#trans pacific partnership

[hindbodes]

The below organizations participated in the Stop the Secrecy campaign (click here for a full list of supporting organizations): They have endorsed the following statement: "The TPP threatens to censor your Internet, kill jobs, undermine environmental safeguards, and remove your democratic rights." *Your organization can sign on here.

Screenshot from January, 2016.

[liberalsarecool]

I owe my Trump-supporting friends an apology. I’ve been critical of the Trump presidency and am still exhausted from the experience.

But to be fair, President Trump wasn’t that bad, other than:

• when he incited an insurrection against the government,

• mismanaged a pandemic that killed over a million Americans

• separated children from their families

• lost those children in the bureaucracy

• tear-gassed peaceful protesters on Lafayette Square so he could hold a photo op holding a Bible in front of a church

• tried to block all Muslims from entering the country

• got impeached

• got impeached again

• had the worst jobs record of any president in modern history

• pressured Ukraine to dig dirt on Joe Biden

• fired the FBI director for investigating his ties to Russia

• bragged about firing the FBI director on TV

• took Vladimir Putin’s word over the US intelligence community

• diverted military funding to build his wall

• caused the longest government shutdown in US history

• called Black Lives Matter a “symbol of hate”

• lied nearly 40,000 times

• banned transgender people from serving in the military

• ejected reporters from the White House briefing room who asked tough questions

• vetoed the defense funding bill because it renamed military bases named for Confederate soldiers

• refused to release his tax returns

• increased the national debt by nearly $8 trillion

• had three of the highest annual trade deficits in U.S. history

• called veterans and soldiers who died in combat losers and suckers

• coddled the leader of Saudi Arabia after he ordered the execution and dismembering of a US-based journalist

• refused to concede the 2020 election

• hired his unqualified daughter and son-in-law to work in the White House

• walked out of an interview with Lesley Stahl

• called neo-Nazis “very fine people”

• suggested that people should inject bleach into their bodies to fight COVID

• abandoned our allies the Kurds to Turkey

• pushed through massive tax cuts for the wealthiest but balked at helping working Americans

• incited anti-lockdown protestors in several states at the height of the pandemic

• withdrew the US from the Paris climate accords

• withdrew the US from the Iranian nuclear deal

• withdrew the US from the Trans Pacific Partnership which was designed to block China’s advances

• insulted his own Cabinet members on Twitter

• pushed the leader of Montenegro out of the way during a photo op

• failed to reiterate US commitment to defending NATO allies

• called Haiti and African nations “shithole” countries

• called the city of Baltimore the “worst in the nation”

• claimed that he single-handedly brought back the phrase “Merry Christmas” even though it hadn’t gone anywhere

• forced his Cabinet members to praise him publicly like some cult leader

• believed he should be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize

• berated and belittled his hand-picked Attorney General when he recused himself from the Russia probe

• suggested the US should buy Greenland

• colluded with Mitch McConnell to push through federal judges and two Supreme Court justices after supporting efforts to prevent his predecessor from appointing judges

• repeatedly called the media “enemies of the people”

• claimed that if we tested fewer people for COVID we’d have fewer cases

• violated the emoluments clause

• thought that Nambia was a country

• told Bob Woodward in private that the coronavirus was a big deal but then downplayed it in public

• called his exceedingly faithful vice president a “p---y” for following the Constitution

• nearly got us into a war with Iran after threatening them by tweet

• nominated a corrupt head of the EPA

• nominated a corrupt head of HHS

• nominated a corrupt head of the Interior Department

• nominated a corrupt head of the USDA

• praised dictators and authoritarians around the world while criticizing allies

• refused to allow the presidential transition to begin

• insulted war hero John McCain – even after his death

• spent an obscene amount of time playing golf after criticizing Barack Obama for playing (far less) golf while president

• falsely claimed that he won the 2016 popular vote

• called the Muslim mayor of London a “stone cold loser”

• falsely claimed that he turned down being Time’s Man of the Year

• considered firing special counsel Robert Mueller on several occasions

• mocked wearing face masks to guard against transmitting COVID

• locked Congress out of its constitutional duty to confirm Cabinet officials by hiring acting ones

• used a racist dog whistle by calling COVID the “China virus”

• hired and associated with numerous shady figures that were eventually convicted of federal offenses including his campaign manager and national security adviser

• pardoned several of his shady associates

• gave the Presidential Medal of Freedom to two congressman who amplified his batshit crazy conspiracy theories

• got into telephone fight with the leader of Australia(!)

• had a Secretary of State who called him a moron

• forced his press secretary to claim without merit that his was the largest inauguration crowd in history

• botched the COVID vaccine rollout

• tweeted so much dangerous propaganda that Twitter eventually banned him

• charged the Secret Service jacked-up rates at his properties

• constantly interrupted Joe Biden in their first presidential debate

• claimed that COVID would “magically” disappear

• called a U.S. Senator “Pocahontas”

• used his Twitter account to blast Nordstrom when it stopped selling Ivanka’s merchandise

• opened up millions of pristine federal lands to development and drilling

• got into a losing tariff war with China that forced US taxpayers to bail out farmers

• claimed that his losing tariff war was a win for the US

• ignored or didn’t even take part in daily intelligence briefings

• blew off honoring American war dead in France because it was raining

• redesigned Air Force One to look like the Trump Shuttle

• got played by Kim Jung Un and his “love letters”

• threatened to go after social media companies in clear violation of the Constitution

• botched the response to Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico

• threw paper towels at Puerto Ricans when he finally visited them

• pressured the governor and secretary of state of Georgia to “find” him votes

• thought that the Virgin islands had a President

• drew on a map with a Sharpie to justify his inaccurate tweet that Alabama was threatened by a hurricane

• allowed White House staff to use personal email accounts for official businesses after blasting Hillary Clinton for doing the same thing

• rolled back regulations that protected the public from mercury and asbestos

• pushed regulators to waste time studying snake-oil remedies for COVID

• rolled back regulations that stopped coal companies from dumping waste into rivers

• held blatant campaign rallies at the White House

• tried to take away millions of Americans’ health insurance because the law was named for a Black man

• refused to attend his successors’ inauguration

• nominated the worst Education Secretary in history

• threatened judges who didn’t do what he wanted

• attacked Dr. Anthony Fauci

• promised that Mexico would pay for the wall (it didn’t)

• allowed political hacks to overrule government scientists on major reports on climate change and other issues

• struggled navigating a ramp after claiming his opponent was feeble

• called an African-American Congresswoman “low IQ”

• threatened to withhold federal aid from states and cities with Democratic leaders

• went ahead with rallies filled with maskless supporters in the middle of a pandemic

• claimed that legitimate investigations of his wrongdoing were “witch hunts,”

• seemed to demonstrate a belief that there were airports during the American Revolution

• demanded “total loyalty” from the FBI director

• praised a conspiracy theory that Democrats are Satanic pedophiles

• completely gutted the Voice of America

• placed a political hack in charge of the Postal Service

• claimed without evidence that the Obama administration bugged Trump Tower

• suggested that the US should allow more people from places like Norway into the country

• suggested that COVID wasn’t that bad because he recovered with the help of top government doctors and treatments not available to the public

• overturned energy conservation standards that even industry supported

• reduced the number of refugees the US accepts

• insulted various members of Congress and the media with infantile nicknames

• gave Rush Limbaugh a Presidential medal of Freedom at the State of the Union address

• named as head of federal personnel a 29-year old who’d previously been fired from the White House for allegations of financial improprieties

• eliminated the White House office of pandemic response

• used soldiers as campaign props

• fired any advisor who made the mistake of disagreeing with him

• demanded the Pentagon throw him a Soviet-style military parade

• hired a shit ton of white nationalists

• politicized the civil service

• did absolutely nothing after Russia hacked the U.S. government

• falsely said the Boy Scouts called him to say his bizarre Jamboree speech was the best speech ever given to the Scouts

• claimed that Black people would overrun the suburbs if Biden won

• insulted reporters of color

• insulted women reporters

• insulted women reporters of color

• suggested he was fine with China’s oppression of the Uighurs

• attacked the Supreme Court when it ruled against him

• summoned Pennsylvania state legislative leaders to the White House to pressure them to overturn the election

• spent countless hours every day watching Fox News

• refused to allow his administration to comply with Congressional subpoenas

• hired Rudy Giuliani as his lawyer

• tried to punish Amazon because the Jeff Bezos-owned Washington Post wrote negative stories about him

• acted as if the Attorney General of the United States was his personal attorney

• attempted to get the federal government to defend him in a libel lawsuit from a women who accused him of sexual assault

• held private meetings with Vladimir Putin without staff present

• didn’t disclose his private meetings with Vladimir Putin so that the US had to find out via Russian media

• stopped holding press briefings for months at a time

• “ordered” US companies to leave China even though he has no such power

• led a political party that couldn’t even be bothered to draft a policy platform

• claimed preposterously that Article II of the Constitution gave him absolute powers

• tried to pressure the U.K. to hold the British Open at his golf course

• suggested that the government nuke hurricanes

• suggested that wind turbines cause cancer

• said that he had a special aptitude for science

• fired the head of election cyber security after he said that the 2020 election was secure

• blurted out classified information to Russian officials

• tried to force the G7 to hold their meeting at his failing golf resort in Florida

• fired the acting attorney general when she refused to go along with his unconstitutional Muslim travel ban

• hired Stephen Miller

• openly discussed national security issues in the dining room at Mar-a-Lago where everyone could hear them

• interfered with plans to relocate the FBI because a new development there might compete with his hotel

• abandoned Iraqi refugees who’d helped the U.S. during the war

• tried to get Russia back into the G7

• held a COVID super spreader event in the Rose Garden

• seemed to believe that Frederick Douglass is still alive

• lost 60 election fraud cases in court including before judges he had nominated

• falsely claimed that factories were reopening when they weren’t

• shamelessly exploited terror attacks in Europe to justify his anti-immigrant policies

• still hasn’t come up with a healthcare plan

• still hasn’t come up with an infrastructure plan despite repeated “Infrastructure Weeks"

• forced Secret Service agents to drive him around Walter Reed while contagious with COVID

• told the Proud Boys to “stand back and stand by”

• fucked up the Census

• withdrew the U.S. from the World Health Organization in the middle of a pandemic

• did so few of his duties that his press staff were forced to state on his daily schedule “President Trump will work from early in the morning until late in the evening. He will make many calls and have many meetings,” allowed his staff to repeatedly violate the Hatch Act

• seemed not to know that Abraham Lincoln was a Republican

• stood before sacred CIA wall of heroes and bragged about his election win

• constantly claimed he was treated worse than any president which presumably includes four that were assassinated and his predecessor whose legitimacy and birthplace were challenged by a racist reality TV show star named Donald Trump

• claimed Andrew Jackson could’ve stopped the Civil War even though he died 16 years before it happened

• said that any opinion poll showing him behind was fake

• claimed that other countries laughed at us before he became president when several world leaders were literally laughing at him

• claimed that the military was out of ammunition before he became President

• created a commission to whitewash American history

• retweeted anti-Islam videos from one of the most racist people in Britain

• claimed ludicrously that the Pulse nightclub shooting wouldn’t have happened if someone there had a gun even though there was an armed security guard there

• hired a senior staffer who cited the non-existent Bowling Green Massacre as a reason to ban Muslims

• had a press secretary who claimed that Nazi Germany never used chemical weapons even though every sane human being knows they used gas to kill millions of Jews and others

• bilked the Secret Service for higher than market rates when they had to stay at Trump properties

• apparently sold pardons on his way out of the White House

• stripped protective status from 59,000 Haitians

• falsely claimed Biden wanted to defund the police

• said that the head of the CDC didn’t know what he was talking about

• tried to rescind protection from DREAMers

• gave himself an A+ for his handling of the pandemic

• tried to start a boycott of Goodyear tires due to an Internet hoax

• said U.S. rates of COVID would be lower if you didn’t count blue states

• deported U.S. veterans who served their country but were undocumented

• claimed he did more for African Americans than any president since Lincoln

• touted a “super-duper” secret “hydrosonic” missile which may or may not be a new “hypersonic” missile or may not exist at all

• retweeted a gif calling Biden a pedophile

• forced through security clearances for his family

• suggested that police officers should rough up suspects

• suggested that Biden was on performance-enhancing drugs

• tried to stop transgender students from being able to use school bathrooms in line with their gender

• suggested the US not accept COVID patients from a cruise ship because it would make US numbers look higher

• nominated a climate change skeptic to chair the committee advising the White House on environmental policy

• retweeted a video doctored to look like Biden had played a song called “Fuck tha Police” at a campaign event

• hugged a disturbingly large number of U.S. flags

• accused Democrats of “treason” for not applauding his State of the Union address

• claimed that the FBI failed to capture the Parkland school shooter because they were “spending too much time” on Russia

• mocked the testimony of Dr Christine Blasey Ford when she accused Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault

• obsessed over low-flow toilets

• ordered the re-release of more COVID vaccines when there weren’t any to release

• called for the construction of a bizarre garden of heroes with statutes of famous dead Americans as well as at least one Canadian (Alex Trebek)

• hijacked Washington’s July 4th celebrations to give a partisan speech

• took advice from the MyPillow guy

• claimed that migrants seeking a better life in the US were dangerous caravans of drug dealers and rapists

• said nothing when Vladimir Putin poisoned a leading opposition figure

• never seemed to heed the advice of his wife’s “Be Best” campaign

• falsely claimed that mail-in voting is fraudulent

• announced a precipitous withdrawal of troops from Syria which not only handed Russia and ISIS a win but also prompted his defense secretary to resign in protest

• insulted the leader of Canada

• insulted the leader of France

• insulted the leader of Britain

• insulted the leader of Germany

• insulted the leader of Sweden (Sweden!!)

• falsely claimed credit for getting NATO members to increase their share of dues

• blew off two Asia summits even though they were held virtually

• continued lying about spending lots of time at Ground Zero with 9/11 responders,

• said that the Japanese would sit back and watch their “Sony televisions” if the US were ever attacked

• left a NATO summit early in a huff

• stared directly into an eclipse even though everyone over the age of five knows not to do that

• called himself a very stable genius despite significant evidence to the contrary

• refused to commit to a peaceful transfer of power and kept his promise

And a whole bunch of other things I can’t remember .

[xtruss]

Vietnam ‘Has No Interest’ in Joining ‘US-Orchestrated’ Anti-China Coalition

US and Vietnam national flags fly on a street light in Hanoi on September 10, 2023, ahead of US President Joe Biden's visit to Vietnam. Sputnik International, © AFP 2023/Nhac Nguyen

As part of an effort to woo Vietnam to serve its geopolitical interests, US President Joe Biden is arriving in Hanoi on Sunday, nurturing hopes of signing a “comprehensive strategic partnership agreement” with the dynamically developing Southeast Asian nation.

Washington is eyeing “swaying Vietnam to its side,” for it believes the US can use Hanoi as “a counterbalance to China’s influence in South East Asia,” Professor Anna Malindog-Uy, Vice President of the Manila-based think tank Asian Century Philippines Strategic Studies Institute (ACPh), told Sputnik.

However, there is no indication that Vietnam has any interest in joining the “US-orchestrated” coalition against China, consisting of Washington’s allies, Anna Malindog-Uy added.

US President Joe Biden’s meeting with Vietnamese General Secretary Nguyen Phu Trong and other key leaders in Hanoi on September 10 comes as part of the latest page in the US’ Indo-Pacific playbook. Suffice it to recall how Biden hosted Philippine President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. in Washington in May, then welcomed Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi at the White House in June, and threw open the doors of his Camp David presidential retreat to his Japanese and South Korean counterparts mid-August.

The trilateral summit with South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol and Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida is regarded by pundits talking to Sputnik as part of an effort blatantly tailored to forge a new alliance against China and the People’s Democratic Republic of Korea (DPRK). The US has also been posturing in the Indo-Pacific region by holding a slew of large military drills with Japan, Australia, and the Philippines in the South China Sea in recent days.

Vietnam is vital to US foreign policy for several political, economic, and geopolitical reasons, the professor underscored. Firstly, the “strategic geographical location” of Vietnam in Southeast Asia (SEA) is important to the US. Vietnam boasts “close contiguity and nearness to major global shipping lines like the South China Sea (SCS), and it has a border with China,” Anna Malindog-Uy stressed.

Geopolitically Strategic Location

Vietnam plays a crucial role in US foreign policy due to its "strategic location, economic significance, and potential to counterbalance China," according to Professor Anna Malindog-Uy.

“American companies have invested in Vietnam, and trade relations have expanded. Since Vietnam is a member of ASEAN, a regional body that is important to the US, especially on issues such as economic integration, security, and diplomacy, this makes Vietnam a vital partner of the US in advancing its interests in the Indo-Pacific region. The US is likewise keen on upgrading its relations with Vietnam from a 'comprehensive partnership,' established in 2013, to a 'strategic' partnership.'"

Hanoi is being eyed by Washington for its perceived “potential to counterbalance China,” the expert added.

“The evolving relationship between the United States and Vietnam manifests the broader and active US engagement in the Asia-Pacific region and underscores Vietnam's growing importance as a regional partner,” Anna Malindog-Uy emphasized.

Vietnam became a focal point for US diplomacy when it became the sixth member of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in July 1995, the same month Vietnam and the United States normalized relations, concurred Carl Thayer, emeritus professor at the University of New South Wales Canberra at the Australian Defense Force Academy. Further along, Vietnam gradually emerged as a potential US security partner.

“The turning point came during President Barack Obama’s term in office when Vietnam and the US agreed in 2013 to a comprehensive partnership covering nine major areas of cooperation. Since that time, Vietnam has been identified as an important security partner in all US national security strategies, particularly because of China’s growing 'assertiveness,'” said Carl Thayer, adding that the US has been seeking to “counter the appeal” of China’s Belt and Road Initiative launched in 2013.

More recently, the Biden administration has “lobbied Vietnam to upgrade bilateral relations to a strategic partnership to end the situation where the US was listed at the bottom of Vietnam’s three-tiered hierarchy of partnerships – comprehensive, strategic and comprehensive strategic,” Thayer added.

Vietnam an ‘Important Trading Partner’

Vietnam has also emerged as an important trading partner for the US in recent years.

“As one of the fastest-growing economies of SEA, Vietnam is a market for US goods and services, especially in sectors like technology, manufacturing, agriculture, and services. Strengthening relations with Vietnam can give American businesses and exporters more economic opportunities, given Vietnam's rising middle class and a young, educated workforce with higher purchasing power. Since Vietnam is already a vital player in global manufacturing, particularly electronics, textiles, and machinery, US companies can benefit from diversifying their supply chains by investing in or partnering with Vietnamese firms,” the vice president of ACPh underscored.

Furthermore, Vietnam is part of several regional trade agreements, such as the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) - the world’s largest free trade pact. The latter entered full force for all 15 member states following ratification of the pact by the Philippines in June. Thus, boosted ties with Vietnam could grant America more "reach" within these regional economic frameworks. Tourism, too, is fraught with benefits for the two nations.

It's worth noting that the United States is "not a party to the two most important multilateral free trade agreements," the CPTPP and the RCEP, to which Vietnam is a member, Carl Thayer pointed out.

Regarding the goals that the US president is pursuing in respect to Vietnam, he is “motivated mainly by economic issues such de-risking economic dependence on China by securing a reliable supply chain for Vietnamese semiconductors, and a more favorable environment for American investment, including American businesses relocating from China,” the professor said, adding:

“Biden hopes Vietnam will be a founding member of his Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity.”

The US has been bolstering its presence in the Indo-Pacific region by forming alliances such as AUKUS, which groups the country with Australia and the UK, and the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (QUAD) with Australia, India, and Japan. Washington is also part of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF) initiative, launched by Biden in May 2022 and now including 13 other members, such as Australia, Brunei, Fiji, India, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, and New Zealand.

'US-Orchestrated Coalition' Against China

While visiting US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen recently hailed Vietnam as "a key partner" in an effort to reduce dependence on China, Hanoi is “careful not to take sides between the US and China,” Anna Malindog-Uy said. Furthermore, taking sides between the US and China would be “costly for Vietnam both geopolitically and economically speaking.”

“As far as the US-led global coalition against China is concerned, I don’t think Vietnam has the intention or interest to be part of this. I don’t see any indication that Vietnam will join the US-orchestrated and led global coalition against China consisting of US allies... From my vantage point, it [Vietnam] wants to maintain good relations with neighboring countries like China as much as possible. Vietnam knows that joining a US-led coalition against China could potentially adversely impact its economic relations with China, which is vital to Vietnam’s economic development and progress,” the pundit believes.

ASEAN-member Vietnam “values neutrality,” and “follows a policy of non-alignment in major power conflicts, competition, and rivalry,” the vice president of the Manila-based ACPh think tank accentuated.

While Washington has been escalating trade and tech wars with Beijing, Hanoi has been steadily maintaining a “stable, pragmatic, and productive win-win relationship and cooperation with China, its largest neighbor and trading and economic partner.” China is "indispensable to Vietnam's economic well-being," and is a crucial market for Vietnamese exports, "particularly in electronics, textiles, and agriculture sectors." China is also one of the top foreign investors in Vietnam, particularly when it comes to infrastructure development. Many Vietnamese industries are deeply integrated into Chinese supply chains.

“China is crucial to Vietnam due to its economic significance, shared border, historical ties, and geopolitical factors. Balancing its relationship with China with its relationships with other regional and global powers is a crucial feature of Vietnam's foreign policy,” the pundit highlighted. Bearing in mind the sum total of economic significance, shared border, historical ties, and geopolitical factors, Anna Malindog-Uy emphasized:

“I don’t think Vietnam will compromise its sound economic and political relations with China by joining a global US-led coalition.”

Carl Thayer agreed with this opinion, telling Sputnik:

"Vietnam will not abandon its 'Four No’s' defense policy (no alliances, no foreign military bases, no joining one country to oppose another, and no use of force in international relations). Vietnam will not join any US-led anti-China coalition."

Russia of 'Strategic Importance' for Vietnam

At this point it should be noted that Vietnam has comprehensive strategic partnerships with only four countries - China, Russia, India, and South Korea. The significance of both China and Russia for Vietnam cannot be overestimated, pundits have underscored. Russia bears strategic importance to Vietnam due to a historical relationship stretching all the way back to the Cold War era, Anna Malindog-Uy recalled. The professor clarified that Moscow plays a vital role in Hanoi's "strategic, defense, and security considerations," along with potential for energy collaboration.

Furthermore, Joe Biden’s "courting" of Vietnam comes as the Southeast Asian nation has been reluctant to support Western sanctions against Russia. This is due to a “complex interplay of historical ties, foreign policy principles, and national interests,” Professor Anna Malindog-Uy underscored. She added:

“During the Cold War, the Soviet Union provided significant support to North Vietnam during the Vietnam War. This created a foundation of goodwill between the two countries. Vietnam also has a close defense and military relationship with Russia. Russia is a key supplier of military equipment and technology for Vietnam, including fighter jets, submarines, and other advanced weaponry. This defense partnership is vital to Vietnam's security and defense capabilities. Russia and Vietnam also have relatively strong economic and trade ties, especially in machinery, textiles, and agricultural products.”

Supporting Western sanctions against Russia "could potentially harm Vietnam’s economic interests and disrupt ongoing economic cooperation," Anna Malindog-Uy pointed out.

Indeed, Vietnam has a longstanding policy of opposing the unilateral imposition of sanctions by one state against another, Carl Thayer added. He recalled that Hanoi has not forgotten the bitter fallout from the US trade embargo imposed in the 1960s during the Vietnam War. But furthermore, Vietnam is “also practical, it does not want to harm relations with a Russia, a long-standing reliable partner,” said Thayer.

— Svetlana Ekimenko | Sputnik International | September 10, 2023

[mapsontheweb]

The Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership

A trade agreement between 13 nations centered around the Pacific

by OldManLaugh/reddit

[simply-ivanka]

Kamala Harris: Mystery Commander in Chief

How would the Vice President keep America safe in a dangerous world? The voters deserve some answers.

The Editorial Board --- Wall Street Journal

Kamala Harris is all but telling Americans they’ll have to elect her to find out what she really believes, as the Vice President ducks interviews and the media give her a free ride. This is bad enough on domestic issues, but on foreign policy it could be perilous. The world is more dangerous than it’s been in decades, and Americans deserve to know how the woman aiming to be Commander in Chief Harris would confront these threats.

Ms. Harris this week tweeted a photo of her sitting next to President Biden in the White House situation room discussing the Middle East. The point is to suggest she’s a co-pilot on Biden foreign policy.

This isn’t the credential the Harris campaign thinks it is, and the voters should hear directly from her what she thinks about the 2021 Afghanistan withdrawal, the failure to deter Russia in Ukraine, the Iranian nuclear program, China’s island grabs in the South China Sea, and more. The matter is all the more important because Ms. Harris conspicuously declined to choose a running mate who might lend foreign policy experience to the ticket.

Ms. Harris has given a few hints about her own views on the Middle East, and those aren’t encouraging. Her team spent much of Thursday walking back whether she told an anti-Israel group she’d be willing to ponder an arms embargo against Israel. She skipped Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech to Congress when our main Middle East ally is under siege. Did she pass over Josh Shapiro as her running mate because he would have enraged the anti-Israel wing of the Democratic Party?

To the extent she has revealed a larger instinct on national security, it’s been wrong. She told the Council on Foreign Relations in 2019 that she’d rejoin the Iran nuclear deal as long as “Iran also returned to verifiable compliance.” But Iran didn’t comply and is now on the brink of a nuclear breakout.

Her 2018 Senate vote to “end U.S. involvement in the Saudi-led air campaign in Yemen,” as Ms. Harris put it in a tweet, also hasn’t aged well. The Houthis the Saudis were fighting are now targeting commercial ships in the Red Sea almost daily and putting U.S. naval assets at risk. Does she think this status quo can persist—and what would she do differently?

Ms. Harris will surely argue that she and Mr. Biden reinvigorated the North Atlantic Treaty Organization after Vladimir Putin’s invasion in Ukraine. But absent a change in U.S. political will, the war in Ukraine isn’t on track to end on terms favorable to American interests. Her past enthusiasm for banning fracking—which her campaign is trying to walk back—also suggests she isn’t serious about checking Mr. Putin’s main source of war financing.

Ms. Harris would no doubt also tout the diplomatic progress the Biden Administration has made in Asia with Japan, the Philippines and others. Yet she whiffed on one of the single most important diplomatic questions in Asia: She opposed Barack Obama’s Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal that would have excluded China and boosted America as the region’s premiere trading partner.

Most important, will Ms. Harris build up the hard military assets required to deter China’s Xi Jinping and a consolidating axis of U.S. adversaries? “I unequivocally agree with the goal of reducing the defense budget,” Ms. Harris said as a Senator in 2020 after voting against a Bernie Sanders proposal to slash the Pentagon by 10%. That vote needed no explanation, but Ms. Harris wanted to make sure the left knew she was sympathetic. Does she still want to slash the defense budget?

Donald Trump often shoots from the hip on these subjects, and his favorable comments about dictators are witless. But his first-term record, especially on Iran and the Middle East, is far stronger than the Biden-Harris performance.

Americans shouldn’t have to read tea leaves to figure out if Ms. Harris would keep the country safe in a treacherous world.

[that-starlit-wanderer]

Another semi-coherent thought: with all the talk about how Democrats need to move in a more left-wing populist direction on economic policy to win back working class voters, it makes me wonder how they're going to approach tariffs going forward.

As we know Biden left a bunch of Trump's tariffs in place, either because he agreed with them or because he thought it would be politically toxic to remove them. Bernie Sanders also talked favorably about tariffs in both his 2016 and 2020 campaigns, criticizing Trump not for imposing tariffs but for imposing bad tariffs. Kamala Harris opposed the renegotiated USMCA, and it's an article of faith in both parties now that free trade deals as ambitious as the Trans-Pacific Partnership (infamously supported by Hillary Clinton, as both Sanders and Trump pointed out in 2016) are dead on arrival in the current US political climate.

In 2024 both Trump and Biden supported blocking the takeover of US Steel (not exactly a tariff issue but in the same conversation). Harris made some (what seemed to me mostly half-hearted) attacks on Trump's proposed tariffs, describing them as a sales tax, but seemed to have a really hard time explaining why Trump's tariffs on China were kept in place.

In other words, while I see some occasional discussion of tariffs being bad around here, I'm not convinced that either party is going to have much of an anti-tariff line going forward, and unless the tariffs in the new Trump administration are so obviously a disaster that Democrats can't help trying to make political hay out of it...I think tariffs and protectionism in general are going to be around for a long time to come regardless of which party is in power.

[darkeagleruins]

Kamala Harris is ten times more radical then Biden:

1. Abortion: codify Roe and set limits on state restrictions.

2. Sympathy for Palestine

3. Proposed a 10 trillion dollar climate plan, co-sponsored green new deal, pledged to ban fracking, wants to scrap the filibuster to pass all this

4. Called for making college free for all 5. Voted against US-Mexico -Canada trade agreement and Obama’s Trans-Pacific Partnership

6. Wants government regulation of AI

7. Defended California foie gras ban and free range hen mandate.

[mariacallous]

When Donald Trump first ran for the U.S. presidency in 2016, a wave of writing suggested that he was a realist. In this framing, Democratic Party candidate Hillary Clinton was presented as a neoconservative hawk who would start wars. Trump, by contrast, would balance U.S. commitments with its resources. He would avoid foreign conflicts and quagmires. He would be less ideological in his approach to nondemocratic states.

In 2024, this thinking has returned. Some realist voices are again suggesting that Trump is one of them. Trump’s desire to end the war in Ukraine—even though he simply intends to let Russia win—is taken as evidence of this. So is the selection of Ohio Sen. J.D. Vance as his vice presidential candidate. Vance has famously said that he does not care what happens to Ukraine. Conversely, he is a China hawk who seems to believe the United States cannot support both Taiwan and Ukraine simultaneously.

The notion that U.S. support for Taiwan and Ukraine is a trade-off is the most controversial component of the Trump realist position. Former Defense Department official Elbridge Colby, for example, has argued prominently that U.S. support for Ukraine undercuts its ability to help Taiwan, and that Europe should be almost exclusively responsible for helping Ukraine (or not).

But these hopes are badly misplaced. A second Trump term may well take an entirely different tack on China from the hawks—and even if he wants to move against Beijing, he lacks the discipline and ability to do so.

There is far more in Trump’s first term to suggest indiscipline, showboating, and influence-peddling than the clear-eyed, bloodless calculation of national interest that realists aspire to.

On China, Trump was undisciplined and sloppy. Yes, he turned against China in 2020, during the final year of his term, but that was more to deflect blame for COVID-19 than out of any realist or strategic reappraisal of U.S.-China relations. COVID-19 suddenly became the “kung flu” in Trump’s vernacular in an openly racist bid to change the subject.

Trump also undercut any ostensible focus on China by picking unnecessary fights with the United States’ regional partners. U.S.-South Korea and U.S.-Australia relations, for example, sank to their lowest point in years as Trump picked fights with their leaders because he wanted a payoff for the U.S. alliance guarantees.

Realism values allies for their ability to share burdens, project power, and generate global coalitions. Trump does not seem to grasp that at all. When Trump backed off his criticism of Japan, the turning point was apparently then-Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s relentless flattery, including giving Trump a gold-plated golf club, rather than any strategic reevaluation by Trump or his team. Such frippery is exactly the opposite of the cold calculation that we associate with realism.

Trump also sank the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and all but dropped earlier U.S. rhetoric about a pivot or rebalance to Asia. Were China a threat that Trump took seriously, then building a tighter trade area among the United States’ Asian partners would be a smart move to pool local allied economic power and build patterns of administrative coordination among those partners. Indeed, that was the rationale behind TPP and the “pivot” to increased engagement in the Indo-Pacific when it was proposed by the Barack Obama administration. Trump did not see that, either; he is obsessed with imposing tariffs, even against allies, which violates the realist tenets that concern allied power accumulation and coordination against shared threats.

Finally, Trump’s admiration for Chinese President Xi Jinping’s autocracy was blatant, and Trump has once again recently praised Xi as his “good friend.” The former U.S. president has spoken approvingly of China’s crackdowns in Tiananmen Square, Xinjiang, and Hong Kong. He solicited Chinese help in the 2020 election, and China happily channeled money to Trump’s family and his properties during his presidency.

Trump clearly craves authoritarian powers at home and is happy to take China’s money. He was happy to pardon Republican lobbyist Elliott Broidy, who was convicted for illicitly acting on Beijing’s behalf. It stretches credulity to suggest that Trump will lead the United States, much less an Indo-Pacific coalition, in a major shift against a power that he admires. China will probably just throw money at him if he is reelected—especially after seeing his U-turn on a TikTok ban, a policy that he backed in his first term but failed to deliver on, after facing pressure from billionaire TikTok investor Jeff Yass.

Little else in Trump’s first term suggests s a thoughtful, realist weighing of priorities: Trump’s most important first-term foreign-policy venture was the attempted denuclearization of North Korea. Unsurprisingly, that effort was amateurish, sloppy, and unplanned—and it failed.

There is a realist argument for reaching out to Pyongyang. The United States’ long-standing policy of containment and deterrence has not changed North Korea, nor did it prevent its nuclearization. North Korea is now a direct nuclear threat to the U.S. mainland. A realistic foreign policy would accept that as an unchangeable fact and react to it. Perhaps a bold move by a risk-taking statesman could break the logjam.

Trump might have had the chance to pull this off, but he failed due to his own lack of discipline. Trump did not prepare for his meetings with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un; instead, he simply walked off the plane and thought his New York tough guy shtick would somehow bowl over a man raised in the crucible of North Korea’s lethal family politics. There was no interagency process to build proposals ahead of time, nor any kind of realistic, measured deal that could have won over Pyongyang.

According to John Bolton, then Trump’s national security advisor, the president did not even read in preparation for the summits. Instead, Trump demanded the complete, verifiable, and irreversible nuclear disarmament of North Korea in exchange for sanctions removal, then walked out of the Hanoi summit when Pyongyang predictably rejected this wildly unbalanced so-called deal. Talks collapsed because Trump had not prepared and had no idea how to bargain on the issues when his first offer was rejected.

But Trump did get what he really wanted—lots and lots of publicity. His hugely hyped—and criminally underprepared—first summit with Kim in Singapore brought a week of nonstop news coverage. His later trip to the Demilitarized Zone, which included briefly walking inside North Korea, brought another wave of coverage. Trump even demanded that he receive the Nobel Peace Prize. This is showboating, not strategy.

The big issue in the realist case for Trump and Vance is that they will put Taiwan explicitly ahead of Ukraine in a ruthless prioritization of U.S. interests. As Andrew Byers and Randall Schweller write, Trump “understands the limits of American power.” From this perspective, the United States cannot reasonably hope to fight Russia and China simultaneously, much less a coordinated “axis” of those countries working with rogues such as Iran and North Korea. This notion is particularly connected with Vance, who has explicitly advocated abandoning Ukraine.

Yet Trump himself does not think this way. Trump’s supposed policy positions emerge on the fly as he speaks. He is lazy. He is not capable of the strategic thinking that realists want to attribute to him; one must only listen to his campaign speeches this year to see this. He routinely lies, makes up stories, and speaks in indecipherable word-salads. When Trump has spoken on Taiwan, he makes it clear that he sees it as just another free-riding ally that owes the U.S. protection money. In an interview with Bloomberg, Trump said the United States was “no different than an insurance company” and that Taiwan “doesn’t give us anything.”

It stretches psychological credulity to suggest that the United States under Trump will ruthlessly abandon a struggling, nascent democracy under threat by a fascist imperialist, but then abruptly fight for another new democracy under threat by an ever more powerful fascist imperialist. The prioritization of Taiwan over Ukraine misses the obvious precursor that the Middle East, in turn, is less valuable than Ukraine. But instead of reevaluating the United States’ position in the Middle East, Trump will almost certainly deepen U.S. involvement in the region because of the ideological fixations of his Christianist base.

The strategic case for elevating Taiwan over Ukraine is also far more mixed than Vance and Trumpian realists suggest.

First, China is much more powerful than Russia. So, a conflict with it would be far more destructive. The Russia-Ukraine war has been locally contained and, despite Russian bluster, not escalated to nuclear confrontation. That seems less likely in an open, U.S.-China war. It is an odd “realist” recommendation to suggest that the United States should take a provocative line against a stronger power, which increases the risk of great-power war, but not push its preferences on a weaker opponent where U.S. involvement is limited to a lower-risk proxy war.

Second, the U.S. commitment to Ukraine is much less costly than a parallel commitment to Taiwan. The United States is not fighting directly to defend Ukraine. It would have to do so to defend Taiwan. Taiwan defense would require the United States to project enormous force over a huge distance of open water at great expense—plus, there would be combat losses of major U.S. platforms, such as ships and aircraft.

By contrast, U.S. aid to Ukraine has mostly come in the form of money and midsized, ground-based platforms, totaling around $175 billion over two-and-a-half years. This is small and easily manageable because of NATO’s propinquity. U.S. national security spending is approximately $1 trillion annually; the country’s annual economic production is approximately $25 trillion. Notions that U.S. aid to Ukraine is an unsustainable overstretch, or that it is bolstering another “forever war,” are simply not correct.

In Ukraine, the United States is also using intelligence assets and coordination relationships with NATO allies that have long been in place—and resources that have little relevance to a Taiwan conflict. Washington is not going to engage the Chinese army in ground conflict, just as it does not need U.S. aircraft carriers to help Ukraine. As a specific example of a possible trade-off, Vance has suggested the United States lacks the artillery shell production capacity to meet both national defense needs and those of Ukraine. But that argument implies abandoning Ukraine today for an unidentifiable but apparently imminent U.S. ground war tomorrow.

Realist hopes for Trump and Vance assume an intellectual discipline that both men lack and elevate geopolitical trade-offs that are less acute than realists admit., Trump is lazy, unread, venal, easily bought, susceptible to autocrats’ flattery, captive to the ideological fixations of his domestic coalition, ignorant of U.S. strategic interests, and dismissive of alliances that amplify U.S. power. Vance is ostensibly more clear-eyed, but he is a foreign-policy neophyte in the pocket of Silicon Valley donors, including his mentor Peter Thiel. He has been a senator for less than two years, before which he was a financier and author whose interests were local.

The fiscal space to reorient U.S. defense spending is there. If Vance and Trump were truly serious about confronting China, they would not be proposing yet another massive Republican tax cut, for example. The traditional liberal internationalism Vice President Kamala Harris and President Joe Biden represent is far more likely to build a durable global coalition against Chinese and Russian revisionism than the venal caprice masquerading as strategy that Trump would bring back to the White House.

[lenbryant]

I owe my Trump-supporting friends an apology. I’ve been critical of the Trump presidency these last four years, and am still exhausted from the experience. But to be fair, President Trump wasn’t that bad, other than when he incited an insurrection against the government, mismanaged a pandemic that killed nearly half a million Americans, separated children from their families, lost those children in the bureaucracy, tear-gassed peaceful protesters on Lafayette Square so he could hold a photo op holding a Bible in front of a church, tried to block all Muslims from entering the country, got impeached, got impeached again, had the worst jobs record of any president in modern history, pressured Ukraine to dig dirt on Joe Biden, fired the FBI director for investigating his ties to Russia, bragged about firing the FBI director on TV, took Vladimir Putin’s word over the US intelligence community, diverted military funding to build his wall, caused the longest government shutdown in US history, called Black Lives Matter a “symbol of hate,” lied nearly 30,000 times, banned transgender people from serving in the military, ejected reporters from the White House briefing room who asked tough questions, vetoed the defense funding bill because it renamed military bases named for Confederate soldiers, refused to release his tax returns, increased the national debt by nearly $8 trillion, had three of the highest annual trade deficits in U.S. history, called veterans and soldiers who died in combat losers and suckers, coddled the leader of Saudi Arabia after he ordered the execution and dismembering of a US-based journalist, refused to concede the 2020 election, hired his unqualified daughter and son-in-law to work in the White House, walked out of an interview with Lesley Stahl, called neo-Nazis “very fine people,” suggested that people should inject bleach into their bodies to fight COVID, abandoned our allies the Kurds to Turkey, pushed through massive tax cuts for the wealthiest but balked at helping working Americans, incited anti-lockdown protestors in several states at the height of the pandemic, withdrew the US from the Paris climate accords, withdrew the US from the Iranian nuclear deal, withdrew the US from the Trans Pacific Partnership which was designed to block China’s advances, insulted his own Cabinet members on Twitter, pushed the leader of Montenegro out of the way during a photo op, failed to reiterate US commitment to defending NATO allies, called Haiti and African nations “shithole” countries, called the city of Baltimore the “worst in the nation,” claimed that he single handedly brought back the phrase “Merry Christmas” even though it hadn’t gone anywhere, forced his Cabinet members to praise him publicly like some cult leader, believed he should be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, berated and belittled his hand-picked Attorney General when he recused himself from the Russia probe, suggested the US should buy Greenland, colluded with Mitch McConnell to push through federal judges and two Supreme Court justices after supporting efforts to prevent his predecessor from appointing judges, repeatedly called the media “enemies of the people,” claimed that if we tested fewer people for COVID we’d have fewer cases, violated the emoluments clause, thought that Wakanda was a country, told Bob Woodward in private that the coronavirus was a big deal but then downplayed it in public, called his exceedingly faithful vice president a “p---y” for following the Constitution, etc. etc.

(character limit reached!)

[gatekeeper-watchman]

Our Unresolved Problem(s)

          Problems unresolved are not unlike cancers that fester and fester until they burst with pain and devastation. The longer they fester, the greater the pain, the greater the devastation. Such it is with our great nation, a nation of many problems—currently, it seems, tired, broke, hungry, polarized, and twisting in the winds.

          To solve a problem, any problem, one must first identify it, get to the absolute root of the matter, decide what to do about it, and do it—too often a problem in and of itself. For far too long, we the people of the United States of America haven’t done this, preferring to shift our problems to a “back burner”, dealing with them with temporary “fixes”, passivism, and procrastination, which has cost us dearly.

          I submit to you that in these, the greatest times in the history of civilization, the two greatest problems confronting our nation today are a lack of concerted direction and xenophobia, i.e. racial discrimination. We have many serious problems before us—very serious; but, before they can be effectively resolved, we must above all, first resolve these two.

          I have discussed this in prior postings to this blog, from various aspects. We are heading in a direction, if we are not already there, wherein we are being ruled by an oligarchy of the Corporatocracy and Power Elite which, contrary to our presently being a democratic republic “of the people, by the people, and for the people”, the extent of our freedoms will be determined by them. This is just not The United States of America. This is a global thing. Even now many of the rules under which you and I live are under the control of the World Trade Organization (WTO), the International Monetary Fund (IMF), Agenda 21 of the United Nations, etc. which transcends national boundaries. Even now, our government is negotiating so called Free Trade Agreements in secret (I’m thinking specifically of the Trans-Pacific Partnership [TPP], which will affect jobs and living standards for millions of us). We the people will have no say in it. Some will tell you we freely elected those who facilitate this, our Congress. We did? Keep in mind all the money which flows into the coffers of our representatives through the lobbyists of these Corporatists. Some even write the rules which go into these agreements. Does your representative answer your phone calls? You can bet on it. He, or she, answers theirs.

In 2013, Keynesian economist Joseph Stiglitz, himself a renowned economist, warned that the TPP presented “grave risks” and it “serves the interests of the wealthiest”. Organized labor in the U.S. argues that the trade deal would largely benefit big business at the expense of the workers in manufacturing and service industries. The Economic Policy Institute and the Center for Economic and Policy Research have argued that the TPP could result in further job losses and declining wages. In December 2013, 151 House Democrats signed a letter written by Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) and George Miller (D-Calif.) opposing the “Fast Track”

Let me briefly explain what is meant by the “Fast Track”. From Wikipedia, “the fast-track negotiating authority for trade agreements is the authority of the President of the United States to negotiate international agreement that Congress can approve or disapprove but cannot amend or filibuster. Also called trade promotion authority (TPA) since 2002, fast track negotiating authority is a temporary and controversial power granted to the President by Congress.” Wikipedia also states that “The authority was in effect from 1975 to 1994, pursuant to the Trade Act of 1974, and from 2002 to 2007 by the Trade Act of 2002. Although it expired for new agreements on July 1, 2007, it continued to apply to agreements already under negotiation until they were eventually passed into law in 2011. In 2012, the Obama administration began seeking renewal of the authority.”

You can read for yourself in Wikipedia a history and summary of the ongoing Trans-Pacific Partnership. This is just one event going on with the Corporatocracy and Power Elite, our Shadow Government. There are many more; and, in my mind, they are not in favor of the people—only the 1%, the very very rich and elite. Whether you believe in God or not, God made people. People made business. Business is supposed to serve the people. People should be in charge—not business. We must turn this around before we become their serfs.

I submit to you this is the greatest problem for our nation today. This is not the direction in which we should continue, and we must change that direction now. We the people must take back our country; but, to do that, we must all participate by voicing our demands. We cannot do that with only 40%, or whatever, going to the polls.

As I said above, the second greatest problem for our nation today is xenophobia, i.e. racial discrimination. I will post a candid discussion of this subject in my next blog. I’m sure what I say will be controversial, but it must be said. The successful resolution of almost all our future problems will depend upon the resolution of these two, our domination by the Corporatocracy and Power Elite and our resolution of Racial Discrimination.

Please, think about these things. Do you really want our country/your country to be run by these people—the huge corporations, banks, and the extremely rich and wealthy; or, do you want us to be a democratic republic as per our Constitution, a nation of the people, by the people, and for the people? I tell you. It is going, going, gone—unless you do something about it. You may think this is all a big joke but it isn’t. It really is in your hands. What are you going to do and when? When?

[blankinterstices]

When I was in college, I was part of a group opposing the Trans-Pacific Partnership. After some effort, we got comment from an Obama flunkie that the President couldn't simply pull out of an international agreement unilaterally like that. Then Trump got elected and pulling out of the TPP was one of the first things he did lol.

[darkmaga-returns]

For about a decade, American trade policy has been buffeted by competing impulses on how it should engage economically with the world.

The controversy is over whether the U.S. should expand trade with all countries; use it as a tool that buttresses alliances and deters or coerces adversaries; or just step back from trade and aim for self-sufficiency.

The debate goes back at least to Hillary Clinton’s 2015 decision to abandon the Trans Pacific Partnership, an agreement she had championed as Secretary of State. It is also a debate in which the divisions do not map cleanly along party lines, making predictions about policy under the new administration difficult. But it might help to identify the different factions and their interests in order to make sense of trade-related headlines rolling off the wires, like the below examples.

As is well known, President-elect Trump threatened to impose 25% tariffs on Mexico for not doing enough to control migration and narcotics shipments. It remains unclear what he will do next – he declared victory following a telephone conversation with that country’s new president, Claudia Sheinbaum, but he has not withdrawn the tariff threat. This is a stance that has caused alarm in U.S. industrial circles, particularly in the automotive sector, where supply chains depend on deep cross-border integration.

It is also at odds with the Biden administration push to “nearshore” or “friendshore” U.S. industrial supply chains — a move justified in varying degree by shorter distances, greater resiliency, and a desire to reduce America’s link with China, all goals in which Mexico is seen as playing a key role.

[head-post]

UK formally joins Indo-Pacific trade bloc

The UK became the first European country to join a major Indo-Pacific trading bloc, according to Euractiv.

The move on Sunday, 16 December, marked the country’s biggest trade deal since Brexit. The UK became the 12th member of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP).

Membership should improve the UK economy by as much as £2.0 billion ($2.5 billion) annually. According to government figures, total UK trade totalled £1.7 trillion ($2.15 trillion) a year.

Launched in 2018, the organisation is seen as an alternative to the region’s dominant China, although Beijing has also applied to join the CPTPP.

The CPTPP accounts for around 15 per cent of global GDP. The alliance will give UK businesses trade access to a market of more than 500 million people. The previous Conservative government signed the agreement in July 2023, with then Business and Trade Secretary Kemi Badenoch hailing it as “the biggest trade deal” since Brexit.

The UK also negotiates with Gulf countries. Last month, Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced that the UK and India should revive stalled free trade talks.

Read more HERE

[upsettingandunfortunateclasshate]

"This is why the UK signed an agreement to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) and is looking to sign up to agreements with India and South America. There are tens of millions of middle-class families, in those regions, eager to send their children to UK Universities for one of the best educations money can buy.

"The UK government are eager to have them because their money helps to subsidise our tertiary education sector.

"This is why private contractors are so keen to keep building more and more PBSA. There is an almost inexhaustible supply of customers, all more than happy to contribute to their profits."

And our own middle class and rich. This is how students can be big gentrifiers, and how unis can play a part in destroying a cities' heritage and culture, when they "regenerate" an area to build shite student housing

In Nottingham they knock down historic buildings for shite student lets, here they've built gated estates designed to keep Tarquin and Henry safe from the rugged hard face northern locals

[justinspoliticalcorner]

S.V. Dáte at HuffPost:

WASHINGTON ― Donald Trump left the White House with violent crime spiking, thousands of Americans dying each day from a disease he claimed was no worse than the common cold and having attempted a coup to remain in office despite having lost reelection. The former and would-be future president and the Republican National Committee on Monday released a schedule of convention themes that counts on Americans forgetting all that and instead waxing nostalgic for his years in office. “President Trump will Make America Great Once Again!” the RNC’s synopsis of the convention theme proclaims. Each of the first three nights, though, promises a return to a Trump presidential past that did not really happen in the described way. Monday, July 15, called “Make America Wealthy Once Again,” will focus on the economy under Trump, which it falsely claims was the best ever, thanks in part to “re-worked trade deals” he managed. In fact, the economy during Trump’s first three years ― before the COVID pandemic struck ― was similar to but slightly worse than during the final three years of his predecessor, Barack Obama. And Trump did not “rework” the North American Free Trade Agreement so much as simply rename it the United States, Mexico, Canada Agreement. The few changes it did contain were mostly lifted from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which Obama had negotiated but Trump then abandoned. The theme for July 16, “Make America Safe Once Again,” suggests that crime has been rampant under President Joe Biden. In reality, crime rates spiked to their highest levels in years under Trump in 2020 and have been decreasing each of the three years since Biden took office. And the final night before Trump is to be officially nominated ― labeled “Make America Strong Once Again” ― features Biden’s chaotic August 2021 withdrawal from Afghanistan but fails to point out that it was Trump, not Biden, who cut a deal directly with the Taliban that excluded the Afghan government, even setting a deadline for the withdrawal. Trump’s administration then did no planning for the pullout, leaving the new Biden administration just months to unwind two decades of military presence in that country.

The RNC convention next week will serve up lies and baloney, hoping to get enough Americans to ignore the disaster that the Trump Administration was in order to push the fanciful reality-free narrative that everything was better under Donald Trump.

[super-lad]

Trump has no interest in maintaining long-term relationships. That’s why he has so many failed marriages and bad foreign relations. Constantly calling other leaders dumb and weak. Threatening to pull out of NATO and actually leaving the Paris Agreement, NAFTA, and the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Bombing an Iranian general. The Muslim travel ban. Moving the US embassy to Jerusalem. Loving on Putin like his life depends on it.