How could someone be so fucking stupid?
Easy; they're Conservative.
Again, what Trump "negotiated" was getting Mexico to the table to negotiate. And even then, it's unclear that is what transpired on the call.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
“United States-Mexico Trade Agreement.”
- Thread starter anatta
- Start date
How could someone be so fucking stupid?
Easy; they're Conservative.
Again, what Trump "negotiated" was getting Mexico to the table to negotiate. And even then, it's unclear that is what transpired on the call.
look at what you write. a bilateral deal is dependent on a trilateral deal ??..that is insane.In order to do a bilateral trade deal, all three countries have to agree to abandon NAFTA.
What Trump said Mexico agreed to wasn't a trade deal. It was an agreement to negotiate a new trade deal with Canada.
You guys just make shit up.
Of course NAFTA will be supplanted . Or Mexico would not be willing to negotiate this bilateral.
It is not some lead in dependent on something else. for ex. Mexico and the US could simply sign this with or without Canada
OMFG.
What Mexico agreed to was a negotiation. Mexico didn't agree to a brand new trade deal to supplant NAFTA bilaterally.
FFS, are you really this obtuse or are you just a dupe?
In practical terms Canada will come in, either bi or tri-lateral. It cannot stand out in the cold by itself
LOL!
Trump has us standing by ourselves here.
All Mexico agreed to was to sit down for negotiations -and even that is unclear.
You're under the mistaken impression that means they negotiated a trade deal.
They didn't.
Moron.
look at what you write. a bilateral deal is dependent on a trilateral deal ??..that is insane.
NAFTA is in effect.
We can't do a bilateral trade deal with Mexico while NAFTA is in effect.
So therefore, Mexico didn't agree to a new trade deal; they agreed to sit down and negotiate one.
But that doesn't guarantee a new deal will come up, or that Mexico and Canada will abandon NAFTA.
You idiots don't know anything about this subject. Stop talking. You're doing more damage to yourself than you realize.
you can't be this dumb. the agreement has "terms" in it. I highlited a few about country of origion %;s on autos/wagesRight. Which means Trump didn't negotiate a new trade deal with Mexico.
All he "negotiated" was to get Mexico to the table to negotiate an actual trade deal. Not the terms of a trade deal, but just getting Mexico to the table.
And even then, it's not entirely clear that is what transpired on the call.
If nothing else happened,NAfta would be repealed and this bi-lateral would go into effect.
I'm talking the process, not the politics.
Aren't you the same idiot that was saying the Trump Tower deal was a "conspiracy? no wonder you are out of it
you can't be this dumb. the agreement has "terms" in it. I highlited a few about country of origion %;s on autos/wages
First of all, Canada doesn't have cars they export.
Secondly, the terms they agreed to were the terms to bring Mexico to the table to then negotiate.
And it's not even clear Mexico agreed to do that on the call.
If nothing else happened,NAfta would be repealed and this bi-lateral would go into effect.
All three countries would have to agree to withdraw from NAFTA. One country cannot by itself. And no trade deal was negotiated with Mexico. All that was negotiated was getting Mexico to the table. But that's no guarantee that they'd agree to a new deal, or that Canada would either.
You're being conned. AGAIN.
I'm talking the process, not the politics.
And you're not even right on the process.
You're being conned AGAIN because Trump's just telling you what you want to hear.
No, we haven't negotiated a bilateral trade deal with Mexico. All we did was negotiate a set of terms to get Mexico to the table to possibly negotiate a new deal.
You're a fucking idiot.
Aren't you the same idiot that was saying the Trump Tower deal was a "conspiracy? no wonder you are out of it
It is a conspiracy, and once Trump's removed from office I expect you to delete this account and create a brand new one where you disassociate from Trump and try to pin him on the Democrats. But because you're not clever enough to disguise your "voice" here, within a few posts you'll belie who you are.
We know that's what you'll do because you assholes did it twice already in the last 9 years.
we can't ratify it by Congress, but we can negotiate it and sign it.NAFTA is in effect.
We can't do a bilateral trade deal with Mexico while NAFTA is in effect.
So therefore, Mexico didn't agree to a new trade deal; they agreed to sit down and negotiate one.
But that doesn't guarantee a new deal will come up, or that Mexico and Canada will abandon NAFTA.
You idiots don't know anything about this subject. Stop talking. You're doing more damage to yourself than you realize.
THEN it goes to Congress for approval. as part of that NAFTA of course gets repealed.
Canada comes in or not - if Canada comes in then it becomes trilateral. Canada can tweak it with approval of Mexico and US -but the hard negotiations are done -Canada coming in explicitly means Canada approves the framework/terms.
If Canada does not come in then Mexico and US sign it as is.
Canada can them make it's own bilaterals with either the US or Mexico..
~~
IN PRACTICALITY Canada is under pressure to make it a trilateral. Terms are negotiated among the various parties
-nothing to do with NAFTA
This was the big stumbling block. this is the framework and terms that Canada agrees to subject to any other Canada demands. Non of this has anything to do with NAfta repeal -implicit is NAFTA gets repeal
ROFL.It is a conspiracy, and once Trump's removed from office I expect you to delete this account and create a brand new one where you disassociate from Trump and try to pin him on the Democrats. But because you're not clever enough to disguise your "voice" here, within a few posts you'll belie who you are.
We know that's what you'll do because you assholes did it twice already in the last 9 years.
you do not understand an offer to meet and acceptance to meet is not a conspiracy toward a corrupt purpose.
you are calling a meeting a de facto conspiracy.. talking to you is dealing with your obfuscation/ignorance
wrong. the US could simply abandon NAFTA now..if it wanted to.All three countries would have to agree to withdraw from NAFTA. One country cannot by itself. And no trade deal was negotiated with Mexico. All that was negotiated was getting Mexico to the table. But that's no guarantee that they'd agree to a new deal, or that Canada would either.
You're being conned. AGAIN.
There is a process of course, but "all 3 countries" need not agree for 1 to withdrawal.
we can't ratify it by Congress, but we can negotiate it and sign it.
Not while NAFTA is in effect.
It takes all three nations to agree to abandon NAFTA.
All Trump negotiated was getting Mexico to the table, and even then it's unclear that was actually what they agreed to.
THEN it goes to Congress for approval. as part of that NAFTA of course gets repealed.
You're under the stupid and mistaken impression that Trump successfully negotiated a replacement trade deal with Mexico.
The truth is that all Trump negotiated was getting Mexico to maybe come to the table to negotiate a new deal.
Canada comes in or not - if Canada comes in then it becomes trilateral. Canada can tweak it with approval of Mexico and US -but the hard negotiations are done -Canada coming in explicitly means Canada approves the framework/terms.
If Canada does not come in then Mexico and US sign it as is.
Canada can them make it's own bilaterals with either the US or Mexico..
~~
IN PRACTICALITY Canada is under pressure to make it a trilateral. Terms are negotiated among the various parties
-nothing to do with NAFTA
This was the big stumbling block. this is the framework and terms that Canada agrees to subject to any other Canada demands. Non of this has anything to do with NAfta repeal -implicit is NAFTA gets repeal
The reality is that Trump didn't negotiate a new trade deal with Mexico. What he did was con you into thinking he did, when the reality is that all he negotiated was to get Mexico to the table to maybe work out a new trade deal.
And even then, it's unclear that is what was accomplished.
ROFL.
you do not understand an offer to meet and acceptance to meet is not a conspiracy toward a corrupt purpose.
you are calling a meeting a de facto conspiracy.. talking to you is dealing with your obfuscation/ignorance
1. They tried to cover up the meeting and were successful for about 13 months.
2. A year after the meeting happened was when news of the meeting broke
3. They lied about the reason for the meeting, with Trump personally dictating a false statement for Uday about "adoptions"
4. They all knew the information Russia had was hacked and illegally obtained, and we know that because Scavino tweeted about it on May 11th, 2016.
At this point, if you're still of the mindset that no conspiracy happened, then you're a cult member.
Last edited:
wrong. the US could simply abandon NAFTA now..if it wanted to.
No, it can't!
We can't unilaterally pull out of NAFTA.
All that can happen with NAFTA is that it could be renegotiated, but you need the consent of all three nations to do that.
here is a process of course, but "all 3 countries" need not agree for 1 to withdrawal.
Yes they fucking do. You can't unilaterally decide to pull out NAFTA anymore than you can unilaterally decide to secede from the United States.
no.All three countries would have to agree to withdraw from NAFTA. One country cannot by itself. And no trade deal was negotiated with Mexico. All that was negotiated was getting Mexico to the table. But that's no guarantee that they'd agree to a new deal, or that Canada would either.
You're being conned. AGAIN.
it's called a termination letter
NAFTA’s Article 2205 states: “A party may withdraw from this agreement six months after it provides written notice of withdrawal to the other parties. If a party withdraws, the agreement shall remain in force for the remaining parties.”
even if i accept your terminology/characterization of events -it does not mean there was a conspiracy towards a corrupt goal between the Trump campaign and the Russians at the meeting.1. They tried to cover up the meeting and were successful for about 13 months.
2. A year after the meeting happened was when news of the meeting broke
3. They lied about the reason for the meeting, with Trump personally dictating a false statement for Uday about "adoptions"
4. They all knew the information Russia had was hacked and illegally obtained, and we know that because Scavino tweeted about it on May 11th, 2016.
At this point, if you're still of the mindset that no conspiracy happened, then you're a cult member.
The meeting produced nothing - no agreements on any matters. nothing.
taking a meeting is not conspiracy unless there was something agreed to following.
They meet and the meeting ends with no agreement (conspiracy)