Trump's Trade War

[Brian Fantana 6,667]

Remember, the press is the enemy. Presidents should be able to do whatever they want behind closed doors without anyone reporting it.

[The People’s Elbow 707]

Just now, GRHorn said:

See above. I wonder who the leak is then. 

Who has the most to gain from the leak? Play “Five whys” and there’s your answer.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

Just now, GRHorn said:

See above. I wonder who the leak is then. 

That means you have no source for your claim.  Just like when you claimed yesterday or the day before that CNN's multiple-source report on the Lanny Davis story was bullshit because Lanny got cold feet on the story a few days later.   Why do you continually make up things to support a narrative that the media is lying rather than the people they are reporting on?  

[Dahobbs 17,444]

3 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

See above. I wonder who the leak is then. 

20 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

I'm betting that Trump's folks leaked it because the trade negotiations were already failing and Trump needed someone to blame it on. As a result, Trump gets the following things he wants:

(1) No trade agreement, so he can continue working up his base using the "unfair" trade agreements of prior administrations;

(2) He gets to look tough for standing up to Canada (?!?);

(3) He gets to blame the failure on someone else; and

(4) He gets to attack the media even more.

In fact, now that I write it out, there is no doubt that Trump had someone in his office leak it. 

[The People’s Elbow 707]

Just now, Mojo Hand said:

That means you have no source for your claim.  Just like when you claimed yesterday or the day before that CNN's multiple-source report on the Lanny Davis story was bullshit because Lanny got cold feet on the story a few days later.   Why do you continually make up things to support a narrative that the media is lying rather than the people they are reporting on?  

I will give him partial credit here for coming back and changing his tune. Others, like Slorch or Swam, take the cowardly way out by avoiding the thread after showing their ass. 

[F250 28,682]

4 minutes ago, The People’s Elbow said:

Who has the most to gain from the leak? Play “Five whys” and there’s your answer.

Slocum's Razor approves.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

Just now, Dahobbs said:

 

Could be.  Or it could be one of the many people who leak shit on a daily basis from the leakiest White House in history, and Trump didn't intend on it leaking.  The White House would have their own transcript of the interview and any number of people could have accessed and leaked it. 

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

1 minute ago, The People’s Elbow said:

I will give him partial credit here for coming back and changing his tune. Others, like Slorch or Swam, take the cowardly way out by avoiding the thread after showing their ass. 

He hasn't changed his tune yet.  Just cited a report that doesn't back him up.

[Dahobbs 17,444]

1 minute ago, Mojo Hand said:

Could be.  Or it could be one of the many people who leak shit on a daily basis from the leakiest White House in history, and Trump didn't intend on it leaking.  The White House would have their own transcript of the interview and any number of people could have accessed and leaked it. 

Again, it fits too well with his agenda. If there was just a bit of overlap, I'd agree. But it checks almost every single box for him. 

[GRHorn 105]

7 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

That means you have no source for your claim.  Just like when you claimed yesterday or the day before that CNN's multiple-source report on the Lanny Davis story was bullshit because Lanny got cold feet on the story a few days later.   Why do you continually make up things to support a narrative that the media is lying rather than the people they are reporting on?  

I corrected myself.  What is your problem?

The CNN story contradicts Cohen’s sworn testimony.  I’m not making up anything. 

[Biff Tannen 45,492]

1 hour ago, Mojo Hand said:

That means you have no source for your claim.  Just like when you claimed yesterday or the day before that CNN's multiple-source report on the Lanny Davis story was bullshit because Lanny got cold feet on the story a few days later.   Why do you continually make up things to support a narrative that the media is lying rather than the people they are reporting on?  

[GRHorn 105]

8 minutes ago, The People’s Elbow said:

I will give him partial credit here for coming back and changing his tune. Others, like Slorch or Swam, take the cowardly way out by avoiding the thread after showing their ass. 

I have been wrong here before and it will probably happen again. I misread something. So sue me.

Someone leaked from the Bloomberg meeting, but they claim it’s not them. I’m happy to correct myself.

[Dahobbs 17,444]

1 minute ago, GRHorn said:

I corrected myself.  What is your problem?

The CNN story contradicts Cohen’s sworn testimony.  I’m not making up anything. 

And the source of the story openly admitted to providing CNN the information. So, the only one lying (either initially or when changing his story) is the source, not CNN. I'm not sure why that is so hard for you to understand. 

[Brian Fantana 6,667]

Well, see, Trump has told him that CNN is the enemy of the people.

[Biff Tannen 45,492]

1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:

 

1 hour ago, Brian Fantana said:

Well, see, Trump has told him that CNN is the enemy of the people.

Apparently so do you.

[The People’s Elbow 707]

13 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

I have been wrong here before and it will probably happen again. I misread something. So sue me.

Someone leaked from the Bloomberg meeting, but they claim it’s not them. I’m happy to correct myself.

Great. 

Now, let’s dispense with the source distraction for a minute and actually look at the substance: what’re your thoughts on what’s being reported? 

Edited August 31, 2018 by The People’s Elbow

[GRHorn 105]

2 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

And the source of the story openly admitted to providing CNN the information. So, the only one lying (either initially or when changing his story) is the source, not CNN. I'm not sure why that is so hard for you to understand. 

CNN also stated directly that they’d asked Davis for comment and he declined, which was obviously false.

[Dahobbs 17,444]

5 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

CNN also stated directly that they’d asked Davis for comment and he declined, which was obviously false.

So, do you think Davis is lying about being the source? What is your point here? Do you even know?

[sheeeit 129]

I think it is shitty for anyone to leak private conversations from any potus.  I do not get, at all, this notion that anything the potus says or thinks, at anytime, should be public record.  That is just too stupid.  Any potus has to have the ability to strategize openly without the fear that the conversations will go public.  Be it defense, intelligence, trade, immigration, the economy or whatever.

Questioning the wisdom of renegotiating NAFTA and other trade agreements is fine and a worthy endeavor.  Leaking privileged info that has a direct impact on those negotiations should send someone to jail.  Not just in this case and this potus but any.

Concerning the Cohen/Davis story, people are just playing semantics.  CNN is standing by the fact that they reported exactly what their sources told them.  So they think they are in the right.  They did not make anything up.  It is not CNN's fault that some of those sources are now claiming something different.  Where they are wrong, imo, is by not at least clarifying that at least one of their sources as well as Cohen himself have now denied the original story.  It appears that CNN was possibly duped by Davis but does not want to admit it.  It is also amazingly disingenuous to make a claim that they did not get a comment from Davis when Davis has now admitted to being one of their sources.  The reality is that only Davis, Cohen or one of his other lawyers are the only possible ones that know the facts.  Davis and Cohen are both now denying the story and CNN should report that.   

 

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

2 minutes ago, sheeeit said:

I think it is shitty for anyone to leak private conversations from any potus.  I do not get, at all, this notion that anything the potus says or thinks, at anytime, should be public record.  That is just too stupid.  Any potus has to have the ability to strategize openly without the fear that the conversations will go public.  Be it defense, intelligence, trade, immigration, the economy or whatever.

Questioning the wisdom of renegotiating NAFTA and other trade agreements is fine and a worthy endeavor.  Leaking privileged info that has a direct impact on those negotiations should send someone to jail.  Not just in this case and this potus but any.

Concerning the Cohen/Davis story, people are just playing semantics.  CNN is standing by the fact that they reported exactly what their sources told them.  So they think they are in the right.  They did not make anything up.  It is not CNN's fault that some of those sources are now claiming something different.  Where they are wrong, imo, is by not at least clarifying that at least one of their sources as well as Cohen himself have now denied the original story.  It appears that CNN was possibly duped by Davis but does not want to admit it.  It is also amazingly disingenuous to make a claim that they did not get a comment from Davis when Davis has now admitted to being one of their sources.  The reality is that only Davis, Cohen or one of his other lawyers are the only possible ones that know the facts.  Davis and Cohen are both now denying the story and CNN should report that.   

 

CNN has reported that. 

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/28/politics/lanny-davis-trump-tower-michael-cohen/index.html

[Brian Fantana 6,667]

But they should report it tho

[sheeeit 129]

7 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

CNN has reported that. 

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/28/politics/lanny-davis-trump-tower-michael-cohen/index.html

Had not seen that article.  It seems like I suggested above.  CNN ran with a story based on info from, likely, Davis.  No fault in that to CNN.  CNN is basically saying that Davis is now changing his story and CNN can not be held responsible for that.  Fair enough.  They also seem to imply that Cohen was one of their sources.  Who knows.

Honestly, I do not trust any media outlet anymore when they quote anonymous sources and this case is exactly why.  There seems to be exactly zero negative ramifications to the sources or news outlets when they rely on sources that are lying.  It happened to Obama, Bush, Clinton too.  It is just too easy in todays world to find a "source".  There is simply no way to get to the truth.

Just using this particular story, I find it impossible to believe that Davis was not the originator of the story.  So Davis tells the media and then Davis tells other people who the media go to to "corroborate" the story and then, voila, you have multiple sources confirming the story,  it is so incestuous.  

This is almost exactly like the Carter Page FISA stuff.  The FBI uses Steele and his dossier as evidence.  They ask Steele if he has talked to anyone in the media and Steele says no.  They then use a media story that corroborates the evidence in the dossier and say it is a second stand alone source because Steele swears he did not talk to the media.  Of course then the media guy who wrote the second corroborating story says that of course he talked to Steele and that Steele gave him all of the info for the story.  But by then the warrant is in place and the damage is done.

[Dahobbs 17,444]

34 minutes ago, sheeeit said:

Had not seen that article.  It seems like I suggested above.  CNN ran with a story based on info from, likely, Davis.  No fault in that to CNN.  CNN is basically saying that Davis is now changing his story and CNN can not be held responsible for that.  Fair enough.  They also seem to imply that Cohen was one of their sources.  Who knows.

Honestly, I do not trust any media outlet anymore when they quote anonymous sources and this case is exactly why.  There seems to be exactly zero negative ramifications to the sources or news outlets when they rely on sources that are lying.  It happened to Obama, Bush, Clinton too.  It is just too easy in todays world to find a "source".  There is simply no way to get to the truth.

Just using this particular story, I find it impossible to believe that Davis was not the originator of the story.  So Davis tells the media and then Davis tells other people who the media go to to "corroborate" the story and then, voila, you have multiple sources confirming the story,  it is so incestuous.  

This is almost exactly like the Carter Page FISA stuff.  The FBI uses Steele and his dossier as evidence.  They ask Steele if he has talked to anyone in the media and Steele says no.  They then use a media story that corroborates the evidence in the dossier and say it is a second stand alone source because Steele swears he did not talk to the media.  Of course then the media guy who wrote the second corroborating story says that of course he talked to Steele and that Steele gave him all of the info for the story.  But by then the warrant is in place and the damage is done.

Of course when Trump says "people are saying" you believe him. And, it is hilarious that you try and find fault for the media reporting what sources actually reported to them, rather than finding fault in sources (many associated with the fucking administration) for lying--either when first talking with the media or when later recanting.

Do you fault the media for reporting what Trump says, even though 90% of it is false?

[GRHorn 105]

3 hours ago, The People’s Elbow said:

Great. 

Now, let’s dispense with the source distraction for a minute and actually look at the substance: what’re your thoughts on what’s being reported? 

My thoughts are that whoever’s leaking the comments does not want the deal as currently being framed, to go through for whatever reason.  There’s some big mouths involved so I’m not sure exactly who it could be.  I see people here suspect Trump himself. It’s definitely one of the possibilities.

 

[Biff Tannen 45,492]

[bolverk 29,399]

2 hours ago, sheeeit said:

I think it is shitty for anyone to leak private conversations from any potus.  I do not get, at all, this notion that anything the potus says or thinks, at anytime, should be public record.  That is just too stupid.  Any potus has to have the ability to strategize openly without the fear that the conversations will go public.  Be it defense, intelligence, trade, immigration, the economy or whatever.

Questioning the wisdom of renegotiating NAFTA and other trade agreements is fine and a worthy endeavor.  Leaking privileged info that has a direct impact on those negotiations should send someone to jail.  Not just in this case and this potus but any.

Any president who's strategerizing "privileged" information, openly, in front of the press is a fucking clueless clown if he really wanted to keep it a secret - unless he didn't want to keep it a secret.

[The People’s Elbow 707]

3 hours ago, sheeeit said:

Had not seen that article.  It seems like I suggested above.  CNN ran with a story based on info from, likely, Davis.  No fault in that to CNN.  CNN is basically saying that Davis is now changing his story and CNN can not be held responsible for that.  Fair enough.  They also seem to imply that Cohen was one of their sources.  Who knows.

Honestly, I do not trust any media outlet anymore when they quote anonymous sources and this case is exactly why.  There seems to be exactly zero negative ramifications to the sources or news outlets when they rely on sources that are lying.  It happened to Obama, Bush, Clinton too.  It is just too easy in todays world to find a "source".  There is simply no way to get to the truth.

Just using this particular story, I find it impossible to believe that Davis was not the originator of the story.  So Davis tells the media and then Davis tells other people who the media go to to "corroborate" the story and then, voila, you have multiple sources confirming the story,  it is so incestuous.  

This is almost exactly like the Carter Page FISA stuff.  The FBI uses Steele and his dossier as evidence.  They ask Steele if he has talked to anyone in the media and Steele says no.  They then use a media story that corroborates the evidence in the dossier and say it is a second stand alone source because Steele swears he did not talk to the media.  Of course then the media guy who wrote the second corroborating story says that of course he talked to Steele and that Steele gave him all of the info for the story.  But by then the warrant is in place and the damage is done.

Solid goalpost moving. 

[Ted Lange 16,041]

8 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

Of course when Trump says "people are saying" you believe him. And, it is hilarious that you try and find fault for the media reporting what sources actually reported to them, rather than finding fault in sources (many associated with the fucking administration) for lying--either when first talking with the media or when later recanting.

Do you fault the media for reporting what Trump says, even though 90% of it is false?

He or the other Trumpkins won’t answer that. Sad!

[4th&Five 41,459]

 

[4th&Five 41,459]

 

do we only have like 3 minutes to edit now?

[atomheartbevo 89,416]

On 8/31/2018 at 4:20 PM, sheeeit said:

I think it is shitty for anyone to leak private conversations from any potus.  I do not get, at all, this notion that anything the potus says or thinks, at anytime, should be public record.  That is just too stupid. 

What's stupid is that Trump is waging a war on the media, yet he can't fucking stop talking to them.

[HenryJames 65,889]

 

[HenryJames 65,889]

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,356]

 

Really not surprising that Trump would leverage the tariffs for donations from foreign companies.

[Judge Roybeanbag 11,810]

Inspector Genetal?  Where do I sign up?

[maninblack 7,974]

Trump's Trade War Forces US Cherry Growers to "Dump" Their Crops on China

Spoiler

From the staff editorial in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal “Cherry-Picking Trade Losers: Pacific Northwest growers lost $86 million after retaliatory tariffs“):

Quote

 

In April China retaliated against Mr. Trump’s steel and aluminum tariffs by raising the tariff on U.S. cherries to 25% from 10%. American cherries are a luxury item, and affluent Chinese kept buying despite the price hike. But after the U.S. imposed a 25% tariff on an additional $50 billion of Chinese imports, Beijing raised the cherry tariff again—to 50% on July 6. That was too much even for China’s nouveau riche.

By then cherry growers in the Pacific Northwest had already spent the money to grow, harvest and pack their crop. Shelf life is short, and cherries can’t be stored like wheat. So growers are under pressure to sell at whatever price consumers will pay.

“Chinese importers were very forceful in accounting for the tariffs in their purchase price from us,” says Chris McCarthy, CEO of Auvil Fruit Company of Orondo, Washington. “Chinese consumers will spend only so much, so the Chinese importers say: ‘Option A is I buy nothing. Option B is you lower your prices to account for what I pay as a result of the tariff.’ We lose all negotiating power or leverage in that equation because you can’t just sit on the supply and hope they give in. Our products will rot. So we sell and try to recover as much of our upfront cost as we can, just to minimize the damages.”

On July 6 Chinese importers demanded Auvil Fruit Company sell Rainier cherries for $1.44 a pound less than they had paid the day before, Mr. McCarthy says. This summer Auvil lost more than $2.2 million in profit.

Many cherry farmers grow apples and pears, which are also subject to China’s 50% tariff. Mexico and India are among the biggest export markets for American apples, and both are taking retaliatory measures over the steel and aluminum tariffs. Mexico’s 20% penalty took effect in June, and India has a 25% tariff hike planned for Sept. 18, raising the total import tax to 75%.

“With farming in general, there’s a lot of stress because of things you can’t control, like weather,” Mr. McCarthy says. “This is something that’s very controllable by our government. Growers like Auvil aren’t going to be the beneficiaries of a trade war. But we’re paying a tremendous price.”

That message extends beyond the roughly 2,500 cherry growers in the Pacific Northwest. When the government picks industries to protect, it creates losers too.

 

It’s an important point that farmers, both for fruit crops like cherries and also for soybeans and pork, are especially at risk and vulnerable to Trump’s insane trade war because they have already spent the money to grow and harvest their crops and raise and feed their livestock, and many are now forced to sell their output at below their cost of production. It’s as if US farmers are being forced by Trump’s trade war to “dump” their products in China and other foreign markets at prices below their costs of production. And yet, don’t Team Trump and protectionists/scarcityists objects to “dumping” as one of China’s alleged unfair trade practices? Hmmm...

 

[swraith 336]

Trump doesn’t care about farmers in the Pacific Northwest. Their loss is not his concern. He wants to be seen as helping auto factory workers.

[Horn Under a Bad Sign 20,343]

On 8/31/2018 at 4:20 PM, sheeeit said:

I think it is shitty for anyone to leak private conversations from any potus.  I do not get, at all, this notion that anything the potus says or thinks, at anytime, should be public record.  That is just too stupid.  Any potus has to have the ability to strategize openly without the fear that the conversations will go public.  Be it defense, intelligence, trade, immigration, the economy or whatever.

 

 

 

Said President should probably think about the consequences of alienating everybody around him if he wants to keep his idiocy under wraps.  But then, he's an idiot, so he won't. Instead he'll just whine without every understanding the actual dynamic. 

[Horn Under a Bad Sign 20,343]

Automobile prices in United States to rise after Trump's trade deal with Mexico:


http://www.usatoday-go.com/2018/09/02/car-prices-projected-to-jump-under-trump-trade-agreement-with-mexico/

[HenryJames 65,889]

 

[relapse98 634]

#MAGA!

[F250 28,682]

On 9/2/2018 at 7:41 AM, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

Really not surprising that Trump would leverage the tariffs for donations from foreign companies.

As was previously discussed in this thread, tariffs create a huge incentive for rent-seeking behavior and when you have someone as unethical as Trump in charge, you damn well know some shady shit is going on.

 

[Brisketexan 104,596]

1 hour ago, F250 said:

As was previously discussed in this thread, tariffs create a huge incentive for rent-seeking behavior and when you have someone as unethical as Trump in charge, you damn well know some shady shit is going on.

 

That's why the shit sandwich being served here is a multi-layer club shit sandwich.  It's fuckery on multiple levels.

But, you know....MAGA!!!!

[happyfunball 481]

This is very shocking

 

 

Edited September 23, 2018 by happyfunball

[The People’s Elbow 707]

Pfft. The Failing Des Moinea Register. 

[Bozo_Casanova 26,279]

On 9/2/2018 at 8:41 AM, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

Really not surprising that Trump would leverage the tariffs for donations from foreign companies.

Inspector Genital? 

[F250 28,682]

Winning.

 

[zork 629]

Quote

China to Cut Tariffs on Imports Including Machinery, Textiles

Bloomberg News

September 26, 2018, 5:51 AM CDTUpdated on September 26, 2018, 7:12 AM CDT

...

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-26/china-to-cut-import-tariffs-on-some-goods-from-november

[F250 28,682]

1 hour ago, zork said:

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-26/china-to-cut-import-tariffs-on-some-goods-from-november

Interesting, there is no mention of cutting import tarrifs on U.S. goods.

[retread 2,951]