He did get promises to buy more agricultural products. That may have been what they wanted to do anyway though.
China deal
- Thread starter Watu3
- Start date
That’s the most important part of phase 1 - China is dying to make a deal because we are hampering their economy. Do you think it’s a coincedence that everything with Hong Kong is happening currently after the President not only vowed to not only disregard/not honor the China One Policy but also that after we send substantial military aid to Taiwan that China then decided to violate the sovereignty of Hong Kong? Where do you think they’re headed after Hong Kong? ... further South so they can eventually get to their artificial islands in the South China Sea (which are illegal & military bases)?
Is it a coincidence that after our President was elected & invoked Tariffs on China Xi Jingping ended term limits? The entire point is that they have not only been betting that President Trump won’t be re-elected, their President decided to HEDGE anyway & erase the term limits just in case Trump does win 2020. Yet, they are suffering so bad from our tariffs (again, these costs haven’t been passed onto the US consumers) that they started to increase development of biochemical weapons so rapidly that it was not even close to being safe. This is what lead to the recent Coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan.
Why do you think the left freaked out when Trump had Huawei executive (CFO iirc) Meng Wenzhou (aka Cathy Meng aka Sabrina Meng) arrested? Why is the Trump administration largely against Chinese 5G technology? How did China get our intellectual property in the first place? COULD IT BE THAT IT WAS SOLD TO THEM BY PREVIOUS ADMINISTATIONS???
Bush/Clintons/Obama/Kerry/Brennan/Clapper etc SOLD US OUT! & it wasn’t just sold to China. They were straight hookers willing to double sell & lie to highest bidders - emphasis on plurality of BIDDERS! Why do you think they caved to the JCPOA / Iran Deal?
https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/06/tech/what-is-huawei/index.html
Last edited:
Ok, once again people on the Left have no idea what is actually happening from a global, 50,000ft perspective. If we are helping China why did we kill Soleimani? You do know Iran & China are allies, right?
SAME THING as the TOTALLY BUNK Mueller Investigation. First it’s Russia. Now it’s the Ukraine??? You do realize these two countries are at war right now, right?
To my fellow patriots reading this, we must remember that it’s not that our fellow countrymen on the Left are stupid, it’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.
Last edited:
NoKo is not a threat. The Republic is in good hands. The game is over. They’ve lost all control. & that’s why they’re panicking with this sham impeachment. See my other post.
https://tulsa.forums.rivals.com/thr...p-state-exposed-sinking-fast-must-read.19306/
Winning without cheating is, too.
The’ve lost. New game, new refs, playing by the rules now. At least it’s going to fun to watch the squirm. Other than that, what’s going to come to light is going to be so dark that we will all be ashamed. Even McCain was involved in these schemes. It’s just sickening. I pray for the countless souls that this ruthless, corrupt group of people sacrificed for their own gain.
Ww.gone.wga
North Korea is now farther along in its missile development than when Kim met Trump and Japan is more concerned than before the meeting.
The China deal is the same. The NAFTA replacement is barely different from the original. Americans have paid billions and billions in tariffs and agricultural subsidies for smoke and mirrors.
Trump understands that as long as the bachelor gives the girl a rose, viewers don’t care if he marries her.
Most big companies have eaten the costs on products and found ways to get around it for a short term. The increase in prices has been minimal to nonexistent so far.
Especially on large items,(eg, cars) but also on lesser items, they will increase the price after the fact only minimally and recover the costs over several mo. to several years. A lot of it hasn't even been sold yet, because it is still in warehouses or on the production lines. We'll pay a lot of the cost, but it won't be so obvious when we actually pay it.
The point I was getting at is almost all the goods which were the subject to tariffs were raw materials and not consumer goods. The manufacturers have either dropped margins slightly to account for the increases or procured said goods from other sources....hopefully US sources. The effect of the tariffs have been greatly overblown for political purposes. We have seen little inflationary impact as well as GDP growth.
Well played, sir. They may not respect me but they definitely respect you! Props! You know what’s up & clearly know what I say on here to be true. I don’t blame you for keeping your mouth shut on most of it - a lot of what I post on here are things that are seen as fringe “conspiracies,” but that’s OK. The truth will be out for the public to see in simple, right/wrong format very soon.
As I’ve said, once exposed the truth will probably kill the entire Dem party.
There are far more that are aware of what I’ve been bringing to light than the number of which you are currently aware. I don’t blame them for not posting anything. I just happen to not care/love trolling tiblards.
That's hilarious, now he's pulling a Trump, and claiming those who are silent, are in the know.
No they are just laughing at you/shaking their heads, and thinking it's not worth posting to someone who won't listen with an open mind. Nobody posts about what you say because it's not worth their time posting to an incredibly prejudiced crackpot. I and a few of others find it amusing to keep you going. I certainly don't think I or anybody can change your mind, nobody can change the mind of someone who is off the deep end. You are one of the most gullible people I know, just like every other conspiracy theorist. Of course you take silence as acceptance/agreement. That and illusions of grandeur are characteristics of just about every conspiracy theorist. I and I'm sure a number of others think you need to be in counseling, but we aren't the ones who can do anything about that. Only you, and to a certain extent the ones who love you, can have any affect on that.
Last edited:
Prejudiced crackpot?
People are who vote Dem are the most gullible people in the country.
Russia wasn’t a conspiracy, right? Or did you ignore Rachel Maddow those first 2+ years since the inauguration of your President?
Lol OK, whatever. You definitely seem to think that your president committed a crime yet you can’t name the crime committed & even if you could, there’s no way you have proof of it happening because it never occurred!
That's why 75% of the American public wanted witnesses. It's also why 5 or 10 Republican politicians have all but admitted that Trump was guilty. He used his office to try and force a foreign government to investigate and/or announce an investigation into his main competition for the election. If they had witnesses I might not have to speculate on his guilt.
I know, losing sucks. Trust me, I hate it, too. The difference is when I lose I don’t call foul after the game is over. Well, maybe I do LOL but I don’t deny a L & try to say it was a W
i believe he is guilty of putting pressure on the Ukraine government to investigate the Bidens. My questions are:
1). Based on precedent is this an act sufficient to remove a sitting President ?
2). Was the case proven to such a degree to warrant removal if one believes the act was egregious enough to warrant the same? Proof based on evidence which meets the admissibility requirement of the rules of evidence.
Point 1. is to be argued.(I say yes)
Point 2. never saw the light of day because of blocked witnesses in the house, and more importantly witnesses that they refused to call in the senate.
This sets up a bad precedent for future Presidents of either party. It give any President in the future the feeling that he/she can do anything if he/she has enough party support, regardless of whether it is morally right, or illegal.
I have mixed feelings regarding the first question. Based on past precedent I would argue no. We had a President use the FBI and JD to investigate a political rival who in turn broke the law in said investigation. We also had a President bribe elected officials to get a major law passed after repeatedly lying to get public support. Now, for future consideration I absolutely believe said conduct should at least be considered impeachable. Thus mixed feelings.
As far as sufficient admissible evidence, a prosecutor has an almost impossible task when the bribed party states the unlawful act didn’t occur. In fact, such cases never make it to trial due to the extreme difficulty in getting a conviction. Doesn’t mean Trump isn’t guilty fwiw. Just means without a victim there is rarely a case
Agree, that's why as much circumstantial evidence, and he said/she said evidence needs to be revealed. That way the jury is allowed to make a fully realized judgement on the issue. Enough circumstantial and he said, he said, he said evidence can and should sway the judgement. Otherwise anybody can cover up anything if they're careful.
I agree. The problem is when the “victim” is telling the jury that no crime occurred a conviction is almost impossible without recordings or written evidence to the contrary. In fact, charges are almost never brought.
Yes, but there is a more important secondary victim involved, and that is the American public. That secondary victim deserves for all the evidence to be brought out. The actual crime was minimized by the whstle blower bringing it to light. Thus the aid was given in enough time to minimize the damage. That does nothing to alleviate the secondary victim, unless justice is given. That justice cannot be realized for or against the prosecution, unless other witnesses are not questioned(Bolton, Parnas, etc.) And it is not the fault of the secondary victim if the primary victim won't admit there was a crime. The secondary victim still deserves justice.
Many witnesses who were the victim of Mafia crime say there wasn't a crime, for fear of their life. That doesn't mean their wasn't a crime. And in some cases with the mafia, the case is brought to trial regardless. And if it is won with circumstantial and he said/she said evidence which proves their was a crime and who committed it.
I think this is at least as important as all those mafia cases that were brought to trial without the victim supporting the case. Thus 75% of the public, and really 100% of the public deserved to have witnesses in the Senate. Then make the judgement with all the evidence that can reasonably be found.
I’ve previously stated that I was in favor of witnesses fwiw. Mafia cases had recordings of the bad guys admitting to crimes. Without such evidence a finding of guilt is hard to achieve when the “bribed” party said no such act occurred. Just tough to get convictions in cases such as this.
Looking forward to tonight’s game. A little surprised we’re 2.5 point dogs. We’re playing better than WSU of late. That line should be reversed
Looking forward to tonight’s game. A little surprised we’re 2.5 point dogs. We’re playing better than WSU of late. That line should be reversed
That is not illegal. The Bidens are guilty of actual crimes. We have a treaty with the Ukraine that allows for these type of investigations. The truth is coming out soon, so no worries. Still, I’d be surprised if you could name a single President in the entire history of the USA that did not abuse his power in some way - AND THIS ISN’T EVEN AN EXAMPLE OF TRUMP ABUSING POWER!!! It isn’t illegal!
Many a foreign policy include quid pro quo. In fact, it’s how most business is done, period! Reciprocity.
I’m shocked a fellow lawyer would even entertain this nonsense!
You do realize that for decades our federal government has been giving money to corrupt countries to the south of us that work with gangs/cartels to traffic everything from heroin to humans to cocaine into our communities, right? Even in Tulsa... I’m shocked at the way liberals think. They can’t be taught, can’t be reasoned with BUT THEY SURE CAN BE BOUGHT!
Seems pretty much impossible for this to not have secondary affects on investment and/or hiring. A couple tariffs are not going to halt a strong economy and there are things Trump has done on the regulatory end that help, but if manufacturers have had to both take on additional costs and had to worry about reliability in the supply chain I have a hard time believing they wouldn't be doing better without tariffs.
As far as goods from China, I think we're probably at the point where tariffs are the least of our concerns as it relates to the supply chain. I suspect corona will have a significant effect on China's economic output.
I have to admit I'm a little confused by the panic this has caused. Maybe I've missed some news, but last I heard the death rate was lower than most of the other recent flu / respiratory illness outbreaks. Is it that China is maybe lying about the death toll?
Trump trade tariffs wiped out any tax savings the Republican "tax cuts" for the vast majority of Americans. Sure, the top 5% Americans come out ahead as they got all most all of the tax benefits, but the middle and lower income groups got only a pittance of the tax cuts which was wiped out by Trump trade costs. Additional costs include $28B to to bail out farmers when China went elsewhere for ag products (but who cares about the National Debt?). US manufacturing moved into a recession.
Before the Corona Virus arrived on the scene. the Fed estimated that Trump trade policy would reduce 2020 GDP growth by a full percentage point, the effects will be long lasting, and business investment will also drop.
BTW, tariffs are not levied on goods, they are a tax on the purchaser.
Before the Corona Virus arrived on the scene. the Fed estimated that Trump trade policy would reduce 2020 GDP growth by a full percentage point, the effects will be long lasting, and business investment will also drop.
BTW, tariffs are not levied on goods, they are a tax on the purchaser.
