Imagine a President that is not impeached for IRS targeting, illegally running guns to Mexico, sending cash to our #1 enemy, allowing the sale of uranium to Russia, & using FISA to spy on opponents, but another is impeached for asking for an investigation into corruption. -Tim Donnelly
Imagine a president who can do all of those things and not be held accountable by the US Congress, Senate or the media.
Interesting times we live in, isn't it?
Up is down, right is wrong....
That is what makes this Impeachment all the more interesting, have we entered into a time in our (American) history where feelings and opinions trump fact and original intent of rules and laws?
Have we entered into a time where reality is what we are told it is, and not what our eyes and ears tells us it is?
How many believed or still believe the myriad charges against Trump related to the Russian Conspiracy hoax? How many still view CNN as a news source, rather than the pure political propaganda machine that it is?
How many choose to ignore the fact that Hunter and Joe took a flight to China on Air Force II, and ten days later Hunter's Investment Firm had a nice 1.5 Billion dollars delivered to it by a Chinese bank?
How many choose not to question why Joe and Hunter were involved in the Ukraine at all? This is the country from which Clinton also received millions in 'donations', and where Clinton & the CIA's efforts to overthrow the government culminated in the current annexation of Crimea by Russia.
It was only when Clinton's puppet regime was overthrown by the people who voted in Volodymyr Zelensky (a comedian no one outside the Ukraine took seriously) that Trump made the call to congratulate him, and ask him to look into all the corrupt activities of Clinton and Biden, that this even became an issue.
Up is down... right is wrong... and the President's off-the-cuff request to look into corrupt activities within the Ukraine by members of the former Administration is an impeachable offense.
I'm flabbergasted by the people who voted a president that talks about women like "grab them by the pussy" in the first place. Why did America have problems with Bill Clinton misusing his power for sexual pleasure and people don't bother about the misuse of power by Donald Trump for the same thing?
And you know what, Clinton and Trump did have a problem in regards to respecting women. One other thing they have in common was job performance. That might give you a hint to what many American's think about. With all the problems with his impeachment, Clinton won his second term, and most likely so will Trump.
I guess a populist as a leader was a long time in the make and didn’t happen overnight.
It shows that intelligence and know how are not that important anymore when it comes to the job of the presidency of the US. Lots of twitter followers, known from TV and a lot of money will be enough, A sad thing.
I have to bring in Hillary to make a point, otherwise, I wouldn't.
Hillary was well known, most of her notoriety came from scandal from the minute she came onto the political scene. Her scandals were all well televised. There is very little positive history she offered as a presidential candidate. She is very wealthy and accumulated wealth while in public office. Yet she won the popular vote... Intelligence, know-how, did you vote for Hillary?
Not sure how intelligent it would be to not give both these presidents credit for intelligence and now how. Both proved to be very good presidents when it came to the job of running the country. And in my book, that's what they were hired for.
Trump seems to average several scandals a week caused mainly by his mouth. We can't tell how dunb Trump actually is, because like every other facet of his life, he hides the truth, Like his taxes, his medical records, and his school records. But you don't wonder why he's so insistent in doing so, Shar.
Your complete lack of curiosity is something rare to behold.
I am in no way curious to see his school records. His taxes are private as yours and mine. His health records are all over the internet. He had his last physical at Walter Reed, and I completely trust that institution as being one of our best. He got a clean bill of health other than being overweight. And a slightly high Cholesterol. So, rest assured he is healthy for the time being..LOL
No surprise Shar, you believe everything he utters, as does his entire bunch of enablers. So why did he send a couple of strong arms to seize his medical records from his longtime doctor's files?
Spin that one for me! It seems you really do trust his words. In that case, I'm sorry for you.
Randy, you are going way back in the files for that one. Come on, time for some new bashing material. How about that great China deal or the Mexico/Canada, South Korea, Japan trade deals. All benefiting America. Hey, it's tax time, I know I am smiling, I got to keep more of my money. And the cherry on top I don't have to start taking cash from my 401k until I reach 72. I love this, and Trump provided this perk. Need I go on?
Hopefully, you will tune in tonight and have a listen to his State Of Union speech. I am so sure he will provide a new list of problems he will solve in his next 5 years.
It's an exciting time Shar!
I am looking forward to the State of the Union speech.
Me too... It should be a good one. He has plenty of accomplishments to talk about, and I am sure he will share his plans for the next 5 years. Yes, it's a very exciting time.
I am really hoping he doesn't get into the impeachment thing. It's not the time for it—in my opinion.
I totally agree with your sentiment. He should keep positive, talk about what he has accomplished, and what he intends to work on. It is a wonderful opportunity to talk about many of his accomplishments many have not heard about. He should take the high road. Does he have it in him? Well, we will soon find out.
I watched his State of the Union. I think it was a hellava speech. He did great.
Got a link? Got plenty on Youtube but I'm not sure which ones are complete and which are just snippets. Since you say it's great I'd like to check it out over dinner maybe.
Hi Brandon. Youtube probably has it by now. For me, the greatest thing about his speech is that he didn't talk about impeachment. But, as most State of the Union addresses are written to highlight an administration's accomplishments, (of course there have been years when other issues took top billing), I think this one was a great speech in that regard.
I was very impressed with the speech, he well represented his accomplishments, with more to come. I enjoyed seeing each of his guests, very touching... Oh, and I must also add Nancy did not disappoint. She certainly put on an act that was worthy of the center ring. All that was missing was a fiery ring and a pink poodle to jump through it.
Indeed he won't, Gus. He isn't completely without advisors who're much brighter than he.
Apparently he listened Randy. It was a great speech. No impeachment reference.
Well, it was State of the Union Address... not State of the Democrat's Stupidity.
I think the Democrats have done a wonderful job the last 12 months (on top of the previous years) convincing most sane Americans they don't belong anywhere near a leadership position in D.C. … not in the House, Senate, or Presidency.
I was hoping for a competent challenger to rise against Trump, instead we got a circus show, a car full of clowns. A half baked Impeachment effort that made them look delusional and out of touch with reality and most Americans. They can't even run a caucus competently and without charges of fraud and corruption coming out of it.
BTW - it was a nice uncouth touch by Nancy ripping up his speech for everyone to see just as he completed the address. It was a good way of reminding America what an ass she is.
And I suppose you thought is was cool of Donnie to refuse to shake her hand first, Ken. Do you consider him "couth"?
Pretty much everything Trump says is a lie. Why should I believe anything he says based on the evidence of his countless lies. Oh, and this:
Anyone who cheats at golf cheats at everything else.
As usual, you completely ignored my question.
And sure, he'll spin more promises and lies as usual.
"So why did he send a couple of strong arms to seize his medical records from his longtime doctor's files? I have no idea why the President took all his medical records from his long time doctor. I do know the doctor gave an interview in his office talking about Trump's private medical records. Sharing personal medical information, and medications he had to prescribe to a journalist from NBC. One's medical records are private, and a physician can lose their license to practice. there are penalties for HIPAA violations and they can be substantial, ranging from fines to criminal prosecution and imprisonment.
Do you feel Trump's 2019 physical that was done at Walter Reed is in someway not acceptable? I am not sure what you are getting at with your question.
You have no idea why he's hiding his scholastic and medical records, along with his tax returns? No clue whatsoever why he would hide them?
No, I certainly don't trust the word of a physician who can be threatened by Trump. Look how terrified the Republican members of Congress are of even crossing him by not doing their sworn duty in the impeachment trial.
Come on! You are making a funny I assume. If I were to assume why he hiding his taxes I would think one thing, he hardly has paid any... He has used every loophole that our IRS has provided to the very rich.
His school records, I can not come up with anything on that one.
His medical records sound as if you are very paranoid if you feel that a physician at Walter Reed is threatened by Trump. Do you really think Trump would threaten a physician? Did he also threaten lab techs, and persons that conduct any and all medical tests? The person that did his stress test or the lab tech that drew his blood. What about the person that processed his urinalysis? Please just tell me you are kidding me...
I was talking about presidents, not runner ups.
I said a couple of times that I'm not an American citizen. It saddens me to see that you only have a choice between two candidates who will become President. In my view, the US is not a democracy. As it is possible that you can become a president without having the majority of the votes. But that's a different topic again.
I would not have voted for Hillary either for Trump. As they are both corrupt rich kids coming from the powers that be families. Trump is worse in the respect that he is also a racist, sexist and does not actively condemn extreme rightwing actions. But I'm a bit tired of this discussion.
I think the US is tired of Trump too, all that twitter raving, The mistrust between Europe and the US has never been that high. The respect has never been that low. Maybe Americans don't care what foreign leaders and people think about their head of state. But I would be ashamed of my president if I was an American citizen. And this is not a conservative vs liberal thing. It's about respect. I did respect Bush sr. and Obama. Bush jr. and Bill Clinton less but Donald Trump is simply disrespectful, a sexist and a pathological liar with only self-interest. I can not have any respect for him. And I don't think he is good at his job either. (how many people are fired under reign? lost count)
I'm not a citizen in a European country, but I do know that the US economy is much stronger than that of all Europe. President Donald Trump fixed a number of bad trade deals for the United States around the world. Europe is also very dependent on the United States for military aid. Many of them are angry because he wants them to pay what they have agreed to pay for their defense. I say they should have done this without being called on it. See, the United States is now energy independent. We can export oil, that is not the case in Europe. Much of this success has happened during the time we have had President Donald Trump. So, what he did before he became president doesn't bother me. If his words hurt some emotionally weak individual, It doesn't bother me.
You would probably be surprised. And I was too, to be honest when I googled your claim about " US economy is much stronger than that of all Europe." I wanted to know how strong the US economy is vs. Europe.
Truth is different though: The largest economy is China, then Europe and then the US. (measured 2018).
But everything is debatable of course when you talk about figures...
source. (and I guess there are more, this one was the first I picked on Google.)
https://www.thebalance.com/world-s-larg … my-3306044
The US was for ages independent on its own oil riches. This has nothing to do with Trump and starts already in the Bush Sr. era. The war in Iraq was not to get more oil but to control the oil flow in the world.
International relations have to do with trust. There was trust between Europe and the US, independent if it was a Republican or Democrat government. Trump changed the whole relationship with the rest of the world. His idea of America first means, America isolated. And if you think that Trump's policies are better then Reagan, Bush or Obama, who had strong relationships with Europe and the UK. Well so be it.
"But everything is debatable of course when you talk about figures...source."
You are absolutely right.
Here is an article from Business insider claiming the US is the strongest economy in the world for 2019-20
https://www.businessinsider.in/top-10-l … 547252.cms
Actually, the United States wasn't completely energy independent until 2017. Prior to this it had the "potential" to become energy independent. President Donald Trump did away with a number of harmful regulations, got the keystone pipeline completed and more. Now the American energy companies are able to do what they do best and discover and harness energy sources. President Donald Trump brought back our coal industry, it really suffered under obama.
America first means we must take care of ourselves and our citizens before we can help anyone else. I believe every country should take are of itself and its citizens first.
Yes, I believe his policies are better than our previous president.
I read in an European newspaper how they compared the UK's new Prime Minister Boris Johnson to President Donald Trump. They are similar. It does lead to the question that if Europeans are deep down admiring President Donald Trump and really want a president like him.
It would be a good topic for a debate.
America first means we must take care of ourselves before we can help anyone else. - that's not more than fair. Every country looks first to its own interests. And this is nothing new. But in an ever so complicated world trade market, you can not work alone. The US needs China, it needs the EU. Just as China and the EU need the US.
Besides the world is not just Economics. With all the problems attached to the climate crisis we face as a world, countries have to work together. What President Trump did was highly irresponsible. Instead of talking with other nations about the problems he steps out of the Paris Climate Agreement. Without talking about an alternative or better plan. Instead, he is, as you say, promoting the coal industry and the oil industry.
The UK is for a couple of days, not an European country anymore. And Boris Johnson is in Europe (the continent as the English call it..) not really seen as an example of leadership.
He is indeed highly debatable like Donald Trump, and surely a good topic for debate.
"The UK is for a couple of days, not an European country anymore. And Boris Johnson is in Europe"
Again, you are absolutely right. I've had more than one person from the UK be offended when I said they were European. Interesting.
Here is a good video about the Paris Accord. It is a good reason why the United States left it and that was a good thing. I believe we need a solution that does not crash the economies of the world. There is no such solution.
The Paris agreement was not a very good one, absolutely true. Problem is that President Trump did not advocate for a stronger agreement. He had no alternative. If you don't agree with something you propose something better. For him better meant, not to be committed to any international regulations at all. It would have been good if he put lots of regulations through congress that would help to stop the climate crisis but he didn't. Just the opposite.
I think it was a stupid decision for the UK to step out of the European Union, As now it will be eaten up by stronger markets like the US, China, and the EU. From now on the UK will be a small country in a big world without the protection of the EU. It will be more dependent on the rules and regulations made by the big market players. They just gave their country away. Imagine what would happen when California went independent? The US will survive, but will California be better off? Making new trade deals with the US, China, and Europe on its own? When born in California you will need a green card to work in the US. when going on holiday asking for a Visa. Border control...etc. Life becomes suddenly very complicated when you want to deal with foreign countries.
I see your frustration with Brexit. It is a very emotional topic for many people in Europe.
California leaving the United States would be a bit different. If it tried to succeed from the union, the US military would get involved. It would be considered a national rebellion.
Can we agree the EU is made up of separate countries, with their own language, history, cultural and customs? I am impressed you had such countries as France and Germany and others in it considering their history. It's different than being a state in the United States. They had to declare their loyalty to the United States before they were admitted to the union.
When people talk about doing something for Climate Change, I honestly don't believe there is a real workable solution.
Every suggestion I hear would result that would crash the economies of the world. Nobody is going to sign on for that experience.
I've seen and known too many people who get very emotional about climate change, and their behavior contributes quite a bit of carbon dioxide to the environment. It makes them look hypocritical. It makes me wonder if they are really worried about the environment or more worried about getting attention for caring about the environment. Living a life that harms the environment but feeling good about themselves, because in their mind, they care about the environment. This is the case with many rich and famous people, as well as politicians, who claim to be concerned about the environment.
"This is the case with many rich and famous people who claim to be concerned about the environment."
Sounds as if you personally know many of these people, Mike?
I only named California as it is more or less the same economic power as the UK. (California's GDP - $2.747 trillion -- UK GDP - $2.625 trillion ---thanks Google)
Otherwise, the situation is completely different.
The Climate Change problem is in a way to big to handle. It is very difficult for politicians to make decisions that are not popular or are not beneficial directly for themselves.
The problem is that we have to change our way of living. The way we have learned all our lives. It is doable but tough. Like banning cigarettes on the streets and at work. It can be done by laws. But you fight against the oil industry, the meat industry, and thousands of other powerful industries. They can just like the cigaret industry's prolong decisions.
As you say, it's incredibly difficult to change the economic system. And people who live the good life don't want to give up their privileges.
My guess is that at some point the decisions will be made by society and not by politics. But probably it will be too late and we crossed a point of no return.
Peterstreep, you are again correct. I struggle to imagine a situation that would have India, China, Russia as well as the United States ramping down their economies because of global warming. I think, people being people, the leaders of the world would use it as a tool to gain economic advantage over the other.
Impeachment of Obama would have looked very different than the impeachment of Trump. Just due to there was a lot of factual evidence of some of the crimes you have listed. Although, it would all depend on a House that was willing to do their job collecting the solid factual evidence.
All done so blatantly, with such urgency (well except for that time Nancy had the Articles for an extended sleepover)
We have so much work to do in educating our children/young adults; bringing back civics into the classrooms, instilling in them a pride in what makes this Nation so special. They must learn it all; not just selective parts and pieces.
Then, on their own...they’ll know what it means to live in this great Republic and will recognize when they are being fed bs and when they’re not.
*shudder* Can you imagine what our liberal colleges and universities would teach in a civics class?
But yes, somehow we need to teach civics to our children. REAL civics, not the liberal spin. A healthy dose of the constitution would help as well.
REAL civics, REAL American History, a REAL in-depth study of the U.S. Constitution. Wouldn't that be something?
I can't think of much that would be better for our kids than a years worth of high school class on our Constitution. Might put an end to the constant litany of "That isn't Constitutional" on matters that aren't even addressed in the Constitution.
Right! It's apparent you guys don't understand the Constitution, especially oversight , and abuse of power. Does this mean you guys attended a Liberal college?
I have a petition circulating in my State, FLORIDA, for that very thing. A mandatory (1) year high school course (preferably freshmen year) with a 6-8 week introduction to the course, to be taught in middle school.
Knowing Florida like I do, they'll probably put the Bible as required reading as well.
And the Koran, the Talmud, the Book of Mormon, and every other religious cult. Right? Or just the Bible?
You brought up the Bible, I didn’t. But, since you did, the Mayflower Compact, was a religious document, which stated that our right to self-governance, is derived from God. The Mayflower Compact was instrumental in the wording of our Declaration of Independence. The Declaration of Independence was the promise; the Constitution, the fulfillment.
So, yes, I’d have no problem with the Bible utilized in the in-depth study of the U.S. Constitution.
As for the other books you’ve mentioned, they had nothing to do with our founding.
Yes, a country build on slavery, the genocide of Indians, Apartheid till the '50s. Remember Rosa Parks?
If you want to teach civics, show the reality.
Every country has it's moments of glory (first men on the moon etc.) and black pages. Both need to be addressed. You learn just as much from the nasty things in history as the things to be proud of.
If you want to fight racism, extreme ideologies. it's good to learn kids, where they originate.
I was shown the movie "The Wave" (1981) when I was at High School. A great educational film about the question "Why did Hitler get so much support?"
Why do people behave this way?
You could stand a course or two...or five.
It was not my intention to leave my comment with that one line. The United States of America wasn't built on slavery, but the United States of America sure as heck ended it! We can talk about the Native American and genocide, but only if you want to talk about Andrew Jackson. We can talk about the party of the KKK and we can talk about the anti-KKK party.
Our youth need to hear everything! I've never claimed that we are perfect. I don't wish to whitewash our history, tear down statues, revise history, the left is responsible for all of that. We need to teach it all, the good, the bad, the ugly.
You are not interested in reaching civics so much as spreading right-wing propaganda.
I am only interested in the truth, what are you interested in?
“I don’t want to whitewash....the left is responsible for all of that.” - a bit 1 dimensional don't you think. To easy.
The US was built on slavery, like most western countries. My country (Netherlands) sold slaves by the thousands to Americans,..who made tons of money because cheap labour. I learned that slaves constructed the railways or isn’t that true? We should not forget this part of history as tens of thousands suffered and died because of racism.
Today the western world uses cheap labour in Mexico, African countries, India etc. How do you think its possible to buy sneakers for $20.
It’s easy to talk about the great things. Like the moon landing and the invention of the contraception pill but I think we learn more from our mistakes then our triumphs.
Chattel slavery is as old as humanity. Its documented existence goes back thousands of years, and it is likely that it existed for thousands of years before recorded history. Native Americans had slaves. Black Americans were slaveholders prior to the Civil War. Slavery still exists today in some countries.
If the United States has a distinction in this matter, the distinction is that we were in the forefront in abolishing it. Thousands of white Americans fought and died in the Civil War to abolish slavery.
I would also say that the US has for many years had the distinction of doing more to combat racism and provide economic opportunity for black Americans than any other country in the world.
The US railroads were built primarily by Chinese immigrant labor. They were not slaves.
"Slavery" is a term that may have more than one definition, though the word generally refers to chattel slavery. One may expand the definition of slavery to include the exploitation of the labor of others by means of various legal and institutional structures established by governments, worldwide. This is a very big subject and would be deserving of your attention.
The US can claim some distinction in the matter of exploiting the labor of other nations. The chief mechanism for this is the dollar as the reserve currency. Yet this and the related systems and institutions also work serious hardship on Americans in quite a number of ways: the exporting of the US manufacturing base and its breadwinner jobs, and the debasement of the currency, to name two--but there are many more.
You can also make a pretty good argument that the availability of cheap labor in China, Mexico, India, Africa, etc., has quite a bit more to do with the lack of economic opportunity in these countries--caused mostly by their own corrupt governments. It is difficult to parse out who exactly is to blame for this. You can make a case that the corruption and economic stagnation of African countries is related to colonialism. But you can also make a pretty good case that many of these countries fare far worse after throwing off the yoke of colonialism and becoming self-governing--that, in other words, the lack of economic progress and opportunity has more than one source, and possibly more important sources than colonialism. For one thing, the average IQ in Africa is below 70. This is a great disadvantage.
My point is that many, or most, of the transgressions you are laying at the door of the US might better be laid at the door of humanity in the aggregate.
If these are matters to be taught in schools, it would be best to teach them in a meaningful context of human history as a whole.
How do you think American history is taught? Have you taken a history course recently?
I suspect that what you know of the teaching of American history comes from some propaganda report you saw on Fox News about how some stupid, undereducated, underpaid rogue teacher decided to go off-script and teach something personal. Just a guess.
But please, do provide your expertise on this subject.
Many parts of our history have been reduced to a paragraph in a textbook. As a result, a lot of assumptions have been made and a lot of those assumptions aren't based in truth. (ex: Many students are adults before they realize that Lincoln was a Republican or why the Republican Party came into existence)
I do not blame teachers for this though, as you have done here.
Like what? Do you have examples of how history is taught that is not true?
And Lincoln's Republican Party did not really resemble the current Republican Party, so you might need to read up on that. Every class I've ever taken about Lincoln and every book I've ever read mentions he was part of the Republican Party. Show me any textbook that doesn't mention it.
And most American history textbooks summarize issues because that is what textbooks do.
What parts of our history have been reduced to paragraphs in textbooks that you find objectionable or untrue?
Why would you say today’s Republican Party doesn’t resemble Lincoln’s?
Why in the world would you want to get that thesis from me? There are plenty of books on the subject. I'm more curious about your beef with American history and what is untrue and what textbooks you've read that push lies that bother you.
I will provide this: one reason they bear little resemblance is Lincoln was President in 1860, during the Civil War. Their ideological concerns were entirely different. Lincoln's Republican Party was significantly left of where Republicans are today.
Please define "real American history".
REAL - Actually existing as a thing or occurring in fact; not imagined or supposed.
We have a wonderful new trade agreement with Mexico, and funds that are going into America's coffers. Ultimately Mexico is helping pay for the wall. And helping out with immigration problems. Seems Trump has become good partners with Mexico.
Funds going into America's coffers are tariffs we are paying to the Farmers who's bankruptcy rate have skyrocketed, under the cad.
I suggest you have a look at the first part of the China deal. It's wonderful for farmers. Farmers have been given the shaft for many decades. Never was fair, they were the backbone of our Country. And deserved our support as well as fair a fair trading field. Trump has been working for the farmers. I give him great credit for even trying. No other present in many years gave them any consideration.
The deal commits China to buy $36 billion in U.S. farm products in 2020 and $43 billion in 2021
Given that there are slightly more than 2 million farms in the U.S., the 2019 bankruptcy data reveals a bankruptcy rate of approximately 2.95 bankruptcies per 10,000 farms, slightly below the rate of 2.99 filings per 10,000 farms in 2011. And this was a hard year for farmers, Trump help keep them afloat while he worked to bring them relief, and better times this year.
Randy, Trump is not as bad as you think. He has done some really wonderful things these last few years for American's that have been forgotten. It would not hurt to have an open mind in regards to his accomplishments.
I've farmed most of my life, Shar. It took Obama many years simply to undo what Dubya bequeathed him, whereas Trump inherited a growing economy from Obama. You act as though it was Trump who inherited a recession and built it up from the ground floor.
Did you vote for Dubya, I wonder? I'll bet you did as those who complained about Obama's terms were mainly former Dubya voters who took no responsibility for his bad choices.
It was us under Obama that diverted a recession. Any president would have done what Obama did. He did the right thing, but any president would have been forced to do what he did. And no Trump came into an economy that was starting to come back. I did not vote for Bush. My entire voting life I was a card-carrying Dem. Over the last 15 years, I became very disillusioned with the party. Not only the party but the government in general. It was Obama's 8 years that tipped me over the scale to vote for Trump.
I hope you can at least realize [erhaps farmers will benefit from the China deal. I am so hoping they do.
The deal isn't finalized yet, Shar. Trump postponed it until after the election to avoid further damage.
I'm pleased you're happy with the proverbial liar and his getting off as OJ did with the same attorney involved. Do you think OJ learned his lesson after his acquittal? He and Trump are both so arrogant and so alike in their feelings of immunity of the law, Trump will do the same as OJ.
Were you this happy when OJ was acquitted?
The first phase of the China trade deal was signed on Jan 15, 2020. Which included China to buy an additional $12.5 billion in US agricultural products in year one, and then $19.5 billion in year two. In exchange, the United States agreed to reduce tariffs on $120 billion in Chinese products from 15% to 7.5%. Those changes are set to take effect within 30 days of the pact's signing. There is a second pact to work on. It was reported that President Trump did raise the possibility that he "may postpone" phase two, until after the election. The second pact is expected to address issues like intellectual property, technology, state-owned enterprises, and industrial subsidies.
You don't agree that this China trade deal will benefit America?
I felt OJ was guilty, and there was lots of evidence that was available to convict. Although, the jury made the call, not sure how they came to such a conclusion. I was very disgusted with the verdict.
I'm more disgusted by the OJ Trump trial. Even though OJ murdered two people in cold blood, Trump has had a much greater impact on our country.
I only hope he learned something from this near escape, unlike OJ. Not holding my breath, however.
I'm hoping that Democrats learned they cannot subvert our constitution into destroying the balance of power in our government because they don't like a President. Do you think they have learned, or will they continue to try and run the White House as well as the House of Representatives?
I don't see that Trump has hurt the country in any respect. I do feel the Democratic party along with a biased media have done many citizens of this country great harm. I see nothing but good coming out of this White House. And I hope to see more.
"The deal commits China to buy $36 billion in U.S. farm products in 2020 and $43 billion in 2021"
A question comes to mind, and I don't ask because I already know the answer, I don't. What were our farms' sales to China before the tariff war started?
Good question, Gus. I hope the American farmers get the soybean market back. China went to South America and other countries for their soybean imports. Many farmers went bankrupt because of Trump's China tariffs. They won't be back.
"China imported $9.1 billion of U.S. farm produce in 2018 - mainly soybeans Sc1, dairy, sorghum and pork LHc1 - down from $19.5 billion in 2017, according to the American" --- Farm Bureau.
The China deal has China committing to buy $36 billion in U.S. farm products in 2020 and $43 billion in 2021.
This deal is good for the farmers. Hopefully, China keeps its word.
"China finished the fiscal year <2017> with shipments valued at $22 billion, followed closely by Canada at $20.4 billion." https://www.agriculture.com/news/crops/ … level-ever
Adding 12.5 B to that figure gives 34.5B. Not sure how you claim that it is less than before the tariff war, though - can you give figures showing any single year with over 34.5B in exports to China?
This is a great article about the U.S./China trade deal
https://thefederalist.com/2020/01/24/th … ed-states/
Damn abwilliams, I was trying to be lazy, but now I am forced to do some digging on my own.
That was a good pro-Trump, pro-deal link. But it was too good to accept on faith. Now I will have to look for a good anti-Trump, anti-deal article to determine how much faith to put in your article.
If your article is a true summary, then it looks like my question was answered.
Sorry I missed your comment...
"China imported $9.1 billion of U.S. farm produce in 2018 - mainly soybeans Sc1, dairy, sorghum and pork LHc1 - down from $19.5 billion in 2017, according to the American" --- Farm Bureau.
( I believe the president first tariffs on China started in July 2918)
The China deal has China committing to buy $36 billion in U.S. farm products in 2020 and $43 billion in 2021.
I've taken a lot more American history courses than you and that's what I've always been taught.
What is it that you think is being taught that is not real and where is it being taught?
Maybe you can give some examples of things that are being taught that are not real and what you think should be taught that is real.
That could be it, but she won't answer the question, most likely because she's just spewing some hyperbole she heard on Fox News. I've been asking for statements of fact and can't get a thing. Interesting that some people want "truth" and "facts" and can't provide any themselves.
If I had to look to news readers to assist in the forming of my opinions, we wouldn't disagree on everything.
The word I used was "real". I want history/civics kept real, without leftist/propagandist spin. And it has been spun, since around the time of the Vietnam war, when leftists infiltrated academia.
Translate: "I don't have a college degree but know more than any damned scholar."
No I did not go to a liberal college, I worked full time and paid my way as I went, attending a local community college (now, a State College) at night.
My husband started a business at 17, he ran it during the day and attended college courses at night.
We've had this conversation before. Remember?
How about you? What's your story?
Why are you and other leftists so down on this Country?
You just proved everything I've been saying. This is all uneducated, uninformed drivel.
What have you read that suggests leftists "infiltrated" academia?
You know who has infiltrated academia since the Vietnam War, among others? Women. Are they your leftists?
What specific historical events do you have issues with? What history have you read that supports your accusation? Did you arrive at this conclusion through the analysis of books you've read or by watching Fox and Friends?
And look, I know I'm giving you a really hard time, but truth be told, I have great respect for anyone who has started their own business and completely understand how they might not view government as their friend.
Crank, it's a known fact in academia, I've heard it from Teachers for years; talking to them eyeball to eyeball...no Fox around...just people, stay focused.
It makes sense, even these teachers have stated that a degree in education is the easiest to get and it was a no brainer for the conscientious objectors and antiwar activists to go into education. Leftist infiltrators educated many of the news readers you so love.
It's a known fact? They infiltrated academia? You've heard it from which teachers and where did they teach?
Again, the main gain made in education is by women. Are you saying women are leftists or shouldn't be in higher education?
You are completely wrong. And if you are right, it's for the wrong reasons. And again, you have no expertise in this area, but claim to have the truth. Maybe I should try to tell you how to run a small business? Would you follow my advice?
Everything you are saying is hearsay.
Explain to me how right-wingers infiltrated business and Wall St. Explain to me how right-wingers infiltrated our churches. How did that happen? How did right-wingers infiltrate the KKK?
Don't believe it, I really didn't expect you to.
BTW, with statements like you just made....you need to do some serious, deep-digging research about your precious Democratic Party.
You never have any specifics, just what you heard somewhere. And I don't know what my statements have to do with the Democratic Party, which I despise.
Again, you don't have any expertise in an area where you're trying to tell me something is a fact. You don't have any facts, just conjecture. You don't know anything about how higher education operates or how they hire. You just have somebody telling you something that you believe.
Again, are you concerned about how right-wingers have infiltrated our churches and businesses and Wall St.?
If you didn't understand what I was saying, I would believe education is overwhelmingly politically left just like I believe churches and Wall St. are overwhelmingly politically right, not because something was "infiltrated" but because it's the nature of the entity.
If you are quite finished, have you seen the article Mike shared?
Yep, Google has been a long-time friend of mine.
It seems that the Phase 1 deal is a good deal for agricultural exports. A commitment to significant increases in export purchases. So that answers my initial question.
Most of the criticisms I found were relative to what was not in the deal, (the stuff planned to be addressed in Phase 2), and whether China can be trusted to keep their commitments. I think the latter is a valid concern, but that the former is just an effort to slam the deal.
by JOC 2 years ago
Can you imagine how things might look if Hillary Clinton had won the presidency, and, two years later ?• Five of her campaign advisers had been convicted of crimes — one of them implicating her — and a sixth indicted.• A prosecutor documented numerous instances in which Clinton had interfered with...
by Ralph Schwartz 19 months ago
Throughout the last three years, we've seen political maneuvering like never before - the Democrats have spent the entire time trying to undo an election, find a crime where one didn't exist, slander and demonize the President, go after anyone who was associated with the Trump campaign or...
by Prakash RnP 2 years ago
' "If I ever got impeached, I think the market would crash, ... " ' ( Trump says 'everybody would be very poor' if he's impeached @ https://edition.cnn.com/2018/08/23/poli … index.html )He's a disgrace to America of today, isn't he ? The quoted remark reflects his admission of...
by Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago
Do you strongly contend that Trump will be.....IMPEACHED? Why? Why not?
by Mike Russo 4 years ago
What is it exactly that the FBI and the GOP are looking for with Hillary's emails? She has already been exonerated with the Benghazi investigations, but yet the GOP says it has enough material to keep the investigations going for another four years. She has admitted to carelessness in...
by Army Infantry Mom 10 years ago
Why did Clinton get impeached for getting a BJ (That didn't hurt America) However Obama seems to be untouchable when it comes to impeachment? I just don't get it !!!
Copyright © 2021 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of Maven Coalition, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|