. What we are hearing today is propaganda from the extreme left. These law professors are as far left as you would think it can get. The gauge still moves.
What a hoax. What a scam. While this crap is allowed to continue, a trade act between Canada, the U.S. and Mexico sits on Nancy Pelosi’s filthy desk. The creation of thousands of jobs are being held up by Pelosi because she is more focused on getting rid of Trump. Key phrase “jobs are being held up”. We are having impeachment hearings, while nothing gets done, jobs are held up, yet they are impeaching because Trump held up foreign aid to the Ukraine. Congress has put a foreign nation and an impeachment hoax before the American, Canadian and Mexican people. Jobs and welfare of our people can wait, so the Democrats can remove Trump from the White House and won’t be around for re-election. Lets make it clear right here. In Nov. of 2020 Donald Trump will be on the ballot for the presidency.
Nadler is hoping we accept these political law professors testimony to justify their impeachment decision. They hope we are convinced the Dems are doing the right thing. They don’t explain the holes. These professors can only state what the constitution says, however, that is based on how they wish to also interpret. These liberal law professors do not particularly believe in the constitution, especially in it entirety. They as I said, would love to amend the entire document.
They want us to believe and accept the “opinions” of these professors and that they are sacred, because they believe they are!
One last point: It doesn’t get anymore liberal than Prof. Pamela S. Karlan from Stanford University, a Trump hater.
Speaking at a regular news conference, Lopez Obrador said he was encouraged that U.S. Democratic lawmakers were concerned about the working conditions of Mexican workers following a visit by a U.S. congressional delegation to Mexico this week. “There’s agreement, and I took the opportunity to send Mrs Pelosi a letter explaining that it’s in the […]Mexican president urges Pelosi to get USMCA trade deal approved | Can She Legislate or Just Obstruct? — Daily Browse
Please read the above link on the Keystone Pipeline donors to the Clinton Foundation. Hillary silent on the matter, because it is a current issue of the present administration, so she should not comment. Wow, I guess until Obama is out of the White House, Hillary the candidate won’t have anything to say about anything. How is that going to work Hillary? I guess you won’t participate in any debates either?
The truth is, Hillary has a position, she favors the pipeline. She and the foundation have had millions contributed to them, from proponents of the pipeline, mostly from out of Canada. Foreign donations accepted. Hillary and Bill have had many of their speeches funded by Keystone. But, Hillary can’t be straight about it.
It must be difficult when so many foreign countries and companies own a piece of your ass.
No one in the history of this country has an individual/couple profited by selling out the interests of this country like the Clinton’s. We the people see little to no benefits, the Clinton’s rake it all in.
A blogger friend living along the Mexican border recently ask me, why we have a wall on the southern but not the northern border? I did not have an immediate response, and have yet to answer until now.
Border walls and illegal immigration go together like soup and a sandwich. Can you be opposed to the existence of the wall and at the same time favor enforcing immigration laws? I do believe in enforcing laws against illegals. I am not opposed to immigration, done lawfully. I do not want criminal gangs walking across the border into the U.S. Its difficult avoiding contradictory comments or opinions, even a having it both ways attitude, but I will try.
I don’t like the wall(s), I don’t know anyone that really does, other than for its purpose. The wall certainly doesn’t add any landscaping beauty, they are ugly.
Just the sight of the wall is symbolic, with a different meaning from each side, on one it is a keep out sign on the other some security. Does the wall represent the character of those it is meant to keep out or those it is meant to protect, or both? It may be a double-edged sword.
The wall does without saying, keep most of those that would like to enter the U.S. illegally……. out, apparently until now. What the walls don’t do is solve our differences. Not only does the existence of the wall further divide the U.S. from Mexico and the rest of South America, they now create division among ourselves. We are a divided nation, especially when it comes to immigration. The division is only growing wider.
There is no point bringing up the in a perfect world scenario, I’ll leave that for my dreams. There will always be undesirables we want to keep out, not have to deal with. I don’t have all the answers for the ideal situation………….no need for the wall. If people didn’t break the laws, there would be no need for a wall. I was going to keep the perfect world scenario out, but I also said I would try not to double talk; its difficult. It’s a difficult problem. I also have avoided answering why there is no northern wall.
I guess Canada could have built a wall when Americans of draft age were fleeing north to avoid Vietnam in protest of the war and the draft. I can’t put this on Canada though, they too are having immigration issues but not as grave as the U.S. I haven’t heard of much interest in South Americans wanting to migrate to Canada.
So, why a southern wall and no northern? I’m not researching this on Google, this wasn’t meant to be answered that way, its more about getting a feel for the attitude and personality of a nation type of question. It is a good question and to be honest, not one I had thought of until my new friend presented it to me. The simple answer would be, I’m not in charge of that, so I don’t know. He has me thinking, searching for an answer.
It is a difficult question to answer, even possibly without offending someone. Maybe history plays a part…….our history with Mexico….wounds are passed on through generations, trusts that are lost may never be regained. Do we stereotype a certain people and remain prejudice? I’m still searching here……..do we just say our doors have been open to you long enough, we can’t take anymore and a wall slams the door in our Southern neighbor’s face. While up north, there is no wall. Canadians can enter the U.S. and pretty much go unnoticed, therefore free from stereotyping. In my life time I have witnessed very little poor relations with Canada. Also, you do not see a large wave of Canadians coming to America to stay, like we do the Southern border. To most Americans I would say the North does not appear to be a social threat as does the South; and I know that is stereotyping to certain degree maybe more than I want to admit. I also know, Mexican gangs and the cartel shooting at border agents, doesn’t help.
I have tried to answer, from just what I know; maybe I am learning I don’t know very much about our borders, the North and South. Hopefully, someday a better solution comes our way.