Connect with us

News

President Trump’s Envoy Takes Care of Business in Beijing

Published

on

President Donald Trump’s envoy finished talks in Beijing with Chinese leaders as the United States and China come closer to reaching a massive trade agreement that would re-shape the economies of both nations.

Now, the series swings back home to the United States for the final round of negotiations.

Steven Mnuchin and Robert Lighthizer flew to Beijing and did not experience any difficulty — at least in public — but President Donald Trump still holds all the cards.

take our poll - story continues below

Should Mitt Romney be EXPELLED from the U.S. Senate by the GOP for his vote to convict President Trump?

  • Should Mitt Romney be EXPELLED from the U.S. Senate by the GOP for his vote to convict President Trump?

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

For decades, China has taken advantage of the United States in trade deals, exploiting the weakness of past Republican and Democrat administrations. But Trump changed the game.

American tariffs struck a decisive blow to the Chinese economy, forcing the business-savvy Communists to come to the table. In 2018, China posted its worst economic growth figure — 6.6 percent — since 1990, when then-president George Bush used the collapse of the Soviet Union to push through a globalist America Last foreign policy imitated by his successors Clinton, Bush, and Obama. China’s entry into the World Trade Organization in 2001 spelled doom for American manufacturing. The Midwest, battered also by NAFTA and the more than $1 trillion taxpayer tab for the Iraq War, fell into deep economic decline.

But Trump is bringing it back, aided by Mnuchin and his economic adviser Larry Kudlow, who is more than willing to play ball with tariffs in order to correct the massive trade disparity enjoyed by the Chinese regime.

The two sides have already agreed on one major point: China is going to purchase about $1.2 trillion in additional American goods over a six-year period, enough to wipe out the trade imbalance by the year 2024.

But the devil is in the details. The American people deserve 5G technology without fear of Chinese companies spying on us, even more than they do now. And the Chinese shamelessly rip off our tech innovation with intellectual property theft. Inventors — like content creators — don’t like being ripped off.

Trump has the upper hand because he can always call the deal off and impose more tariffs on China. Who can stop him? Not the well-funded but misguided Koch political network, which fought tooth and nail against tariffs (they like so-called “free trade” because they like cheap overseas labor). The Kochs were completely incapable of stopping Trump’s tariffs, which must really make them mad. Some people just don’t want to see America do well. Sad!

Now the Chinese vice premier is gearing up for a trip to Washington, D.C. Has he read “Art of the Deal”? Perhaps the North Koreans can lend him their copy, gifted to them by America’s informal ambassador Dennis Rodman.

Good work, Lighthizer and Mnuchin!

Bypass Tech Censorship!

Facebook, Twitter and Google are actively restricting conservative content through biased algorithms. Silicon Valley doesn't want you to read our articles. Bypass the censorship, sign up for our newsletter now!

Bypass Tech Censorship!

Facebook, Twitter and Google are actively restricting conservative content through biased algorithms. Silicon Valley doesn't want you to read our articles. Bypass the censorship, sign up for our newsletter now!

Have a hot tip for Big League Politics?

Got a hot news tip for us? Photos or video of a breaking story? Send your tips, photos and videos to tips@bigleaguepolitics.com. All hot tips are immediately forwarded to BLP Staff.

Have something to say? Send your own guest column or original reporting to submissions@bigleaguepolitics.com.

You Might Like

News

Did Bernie Sanders Just Endorse a Neocon Regime Change Foreign Policy?

Published

on

Is Bernie Sanders the anti-war candidate that many non-interventionists are making him out to be?

Journalists Jacob Crosse and Barry Grey presented some interesting observations about Sanders’ foreign policy views.

Sanders criticized the assassination of Iranian General Qassem Suleimani in January and also stressed his opposition to the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

During the Iowa presidential debate, Sanders loudly boasted, “I not only voted against that war, I helped lead the effort against that war.”

take our poll - story continues below

Should Mitt Romney be EXPELLED from the U.S. Senate by the GOP for his vote to convict President Trump?

  • Should Mitt Romney be EXPELLED from the U.S. Senate by the GOP for his vote to convict President Trump?

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

However, Sanders changed his tune when chatting with the New York Times.

The answers the Sanders campaign gave the Times showed its flexibility when it comes to foreign policy.

In other words, the Sanders campaign signaled to the military and intelligence apparatus that Sanders won’t present a threat to their interests and may actually carry out their interventionist agenda.

One question in the survey that the Times sent the Sanders campaign stuck out above the rest.

The third survey question asked, “Would you consider military force to pre-empt an Iranian or North Korean nuclear or missile test?”

The Sanders campaign responded, “Yes.”

Based on this response, Sanders’ is signaling that he’s willing to continue Bush-era policies of “preemptive war.”

Like Obama, Sanders’ opposition to the Iraq War was a matter of politics rather than a principled opposition to regime change wars.

His campaign was also asked, “Would you consider military force for a humanitarian intervention?”

Sanders responded, “Yes.”

Some of the wars that the U.S. carried out in the name of “human rights” have been the Bosnian war and the bombing of Serbia in the 1990s along with the aerial campaign against Libya in 2011 and the Civil War launched in Syria.

All in all, Sanders’ pro-peace/non-interventionist image is at best window dressing.

Under a Sanders presidency, the interventionist status quo will likely stay in place.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


You Might Like

Trending