A contrarian take on the Trump tariffs
Stocks fell nearly 2% after the tariff announcement, and that’s the reaction that rational readers should go with. But if anyone is foolish enough to trust my judgment, here’s a more optimistic take.
I suspect that Trump has decided that he wants to do a China deal before getting into the election year. He knows that his negotiating position will be weaker in 2020, as the Chinese would have an incentive to string things out until after the election. They know that Trump doesn’t want to risk an economic shock right before the election. In addition, Trump wants to run for re-election with a big “win” against China under his belt.
So my prediction is that these tariffs are a sign that Trump plans to do a deal with China in the next month or two. In that sense, it might almost be regarded as “good news” (contra Wall Street).
Trump presumably hopes that China will bow to his demands, but he must also know that a 10% tariff is not large enough to force them to capitulate. The yuan has fallen sharply as a result of the earlier round of tariffs; so Chinese goods will remain quite competitively priced.
So why do I expect a deal in the near future? I’d point to the recent dust-up with Mexico over immigration. Trump’s officials had negotiated with Mexico for a period of months. In those negotiations, Mexico had offered several concessions. Then Trump suddenly and dramatically announced plans to put tariffs on Mexico if they did not agree to his demands. The tariffs never took effect—it was all for show. They then signed a deal that was essentially identical to what had been negotiated before the tariff threat.
The Mexican tariff threat was all theatre, Trump’s way of convincing his fans that his tough negotiating style works. And he succeeded; at least based on conversations I had with several Trump supporters, who thought the tariff threat triggered the Mexican “capitulation”.
So there is precedent for Trump doing exactly what I am suggesting here—a dramatic threat of tariffs right before an anticipated deal was signed. Then it looks to all the world like a Trump “win.”
How does Trump know he can get a deal? Recall that the previous negotiations foundered on US accusations that China had reneged on previous promises. That’s kind of silly, as in trade negotiations nothing is agreed to until everything is agreed to. As the US made more and more demands, China may have backed off on some positions in order to get a sense of what issues were most important to American negotiators. In any case, Trump presumably knows that China will agree to a deal based on their best previous offer, which was reported to be more than 90% of a completed deal. Thus Trump knows he can get a deal anytime he wants, if he’s willing to settle for a deal that incorporates China’s best offer in previous negotiations. Maybe he can even get a bit more.
Substantively, none of this matters, as China will likely not adhere to any deal. Why should they? We don’t adhere to the trade deals that we sign.
People talk a lot about the US interests regarding trade deficits, intellectual property, national security, etc. Trump doesn’t care about any of this. Well, he cares a bit about trade deficits. But for the most part Trump cares about Trump. He’ll gladly give in on Huawei if he can get a trade deal that helps him get re-elected. Do you think Pennsylvania steelworkers care about Huawei? To his credit, Trump correctly understands that the John Bolton’s of the world are foolish warmongers, and Huawei is not a threat to US national security. I suspect that Marco Rubio will be more disappointed by the deal than I will be.
I believe that all of Trump’s negotiations need to be seen through the lens of political theatre. Trump reversed course on both Iran and North Korea, merely because he wanted to do the opposite of what Obama did. Both moves failed, but he paid no political price. If he had succeeded, he would have gotten lots of credit. Trump knows that presidential “activity” is a “heads I win, tails it’s a draw” situation. For example, historians view Wilson as a much better president than Coolidge, even though Coolidge was far superior on the economy, foreign policy, human rights, civil rights, indeed just about everything. Historians like Wilson because he was more active than Coolidge. Bush even got re-elected after the Iraq War fiasco. Presidents are encouraged to roll the dice. Trump knows that.
But again, go with the stock and bond market view—the wisdom of crowds. What do I know?
Tags:
1. August 2019 at 13:27
i think trump is clever. he’s putting pressure on the fed to keep lowering. for all his faults, he is a negotiator.
1. August 2019 at 13:33
Scott, I disagree with your premise. You’re right that “for the most part Trump cares about Trump.” But I think the evidence is strong that he does NOT want a deal. He wants to string the China, Iran, and North Korea sanctions along through the election.
He’s already told us exactly what his messaging strategy will be. Yesterday he tweeted: “China, Iran & other foreign countries are looking at the Democrat Candidates and “drooling” over the small prospect that they could be dealing with them in the not too distant future. They would be able to rip off our beloved USA like never before. With President Trump, NO WAY!”
On this, I take Trump at his word. He thinks that acting tough on China makes him look strong, he wants to credit his own unique strength as the factor that got our adversaries to the table, and he thinks that he will be able to attack the eventual Dem nominee as weak on China/Iran/North Korea. Why make a deal and sacrifice that winning message?
1. August 2019 at 13:47
“I believe that all of Trump’s negotiations need to be seen through the lens of political theatre.” True, but why limit this to “Trump’s negotiations”? All politics–especially in a democracy–is theatre.
1. August 2019 at 13:53
This might be your best post on Trump. He’s clearly up to…something, and your speculation has a definite air of plausibility.
1. August 2019 at 15:00
Scott,
This post doesn’t seem unreasonable, but I’m not convinced Trump is as smart or rational as apparently assumed, and I know you don’t have high opinions of his rationality or intelligence.
I agree that Trump is out for Trump, but I’m not convinced he doesn’t think that the tariffs may still be a positive for the economy, at least if he gets what he thinks is enough support from the Fed. I suspect he genuinely believes the Fed is undermining him.
I can’t make a prediction. To me, this is a coin toss. Your scenario seems equally plausible to to a no deal scenario.
1. August 2019 at 15:10
Scott,
I’m curious. Are you confident enough in your prediction to leverage up some margin and/or sell puts and/or buy calls on stock index ETFs?
1. August 2019 at 15:24
Big clap for making the point about Coolidge being a profoundly better President than Wilson (or Harding, or Hoover …). A greatly underestimated President because people don’t appreciate the value of resisting the pressure to act.
1. August 2019 at 15:52
http://magaimg.net/img/8m4x.png
Compare this to ANY rally for ANY Demokkkrat candidate for President.
Why does the fake news make it seem like the D’s have comparable support from the public?
D’s don’t want open borders for compassionate reasons.
They want them so they can rig elections.
1. August 2019 at 16:06
China “trade” and China tech cold war arent not tied together.
There are clear Chinese gives on trade that would warrant a deal to reduce tariffs BUT would still keep Chinese out of the tech stack for global networking.
In this sense Scott is partially right, the US isnt going to let US tech companies use Chinese tech or license to China EVEN IF we have trade agreements.
AGAIN this is about backdoors.
And with China they are guaranteed for Chicom.
We have enough work to do to keep Barr and Sessions on their heels on end to end encryption.
This is almost as basic to US way of life as 2A making sure red states have 500M guns to have the final say in any discussion with blue states.
EVEN AMONGST DEMS the die is cast on keeping China out of the 1st world tech stack.
1. August 2019 at 16:13
Well, one can never be too cynical about Wall Street or Washington, and that includes Donald Trump.
But perhaps Trump wants to “run against China” and so he will keep the tariffs on.
Trump may get lucky. Beijing is presently massing troops outside Hong Kong, while inside Hong Kong, though little-known, Red China maintains a 5,000-man garrison of the People’s Liberation Army. The pundits say Beijing is too smart and will avoid another Tiananmen Square. But others say that the authoritarian Beijing cannot allow images of civil unrest among Chinese to be projected into Red China. In that oldest of boogeymen, China leaders are afraid to look weak.
Red China has incarcerated 1.5 million Uyghurs with hardly a blink from Western media and opinion-makers. But I suspect if Red China puts the hobnailed boot down on Hong Kong, Trump may emerge a winner.
1. August 2019 at 16:16
Trump figures he can get himself an extra rate cut or two before he does the China deal. The combo will unleash a lot of liquidity when the time comes – probably timed with the election. The academics at the Fed are being outwitted by someone with some “street smarts.”
1. August 2019 at 16:38
Finally a good analysis, except here:
Even if your theory were true, it’s still a big win for Trump. No reason for quotation marks. They are his officials and his executive.
You used to say he was responsible for his officials and his executive. In the past you always said that he would not deliver and would not achieve anything in negotiations. You made fun of him for not achieving anything, for example on the migration issue. Now he has a deal with Mexico and the wall is also being built because he has rebuilt the Supreme Court accordingly, and you are desperately looking for some excuse why he supposedly has nothing to do with it. No, no, no, it’s not that simple. Be honest for once. No TDS for once. You can say what you want about Trump, but surprisingly enough he delivers many things he promised in the election campaign.
Let’s compare the 2.5 years of Trump with the 8 years of Obama for a second. What has Obama achieved in these 8 years??? Historians say that Obama’s greatest domestic success has been Obamacare. That says all about his domestic policies. This is his centerpiece? This is supposed to be the positive essence of eight years of Obama??? No further comment.
So what about foreign policy. His greatest success there, according to the mainstream narrative again, was the deal with Iran. The agreement was supposed to serve the security of our allies Israel and Saudi Arabia, that was the dishonest narrative, but both countries were strictly against the agreement. The deal was supposed to bring peace, but “surprisingly” Iran’s aggressiveness exploded after the deal.
Before the deal, Iran was effectively crippled by sanctions and wasted its few resources on pointless nuclear weapons that were never finished. After the deal, Iran drowned in money, extended its power to Syria and Yemen, waged proxy wars, killed hundreds of thousands of people in Yemen and Syria, expanded its missile program. All this was foreseeable, but Obama made the deal anyway. Yet the media cheered Obama as if he were the new Messiah. That’s just not honest. No wonder people chose Trump. If you are surrounded by a fake news press, and a fake news president, you might as well elect another fake news president, but this time from the other camp.
1. August 2019 at 17:16
Besides the theatrics some believe its a way of pressuring the fed to lower interest rates, but if the tariffs cause the equilibrium interest rate to fall by more than the fed is willing to cut then he is in fact causing the opposite of the intended effect.
Before he spoke it felt like the market had deciphered Powell’s cryptic message.
I hope you are right and its all for show.
1. August 2019 at 17:33
agrippa, Sort of like when I repeatedly stab myself to put pressure on my doctor to sew up my wounds.
stoneybatter, That’s possible.
Michael, He’s a “master manipulator” of a certain segment of the population.
No, I’m not investing based on this. I trust markets more than myself.
Christian, You said:
“Now he has a deal with Mexico and the wall is also being built”
Thanks for some comic relief. Why not add the Canadian drug importation initiative?
1. August 2019 at 17:42
Let’s wait and see the Chinese reaction. If the Chinese come out and state the August negotiations are off with this tariff threat then it’s likely no deal is coming anytime soon. If however Chinese state August negotiations will continue as scheduled, then this scenario is plausible but I am not optimistic.
1. August 2019 at 17:59
“Now he has a deal with Mexico and the wall is also being built”
“Thanks for some comic relief. Why not add the Canadian drug importation initiative?”
Why are facts being ridiculed by the blog author?
1. August 2019 at 18:01
Demokkkrats like Omar encouraging violence, “riots”, is why innocent people are being attacked for wearing red hats.
https://i.imgur.com/j6ymnwO.jpg
1. August 2019 at 18:03
https://i.imgur.com/IRmjhlA.jpg
The fake news narrative, of which this blog’s author is an obedient sheep, is contradicted by reality every day, but the fake news will never report it, lest they lose mind control over their sheep.
1. August 2019 at 18:05
If you want to know where most racism is today, look no further than the minds of liberals who view conservative blacks with disdain and contempt, as if they are not allowed to have their own independent minds.
1. August 2019 at 18:06
“Let’s hope the Democrats win in 2020”
https://i.imgur.com/uJcM3XB.jpg
1. August 2019 at 18:11
Where liberals get their ‘news’, i.e. brainwashing:
https://i.imgur.com/ZYmoDUb.png
1. August 2019 at 18:26
Nearly 8 million previously disenfranchised African Americans now live in the recently passed ‘opportunity zones’.
EVERY SINGLE DEMOKKKRAT VOTED AGAINST IT.
1. August 2019 at 19:26
“Trump reversed course on both Iran and North Korea, merely because he wanted to do the opposite of what Obama did.”
This is idiocy. Both were Pompeo ideas.
Good point re: Wilson v. Coolidge.
1. August 2019 at 23:24
It would be strange if Christian List’s take on Obams’s and Trump’s legacies ends up being accurate. One thing that I will say is that there is a lot to recommend in a president who isn’t ideological and is cynically focused on re-election, and who views their public face as political theater and nothing more. I am not sure if that is an accurate description of Trump, but given the way Trump has been jawboning at the Fed, I wouldn’t be surprised if it was the case.
2. August 2019 at 03:21
https://i.imgur.com/GClEkmt.jpg
Trump and the Republicans are not racist
2. August 2019 at 03:32
The military is leading on policy re: Iran and NK, not Pompeo.
Obama’s Iran deal was arming Iran with nuclear weapons using a satellite facility in Syria. That’s what was taken out when the report was missile strikes against a “chemical weapons depot”. But the Mullahs are evil and refuse to agree to denuclearization.
NK was not controlled by Kim Jong Un. But Kim made a deal with the US military to oust who was in control, and have denuclearized. NK will be finally freed from the cabal.
Fake news isn’t reporting on the peace on the Korean peninsula because their role is to cover for the criminals who were going to launch WW3 to depopulate the Earth.
2. August 2019 at 03:52
The Stock Market could very well have declined not because additional tariffs were imposed on Chinese imports, but because of what the tariffs imply about expected China-US relations.
China reneged on their deal to buy agricultural product from America, and also reneged on their deal to stop deadly Fentanyl from being sent here.
Or, another possibility is that the markets expected higher tariffs but when they saw it was only 10% more on $300 billion, or $30 billion/year, US stock prices readjusted to reflect the lower tariff amount.
In other words, based on the PRICE CHANGE ALONE, we cannot reason from it.
I remember reading something about not reasoning from a price change on this blog. Author is an agenda pushing fraud.
2. August 2019 at 03:56
https://twitter.com/TrumpWarRoom/status/1157095139854159873
Trump and the Republicans are uniting the people.
Demokkkrats are always trying to divide us by race and religion.
Why is this?
Because the Demokkkrats are controlled by literal Satan worshiping child rapists and killers. By pushing a ‘narrative’ that pits civilians against each other based on race, religion, political affiliation, class, then they are not fighting back against the elite who are exploiting them.
Power is all the D’s want. That’s all they care about.
They want to abolish private healthcare AND give free healthcare to illegal immigrants. Why? Because they need illegal votes to win elections.
Welcome to the D party con.
2. August 2019 at 05:16
Neon Wolf – you need to take your meds today.
2. August 2019 at 06:00
Trump humiliates his supporters on a daily basis, and they love him for it. Here is a plausible explanation of Trump’s behavior and his supporters’ behavior: https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/08/01/self-centered-religion-shared-by-marianne-williamson-president-trump/
2. August 2019 at 06:11
Scott: what I mean is, at bottom, Trump plays his cards well, from the point of view of playing cards. I have seen him in action as I was a minor player in a the theater of a few of his financings. Putting aside the efficacy for the benefit of the commonweal, his goal is to push rates down, assets up as he approaches the election. Thus my comment. I don’t think Powell has the gravitas, cajones or intellect to work around Trump. We need Stanley.
2. August 2019 at 06:21
The thing is that Trump doesn’t need a deal with China to claim victory; all he needs to do is point to the 3-4% immediate gain that will occur in stock markets once he lifts tariffs. Scott, I think you are incorrect that Trump can take a Chinese deal anytime he wants. The reason for this is that as the 2020 elections approach, there will probably only be a 50/50 chance for re-election given the extreme polarization in the US (this will be true for next decade, IMO), so what is China’s incentive to grant additional concessions and reward Trump for starting this mess? If Trump keeps the tariffs going into the election, then the economy continues to slow and his re-election chances deteriorate, so it is Trump who is going to run out of leverage first and remove the tariffs because the Fed eventually proves unwilling/unable to fully offset his policy mistakes.
Maybe if Trump was aggressively pursuing free trade deals with other Asian countries (e.g. the TPP that both parties foolishly opposed) or rounding up global support for pressure on China to change some of its worst practices, he could have pulled off a substantive trade victory versus China, but I don’t think he can achieve anything other than a “victory” of removing his tariffs.
2. August 2019 at 06:41
rayward, why do you insult people as if they can’t think for themselves?
Maybe they know Trump is on their side and you can’t tolerate that truth?
Here’s the left summarized in one Pic
https://i.imgur.com/KKCDrtS.jpg
2. August 2019 at 06:41
lol, “plausible”.
**WAPO IS FAKE NEWS**
2. August 2019 at 06:43
Derrick, you’re triggered? Thanks for proving I’m over the target.
When you cannot attack the message, attack the messenger.
Typical leftist sheep.
2. August 2019 at 07:22
Christian,
The affordable care act was a much bigger achievement than anything Trump has done. The truth is that while it has flaws, the ACA is still law because it is a good law. Republicans wanted to appeal it for years just like NBA players want to fight each other. When they controlled both chambers and the white house they didn’t repeal it because it is a good law that helps people. The ACA is better than the previous situation and Republicans don’t have a better idea to replace it. And to that point, the supreme court didn’t uphold it because of constructionist ideals. They upheld it because it is a good and popular law. Also, the Iran deal was our best option. Tearing it up was stupid. We have no plan now other than war, which is a terrible option. The Iranian people will be subjected to unnecessary suffering while Iran pursues a nuclear weapon- lose lose. Obama was not a great president, but he was much better than Trump.
2. August 2019 at 08:07
Burgos, You said:
“It would be strange if Christian List’s take on Obams’s and Trump’s legacies ends up being accurate.”
Yes that would be surprising, given that almost everything he says is wrong. Trump has failed on almost all his campaign promises. (Reducing illegal immigration, expelling illegals, rebuilding infrastructure, reducing the trade deficit, repealing Obamacare, bringing back manufacturing jobs, reducing the budget deficit, creating 4% GDP growth, etc.) Yes, he cut taxes for corporations, I’ll give him that.
And yet he’ll likely win, as his supporters don’t care about that stuff. They want someone who will “own the libs” on twitter.
agrippa. It seems to me that Powell is doing fine.
derek, I said:
“He knows that his negotiating position will be weaker in 2020, as the Chinese would have an incentive to string things out until after the election.”
You said:
“Scott, I think you are incorrect that Trump can take a Chinese deal anytime he wants. The reason for this is that as the 2020 elections approach, there will probably only be a 50/50 chance for re-election given the extreme polarization in the US (this will be true for next decade, IMO), so what is China’s incentive to grant additional concessions and reward Trump for starting this mess?”
2. August 2019 at 08:27
Sumner, Trump does not have enough supporters to win. And the manufacturing jobs are sort of being brought back: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MANEMP
2. August 2019 at 08:28
Newsweek (fake news) claimed Trump’s base is “abandoning him”
https://i.imgur.com/ZBUL8k5.jpg
2. August 2019 at 08:52
Scott, this is the section of your post I considered myself to be disagreeing with:
“How does Trump know he can get a deal? …In any case, Trump presumably knows that China will agree to a deal based on their best previous offer, which was reported to be more than 90% of a completed deal. Thus Trump knows he can get a deal anytime he wants, if he’s willing to settle for a deal that incorporates China’s best offer in previous negotiations. Maybe he can even get a bit more.”
I have big doubts Trump can get any more at all in a meaningful way, and I think it is more plausible that China’s offer will get less generous and that Trump indeed cannot “get a deal anytime he wants”. I bet Trump can get China to agree to buy a whole bunch of crops they would normally buy, but probably not much else.
2. August 2019 at 09:20
“They want someone who will “own the libs” on twitter.”
Sumner, quit being an idiot. 25% of Americans support Trump’s twitter.
2. August 2019 at 10:49
Worst Hitler ever
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1157345692517634049?s=21
2. August 2019 at 11:05
Scott—surprised you think he is not just random—few of these pols are random. I was thinking he was random.
My first reaction to the threatened tariff was sort of a “what!?”. Then he followed it with “my good friend Xi”, and “we are still working on a deal” and then I realized it is still only a “threat”. Then I am thinking 10%?–That is almost a kiss. And 30 days from now? Plus–in August?
In the end—I can not figure out what exactly he is up to. A friend of mine made the same point about exchange rates (BTW, why do tariffs matter if they are offset by exchange rates?–That cannot be right—i.e., there are other crosses besides dollar/yuan—but I get your point none the less–re: US China).
By the way, I never assume that what he says is true. How do we know there was a “deal” if we accepted the “90”%? I have no idea whether anything we hear is true.
Having said all of the above bla bla—I do agree he is trying to do something specific—and for sure your point about it having to do with “a win” is part of it. He even let it be known that his big boy advisers were against it—that almost seemed like a set up.
I too am a wisdom of crowds guy—-but the crowd does digest info over time and incorporates new info. I have to admit, I do find it difficult to believe he wants to go into the election with a hot “trade war” with China. But for you to be right-this has to end soon—like around Labor day—when “school is open again.
I guess we will soon find out.
2. August 2019 at 12:06
“Let’s hope the Democrats win in 2020”
https://i.imgur.com/DynD9CV.jpg
😂
2. August 2019 at 12:33
Harding, “Sort of”. You mean as they were under Obama?
derek, I should have said anytime in the near future. Obviously I don’t think the Chinese offer will still be on the table a year from now, I tried to indicate that in the passage I re-quoted.
2. August 2019 at 12:46
“Trump does not have enough supporters to win”
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
[breathes]
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
2. August 2019 at 13:44
This Sumner post sounds like a pretty reasonable scenario. The tariffs aren’t part of any grander political or economic philosophy as far as I can tell, so why wouldn’t we expect it to serve Trump’s personal benefit?
2. August 2019 at 15:11
The Satan worshiping traitor Obama (USSS codename ‘Renegade’] would NEVER have been able to do this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXaNBvjtW1A
2. August 2019 at 15:47
“Trump does not have enough supporters to win”
https://twitter.com/TheJTWilde/status/1157252251192352769
2. August 2019 at 16:47
Rabbi Yaakov Menken discusses how members of #TheSquad have racist, anti-semitic views
https://twitter.com/EpochTimes/status/1157448202213371904
True history of the Demokkkrat party
https://i.imgur.com/sCcwrj1.png
2. August 2019 at 21:39
@derek
China’s incentive to make a deal with Trump would be that they want him to be re-elected. Any Democrat elected is likelier to start a war and to take a much harder line towards China in all sorts of ways. Trump, once he gets a trade deal, is pretty likely to declare victory and then leave China alone. HRC would never do something like that, nor do any of the other candidates seem likely to do that with the exception of Sanders and Williamson. All of the other Democrats are likely to be a huge pain in the tucus to China because Democratic foreign policy is still neo-conservativism, just with a pivot towards China instead of the Middle East.
3. August 2019 at 03:59
Scott, you may not care, but Its hard not to. There is a de facto spammer interfering on your sight (no, not me). I know you want informality which all appreciate. But purposeful hectoring beyond your topic becomes obvious. You don’t need knew rules, just subjective judgment—-21 of 51 on this essay alone—-my opinion of course and yours is the only one that matters—-but I would clean the floor.
3. August 2019 at 04:43
The 2020 election will be a turnout war. I hope Democrats eventually understand that. Trump is obviously trying to maximize turnout among his very limited base, and he will try to suppress turnout for Democrats by smearing them. The media will assist Trump by too often setting up false equivalents.
Democrats need to speak calmly and rationally, but carry a big stick. They need to make the election about Trump and make his crimes and corruption central.
Then, they need to offer a non-scary, positive agenda that includes negotiating down drug prices and other prices for Medicare recipients, among other cost reforms if they’re going to push Medicare for all. They should make it opt-out, and emphasize the cost savings they will generate.
Above all, they have to be tough, again without being scary. Someone like Buttigieg would most make Trump seem like the moron he obviously is, though his local police scandal may have mortally wounded him.
Biden is probably good enough, and isn fully capable of going after Trump and making him look foolish.
Obviously, Trump has a high floor and low ceiling. Any competent candidate can easily win. But, competence isnin short supply in the Democratic Party.
Overall, I think Trump has only a slim chance of winning again.
3. August 2019 at 04:53
“very limited base.”
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Do the sheep want to believe fake news or do they just automatically believe it?
https://www.google.com/search?q=Trump+rally+pics&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiA0-mf3-bjAhWNB50JHYykA60Q_AUIESgB&biw=1368&bih=770&dpr=2
3. August 2019 at 04:58
LOL, what “crimes”?
The ‘guilty until proven innocent’ inversion of justice three year long fake news Russia collusion MKUltra attack on the population?
“…the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”
THE DEMOCRATS ATTEMPTED AN ILLEGAL COUP, TREASON PUNISHABLE BY THE DEATH PENALTY.
WAKE UP.
3. August 2019 at 04:59
https://i.imgur.com/nub2tVQ.png
3. August 2019 at 08:06
Scott: This discussion is all about Trump with nothing about China, a big mistake. Xi has no interest in a deal, he feels the Middle Kingdom has awoken from a 400 year sleep and is ready to return to its rightful place as super power of the Eastern Hemisphere if not the world.
Xi canceled the offer made by his negotiators and removed his lead negotiator. He reneged on his agreement with Trump to increase agriculture imports and to reduce fentanyl exports, he reneged on his agreement with Obama not to militarize the South China Sea Islands, and is reneging on his agreement with Hong Kong. North Korea, his client state, is renewing missile testing.
This face off was inevitable in its coming and Xi is waiting to see how far he can push the West.
4. August 2019 at 08:12
Michael, Let him blow off a bit of steam. There’s plenty of time to take action if it becomes a big problem.
Art, I would suggest reading a wider range of news sources. You seem to be relying on some pretty questionable news outlets.
BTW, Trump also “renegs” on our agreements.
4. August 2019 at 09:06
“I would suggest reading a wider range of news sources. You seem to be relying on some pretty questionable news outlets.”
Coming from a fake news sheep, that’s hilarious to read.
4. August 2019 at 10:04
Scott: Thanx for reading and responding to my comment. My take on China’s world view is what I gleaned from Australian Ambassador Kevin Rudd’s talks. Wondering what exactly did I say that was not true?
Not to be nit picking but does your last sentence mean that China did renege but that is all right because Trump has reneged on the American people?
5. August 2019 at 09:27
Scott, do you think CNY breaching 7 diminishes the likelihood of a near-term deal or is it just another bargaining chip for the Chinese?