President Trump: Making America Great Again...

[Uncle Ted]

UT bot is highlighting a conspiratorial claim against the one real and sane libertarian who holds public office. Does not compute.

I read it in the paper... it has to be true. Please tell me more stories about how Drumpf colluded with the Russians, is going to be impeached, and Pence will be president. I like those.

Good call, Uncle Ted. I have always found that the best place to look for balanced, accurate information is a political opponent's TV ads.

It only doesn't compute if you hold onto the thought that Ted is a libertarian.

I like to expose the fake libertarians like this crony.


If they were saying shiz about the other candidate wouldn't they get sued for slander or something?

While he gets sue happy maybe he should go after these guys...

Justin Amash’s Business Interests in China Underscore His Push to Impeach Trump
It may be more than constitutionalism driving Amash’s dogged opposition to President Trump.

Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI) has become the darling of anti-Trump liberals following his declaration in favor of impeaching President Donald Trump yesterday.

While Amash acts like his support of impeachment is rooted in constitutional grounds, there may be a financial motive to his opposition to Trump. It has been revealed that Amash has significant business interests in China that may be harmed by Trump’s ‘America First’ trade policies.

In Amash’s financial disclosure forms for the year of 2015, he was shown as receiving up to $1 million in annual income due to his ownership stake in Michigan Industrial Tools (MIT). MIT is the parent company of Tekton Tools, Amash’s family business, that benefits directly from Chinese manufacturing.

An article from MLive in 2010 exposed Amash as being the co-owner of Dynamic Source International (DSI), a Chinese company that was once an MIT supplier. Amash’s family have been outspoken advocates of the globalist trade status quo for many years.
[...]

https://bigleaguepolitics.com/justin...impeach-trump/

Wow... million(s) in annual income. Chinese tools suck, BTW.

[Uncle Ted]

yeah, trade is bad. emperor Trump has taught you well.

Yes, the current trade with China is bad... We have been screwed by the Chinese forever. Even Chuck Schumer recognizes this!

Embedded Tweet

Y'all should listen to your boy Schumer.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Yes, the current trade with China is bad... We have been screwed by the Chinese forever. Even Chuck Schumer recognizes this!

Y'all should listen to your boy Schumer.

I actually think Trump might be doing the right thing with China. Time will tell.

[Northwestcoug]

I like to expose the fake libertarians like this crony.

If that's true, your list of real/not-crazy libertarians is growing shorter by the day...

[Jeff Lebowski]

If that's true, your list of real/not-crazy libertarians is growing shorter by the day...

I am not aware of any.

[BlueK]

I read it in the paper... it has to be true. Please tell me more stories about how Drumpf colluded with the Russians, is going to be impeached, and Pence will be president. I like those.





I like to expose the fake libertarians like this crony.


If they were saying shiz about the other candidate wouldn't they get sued for slander or something?

While he gets sue happy maybe he should go after these guys...


https://bigleaguepolitics.com/justin...impeach-trump/

Wow... million(s) in annual income. Chinese tools suck, BTW.

Except that there are Constitutional reasons to push back on Trump.

[Northwestcoug]

I am not aware of any.

Well, I want to give UT the benefit of the doubt

[BlueK]

Yes, the current trade with China is bad... We have been screwed by the Chinese forever. Even Chuck Schumer recognizes this!

Embedded Tweet

Y'all should listen to your boy Schumer.

In general, Trump is wrong about trade.
In general, Schumer is wrong about trade.

That shouldn't be hard to understand, especially for a principled libertarian who has complaints with both sides of the aisle.

Regardless of what may be the best way to push back on China's behaviors which we can all agree are not the best, both Trump and Schumer have a long history going back decades of making anti-free trade statements.

It's quite possible in the next few weeks Trump will declare a "deal" with China where he can claim he fixed everything and remove the tariffs before more people get hurt. But another good possibility is that he won't because he actually believes tariffs are good for the long term in general and just leave them on. To this point they have generally not targeted the direct to consumer products that China sells in the US, but he's already asked the treasury to make this last set of tariffs ready to go. If that happens there will be a noticeable effect on prices which will probably be unpopular and knock Trump's approval down to a lower level as the election gets closer.

You would think his political instincts would keep him from going that direction. But the interesting thing there is that if there is that his protectionist, anti-free trade ideas are the one belief you can trace back to him the longest, even farther back than his views on immigration.

[Uncle Ted]

Except that there are Constitutional reasons to push back on Trump.

Let's see... reasons to push back on Drumpf:

(1) He colluded with the Russians!

(2) He obstructed justice!

(3) He won't show us his tax returns so we are going to keep the republican candidate off the ballot.

(4) (Undisclosed) "Constitutional reasons".

Yeah, I am convinced that the Dems are the constitutional experts given that the only requirements to run for president are like being a natural born citizen and 35 years of age or older. Nothing in the constitution about disclosing tax returns. I hope California and all the other blue states do this, however, then the supreme court can just throw out all their electoral votes after the fact for hosting a rigged election. Maybe the libertarian candidate will have a chance!

[BlueK]

Let's see... reasons to push back on Drumpf:

(1) He colluded with the Russians!

(2) He obstructed justice!

(3) He won't show us his tax returns so we are going to keep the republican candidate off the ballot.

(4) (Undisclosed) "Constitutional reasons".

Yeah, I am convinced that the Dems are the constitutional experts given that the only requirements to run for president are like being a natural born citizen and 35 years of age or older. Nothing in the constitution about disclosing tax returns. I hope California and all the other blue states do this, however, then the supreme court can just throw out all their electoral votes after the fact for hosting a rigged election. Maybe the libertarian candidate will have a chance!

change the subject.

But if you must, the president doesn't have the authority under the Constitution to unilaterally impose taxes, which is what tariffs are. Oh sure, there was a Constitutionally dubious law passed I think in the 40s about the president being able to institute tariffs for "national security reasons." I'm sure you'll agree baseball gloves and bicycles easily fall into that.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/fr...you-2018-09-24

[Uncle Ted]

In general, Trump is wrong about trade.
In general, Schumer is wrong about trade.

That shouldn't be hard to understand, especially for a principled libertarian who has complaints with both sides of the aisle.

Regardless of what may be the best way to push back on China's behaviors which we can all agree are not the best, both Trump and Schumer have a long history going back decades of making anti-free trade statements.

It's quite possible in the next few weeks Trump will declare a "deal" with China where he can claim he fixed everything and remove the tariffs before more people get hurt. But another good possibility is that he won't because he actually believes tariffs are good for the long term in general and just leave them on. To this point they have generally not targeted the direct to consumer products that China sells in the US, but he's already asked the treasury to make this last set of tariffs ready to go. If that happens there will be a noticeable effect on prices which will probably be unpopular and knock Trump's approval down to a lower level as the election gets closer.

You would think his political instincts would keep him from going that direction. But the interesting thing there is that if there is that his protectionist, anti-free trade ideas are the one belief you can trace back to him the longest, even farther back than his views on immigration.

Oh, so we have (or had before Drumpf started the trade war) completely free trade with China? Good to know!

Yeah, we should just have started a real war with China, right? That would have been better.

BTW, time to get rid of you Huawei Android phone!

[Uncle Ted]

change the subject.

But if you must, the president doesn't have the authority under the Constitution to unilaterally impose taxes, which is what tariffs are. Oh sure, there was a Constitutionally dubious law passed I think in the 40s about the president being able to institute tariffs for "national security reasons." I'm sure you'll agree baseball gloves and bicycles easily fall into that.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/fr...you-2018-09-24

Believe me... those Chinese android phones and cell equipment are a national security threat.

[BlueK]

Believe me... those Chinese android phones and cell equipment are a national security threat.

Cool. I'm fine with going after Huawei specifically.

[Uncle Ted]

Cool. I'm fine with going after Huawei specifically.

Huawei is owned by the Chinese government.

[BlueK]

Huawei is owned by the Chinese government.

Ok, good. But different subject. What the US is doing to limit Huawei from operating here isn't the same thing as a broad discussion on the merits of protectionist trade policy that Trump has spoken out in favor of since the 1980s.