Today, Mick Mulvaney said something shocking. He declared if the Senate tax cut bill was getting stalled over repealing the individual mandate, then the White House would be okay with killing off that portion.

Huh?

What Republican would oppose the tax cuts specifically because they had the individual mandate repeal attached to them? Can anyone who feels this way really be called a Republican? No. As I noted on RedState:

If there are Republicans in the Senate and/or the House who are objecting to the tax cuts because of killing the individual mandate, it’s time for them to declare they’re Democrats. No Republican, not even the swampiest of the RINOs, could look anyone in the eye and claim they’re part of the GOP if they hold up cutting taxes for the sake of protecting the worst component of Obamacare. Not John McCain. Not Lisa Murkowski. Not even Susan Collins.

Let’s be perfectly clear. True Republicans should favor tax cuts. True Republicans should favor repealing the individual mandate. Neither is debatable nor are they mutually exclusive. If there are fiscal reasons for wanting to keep the mandate, then cut expenses elsewhere. Otherwise, don’t even pretend you’re a Republican if you oppose tax cuts or want to keep the individual mandate.

I’m no fan of the GOP, but I want two things they want: lower taxes and less government in my healthcare. This shouldn’t be an issue and the fact that the White House is already signalling retreat on this aspect of the cuts should be a wake up call for anyone who believes in limited government and fiscal responsibility.

Steve Bannon in Manchester 11-10-17

Last night I covered Steve Bannon’s speech at the 603 Alliance fundraiser in Manchester NH.

Because I got home a little late my post on the subject, including video of speeches by Bannon and Corey Lewindowski and some interviews (including an exclusive with Corey) will go up tomorrow but there was one thing that  was newsworthy enough that I thought it worth getting up now.

Our friend JD Rucker has some suspicion concerning the Roy Moore story and so do I.  Given Moore’s long history as a person despised by the left it seems odd to me that something like the Post story would have waited until just before this particular election to break given that the same media has been looking for something to bring him down for more than a decade.  It reminded me very much of the Billy Bush tape and Trump during his campaign.

It appears blogging minds think alike because in the middle of his speech Steve addressed the very same thing and gave it some needed perspective. I’ve excerpted that part of the speech here (I apologize for the brief video blur in the middle as the camera readjusted focus)

My gut feeling is the same as Steve’s and based on Moore’s response on twitter he plans on taking a page from the Trump book, ignoring the national MSM pile on and just keep fighting, particularly against a media that is highly trusted by the voters in Alabama.

While I can’t speak for the establishment GOP there is one thing that seems pretty clear, the days of non-establishment GOP members wilting or backing down from the MSM without a fight appear to be over. Or to paraphrase myself. they’re not going to let themselves be played.

That is a seminal change, which is why I believe the MSM/Establishment will now go all out in Alabama, because if Moore ignores the attack, fights back and wins the example that will set for other candidates and the damage to the media as the left’s attack dogs will be incalculable.

(Reminder Steve’s full speech short 25 seconds when camera #1’s battery died and I went to camera 2 will be up tomorrow)

Update I’ll be including this in my post on the event as well but here is an exclusive interview with him after the Bannon speech where he touches on the subject as well

He’s putting the reason why we shouldn’t trust these guys rather diplomatically don’t you think?


If you like the idea of new media on the scene at for these time of things and want to support independent journalism please hit DaTipJar below.




Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basis but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt Press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer


Choose a Subscription level



(or you can buy one here)

Eagle River, Wisconsin

By John Ruberry

“‘Many are the strange chances of the world,’ said Mithrandir, ‘and help oft shall come from the hands of the weak when the Wise falter.'”
Mithrandir (Gandalf), in J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Simarillion.

This week greets the first anniversary of Donald J. Trump’s historic election to the presidency.

Historic? Yes. Trump is first first non-politician–or former general–ever elected to the nation’s highest office. The Manhattan billionaire was one of 17 candidates for the Republican nomination and it’s very safe to say that among the GOP establishment, Trump was the least popular member of this group.

But among the unpolished masses–the folks that Hillary Clinton dubbed “Deplorables” a year later–Trump was their champion. House Speaker Paul Ryan said after Trump’s upset win over Clinton, said that the president-elect, “Heard a voice that no one else heard.”

Clinton, on the other hand, was clearly the choice of the Democratic Party insiders, and that point was driven home last week by Donna Brazile, the interim DNC chair when Trump scored his upset win.

Trump was branded a racist when he said that Mexico was sending “rapists” and “criminals” over the border and he vowed to build a wall at the Mexican border. Was he wrong to say that? Yes. But Trump revealed a glaring hypocrisy among the Republican Party. The GOP’s idea of “getting tough” on illegal immigration was to talk tough about illegal immigration. And suddenly, the emerging Trump base learned, here was a candidate who will do something about illegal aliens–who yes, not only take away American jobs, such as in food service, but also drive down wages.

Barack Obama waxed eloquently–he’s good at that–about the plight of the laid-off workers at a Maytag refrigerator plant in Galesburg, Illinois–the manufacturer shifted that work to a factory in Mexico, both in his memorable keynote speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention and in Audacity of Hope. Trump vowed–and vows–to stop the exodus of blue collar jobs to south of the border. After eight years of President Obama in charge, whose response to these job losses was to offer retraining to workers for scarce jobs in “green industries,” Trump’s message resonated. While Clinton doubled-down on green failure.

Last week Rush Limbaugh praised Trump’s making an issue during the campaign of China cheating on trade deals and its currency manipulation “China is ripping us off on trade,” Trump screamed. At the time El Rusho saw it as too esoteric of a topic for presidential campaign. But the “weak” understood while the “wise” faltered.

And the Deplorables of Iowa, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan–many of whom voted twice for Barack Obama–went with Trump last year.

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

Another day, another terror attack by a Muslim screaming Allahu Akhbar and another batch of media stories about that fabled Muslim Backlash that like global warming putting US coastal cities underwater never seems to happen.

Ahmad’s question was answered.

My biggest concern is that he’s readily identified as a Muslim and then that is extrapolated out to my own faith,” he said.

In the wake of Tuesday’s attack, some Muslim Americans and community leaders expressed concerns over how their religion would be perceived and whether Muslims would become targets of violence.

Despite the lack of a backlash over the last 17 year Ahmad and many like him, according to NBC and others are still very worried, but there is an easy solution to allay his fears.

This may seem counterintutative to some but the people who will most benefit from extreme vetting are people like Ahmad. Muslim Americans.

You see as long as the vetting of immigrants is suspect Jihadist will keep getting in and as long as Jihadist keep getting in to attack American Muslims like Ahmad will find themselves suspected.

However if vetting of immigrants is extreme enough to keep potential jihadists out by definition there are less potential Islamic terrorists here, and people’s confidence that American Muslims aren’t here to make jihad against the US increases. If that is combined with American Muslims vetting their own communities for either radical imam’s trying to radicalize communities or individuals who might get radicalized online that will really change the picture.

In the end every jihadist that Trump’s program keeps out is insurance against Muslim American’s fears of a backlash.

Because of this they should be the first to come out and say: “We Muslim Americans support extreme vetting because as far as we are concerned Jihadist and Radical Islamists are not welcome here. After all many of us came here to get away from that kind of thing.”

The day such an anouncement is made on behalf of the American Muslim community is the beginning of the end of the war on terror.


As I have no sexual secrets of rich liberals to keep for a price I have to make my buck by going places and doing interviews all the time hoping people like it enough to pay for it.

If you like the idea of new media on the scene at for these time of things and want to support independent journalism please hit DaTipJar below.




Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basis but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt Press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer


Choose a Subscription level



(or you can buy one here)

A lot of my friends on the right don’t like Jake Tapper much these days Jon Nolte who I absolutely love dropped him last year over these two interviews:

In full grandstanding, self-righteous mode (we’ve seen this Tapper come out against Republicans before), Tapper hammers Trump over this judge 23 times — 23 freakin’ times! Tapper refuses to move on for about 4 minutes.

Note, though, how Tapper hides crucially important and mitigating information from his audience, like the judge’s cozy relationship with the racist hate-group La Raza.

And this is not the first time in his quest to destroy Trump that Tapper has hidden information from his audience.

Back in February, Tapper asked Trump if he would condemn David Duke and the KKK. Trump famously bungled the question, but during the interview, Tapper chose not to disclose the crucially important fact that less than 24 hours earlier, Trump had not only disavowed David Duke but done so without being asked to do so. Tapper pretending that for the first time he is asking Trump to do something he had just voluntarily done is propaganda not journalism.

With all of that in mind, watch the video below… The key part of Tapper’s Hillary Clinton interview occurs near the end at the 6:20 mark, where Tapper practically apologizes to Hillary for bringing up the myriad of scandals surrounding the corrupt Clinton Foundation (“And I’m not equating Trump University with the Clinton Foundation,” Tapper squeaks.). Moreover, after she not only dodges the question with lies (“we’ve disclosed everything“) and then uses the question to attack Trump, Tapper doesn’t ask a SINGLE FOLLOW UP (much less 23).

And since Trump’s election has been even harder on him:

Note how Tapper carefully avoided stating that Trump mocked an actual disability. Well, he cannot come out and say that because it is a lie. If you recall, though, that was the original charge — that Trump openly mocked the specific handicap of this reporter. But now that everyone knows that this accusation is a lie, in order to keep the accusation alive, Tapper weasels his words into the more generalized charge that Trump “make[s] fun of disabled people” — as though Trump should condescend to the handicapped and treat dishonest reporters with a disability any different from dishonest reporters without one.

The latest entry comes from another friend Stephen Krusier

I’ve been mystified for the last couple of years as to why so many conservatives on social media think that Jake Tapper is one of the good guys in the MSM. Yes, he gives support to the military, which one doesn’t see a lot from the leftmedia. Beyond that, however, he is a garden-variety Democrat advocate media hack. He loves sticking it to conservatives on social media and Republicans whenever he can. This nonsense he’s offering the equally hacktastic Colbert only makes sense if you are in the camp that doesn’t acknowledge the essential truth about Joe McCarthy: that he was right.

Let me stipulate for the record that both Krusier and Nolte are right that Jake is wrong about Trump and that he seems to have it in for him more than other do.  My purpose in this post isn’t to defend Jake Tapper as I already wrote that post months ago but I do want to make an important point concerning Jake Tapper.

He elected Donald Trump.

Now you might be thinking “DaTechGuy you’re crazy, how can you make a statement like that?”

Here’s how.

I will concede that Jake was very hard on Trump during the run up to the election but he was also willing to hit Clinton both before the primaries :

While this morning Politico was spinning Nancy Pelosi Jake Tapper decided in proper journalist fashion to unspin Hillary Clinton

as members of the Obama administration can attest, Clinton was one of the leading drivers of the TPP when Secretary of State. Here are 45 instances when she approvingly invoked the trade bill about which she is now expressing concerns:

Tapper’s piece give 45 examples of Hillary Clinton publicly supporting the bill.

and right before the general election when Donna Brazile feeding her questions came out

Jake Tapper told me earlier this morning that the news that his former CNN colleague, Donna Brazile, obtained questions in advance of a CNN Town Hall event and then forwarded them to the Clinton Campaign was “very troubling” and “horrifying.”

Now of course both of these were pinpricks  compared to the anti-Trump onslaught but the day Jake Tapper elected Donald Trump wasn’t a day when he reported on Clinton lies or pushed Trump.  It was Sept 11th 2016 when he choose to report the news straight as it happened while everyone else did not.

Let me take you back to that fateful morning.  Hillary Clinton was at a 9/11 ceremony and suddenly had issues.   Fox’s Rick Leventhal immediately tweeted it out and wrote about it

and while conservatives were all over it,  immediately everyone on the left went into full damage control spin mode to protect her and CNN was the worst:

I’ve just sat through a Mr. Seltzer and a panel of three discuss the story, the only person I knew off the top of my head was the ultra far left Katrina vanden Heuvel of the Nation. UPDATE: another was David Zurawik of the Baltimore sun and the other Tara Sotmayor) They had very little to say about Hillary Clinton but a lot to say about Fox news. They had no problem using words like “conspiracy”, “irresponsible” and were united in painting the Fox story as poorly soured, overblown and attacking the network for reporting it. Nowhere on the panel was any person defending the story, or providing any balance and let me remind you this is a show about taking an unbiased look at the media.

For a full hour they played this story as if it was completely phony something that the MSM could easily ignore and discount as a Fox/Breitbart trick.  I was watching them do it at the time and tweeted:

And then Jake Tapper took over, live.

Instead of the usual repeat of the 9 am show Tapper took the stage live and did something nobody on the network did, he treated the story as an actual news story, showed the video and questioned. Here is what I wrote at the time:

meanwhile in a disasterous devleopment for the Clinton Campaign Jake Tapper is now live on CNN meaning that the network will practice actual journalism for a while.

In fact he just played the video of her stumbling.

On twitter you could see the meme change in real time

And the whole conversation changed

Once Tapper played it as straight news so did Chris Cillizza at the Washington Post

I wrote this on Tuesday morning:

The simple fact is that there is zero evidence that anything is seriously wrong with Clinton. If suffering an occasional coughing fit is evidence of a major health problem, then 75 percent of the country must have that mystery illness. And I am one of them.

Well, that is no longer operative. Context matters. A coughing episode is almost always just a coughing episode. But when coupled with Clinton’s “overheating” on Sunday morning — with temperatures something short of sweltering — Clinton and her team simply need to say something about what happened (and why the press was in the dark for so long.)

and the dam was broken.

Hillary’s health was no longer a story confined to conservative media, it was a legit story to be reported by the MSM.

The sage of election 2016 Scott Adams put it best 

when it comes to American psychology, there is no more powerful symbol of terrorism and fear than 9-11 . When a would-be Commander-in-Chief withers – literally – in front of our most emotional reminder of an attack on the homeland, we feel unsafe. And safety is our first priority.

Hillary Clinton just became unelectable.

I submit and suggest none of this breaks into the MSM if either CNN decides to play the repeat of Tapper at noon that day or Jake decides to play down the incident as Reliable Sources did before him and the rest of the CNN team did after he got off the air.  This was breaking news happening on a Sunday where people were available and would naturally switch to CNN to find out about breaking news and there was Jake Tapper, the single most trusted reporter on that station playing it straight.

Now my fellow conservative writers and bloggers can argue that this moment doesn’t cancel out Jake Tapper’s anti-Trump obsession for the last year and I’m sure they will make plenty of fine points 90% of which that I might agree with.

But for my money none of that can happen if Tapper decides to tow the Hillary Campaign line during those critical two hours.  Even Hillary voters understood that she was dishonest but the idea that she might not be up to being President physically was established that day and it was Jake Tapper who did it.

I think I, the entire country and the world, is in his debt for it.

Closing thought:  I suspect we’ll see a counter point suggesting that this is why he is so hard on Trump, he blames himself for his election.


As I have no sexual secrets of rich liberals to keep for a price I have to make my buck by going places and doing interviews all the time hoping people like it enough to pay for it.

If you like the idea of new media on the scene at for these time of things and want to support independent journalism please hit DaTipJar below.




Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basis but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt Press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer


Choose a Subscription level



(or you can buy one here)

And the WaPo‘s anonymous sources say so:  Fusion GPS was paid by Marc E. Elias, a lawyer acting on behalf of the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee,

Fusion GPS hired dossier author Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer with ties to the FBI and the U.S. intelligence community.

Elias and his law firm, Perkins Coie, retained the firm in April 2016 on behalf of the Clinton campaign and the DNC.

How much? It’s unclear how much money went to Fusion GPS directly, but according to campaign records, the Hillary campaign paid Elias’s firm $5.6million legal fees from June 2015 to December 2016, while the Post states that the DNC paid Perkins Coie $3.6million in ‘legal and compliance consulting.’ Roughly $9 million. Under campaign rules, I assume that the amounts can be verified.

According to the post, there were three sources of funding.

The unknown first client:
The Post’s anonymous sources claim that (emphasis added)

Prior to that agreement, Fusion GPS’s research into Trump was funded by a still unknown Republican client  during the GOP primary.

IF the first client actually exists (and I’m not the only skeptic) it’ll be interesting to find out who the Republican (or not?) was, and why (s)he stopped funding it. Was there “no there, there “? Were they outbid by the Dems?

The second: Hillary/DNC,
Either way,

The Clinton campaign and the DNC through the law firm continued to fund Fusion GPS’s research through the end of October 2016, days before Election Day.

Aaron Blake notes that Steele was only funded by Democrats.

The third: The FBI, who apparently offered, but didn’t, pay
The Daily Mail reports that After the election the FBI agreed to pay Steele to continue gathering intelligence, but they reneged when he was identified. Paul Mirengoff explains,

The agreement reportedly was reached before the election. If Clinton won, as the parties to the agreement probably expected, the FBI would take over financial responsibility for the apparatus she was funding in order to discredit her political opponent, even after he was defeated. If Trump won, the FBI would take over financial responsibility for trying to discredit the president-elect.

My doubts:
Ace wants to know who the first client is, as Fusion fights a congressional subpoena to avoid disclosing that information,

But the first remains hidden — and if Fusion prevails in court, it will remain hidden.
. . .
Someone really doesn’t want Fusion to be compelled to open up its books and client list.

As I said above, IF the first client really exists, it may not be a Republican , because,

someone wishing to obscure the actual client would, of course, put out that kind of disinformation, anonymously.

Be that as it may,  while both sides paid Fusion GPS, Steele was only funded by Democrats, and Fusion GPS had the Kremlin as a client for . . . wait for it . . . a smear campaign against Russian whistleblower Sergei Magnistsky.

When asked about the original Russia collusion story, Hillary’s talking point/bromide – repeated by her minions on cable news interviews – is “it’s been debunked.”

This is a huge story, undoubtedly. We’ll see what kind of coverage it gets from the same reporters Hillary lied to, and what Congress does about it.

Fausta Rodríguez Wertz writes on U. S. and Latin America at Fausta’s blog

by baldilocks

The church I regularly attend is multi-racial, but I didn’t choose it because of that. I chose it because of other churches and other pastors. I chose it because of situations like the following.

From Lloyd Marcus:

My brother Jerry is a deacon in his all-black church. Jerry called to tell me he confronted his pastor, telling him it is unchristian to include a hateful rant against Trump in every sermon. His pastor firmly believes Trump is a rabid racist. I asked Jerry, “What was your pastor’s response?”

Jerry said his pastor gave him the same blank stare he always receives from fellow blacks when he states commonsense views that are contrary to Democrat lies believed by that most blacks. Condescendingly, Jerry’s pastor said he understood his concerns. Meanwhile, his attacks on Trump from the pulpit continue. Jerry said every guest speaker at his church includes trashing Trump in their sermon.

I want to be clear about this: it isn’t the bashing of Republicans or of Trump in particular that bothers me. It’s that is being done from the pulpit as a part of the sermon. A pastor’s job is to tend to the sheep: to lead them in their walk with and toward Christ. Any other purpose is leading the flock astray.

In fact, the church belongs to Christ, not to individual pastors/reverends/priests, etc.; it is entrusted to these individuals, but it’s not theirs. When these leaders stoke and provoke anger as opposed to faith and prayer about any person or any topic, they have become wolves in pastor’s clothing.

But we all know that, for many of these people, it’s about getting butts in the seats. And most people are comfortable with having their anger and victimhood nourished.

Meanwhile, who is exhorting these people to seek the Kingdom of God and His righteousness?

The Bible says that we will all give account for our words and actions, but pastors, etc. have a special standard to meet. I don’t even want to think about what’s in store for these misleaders of God’s church if they don’t do a 180.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. (Her older blog is located here.) Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2012. Her second novel tentatively titled Arlen’s Harem, will be done one day soon! Follow her on Twitter and on Gab.ai.

Please contribute to Juliette’s JOB:  Her new novel, her blog, her Internet to keep the latter going and COFFEE to keep her going!

Or hit Da Tech Guy’s Tip Jar in the name of Independent Journalism!

The just-concluded Values Voter Summit in Washington D.C. was punctuated by standing ovations. Among them: a few for the President, who spoke decisively but without pugnacity; for Bannon and Gorka, the red-meat guys; for Alveda King, bringing the crowd to its feet to join her in song.

And then there was the one for Steve Scalise.

Months after a gunman’s savage and politically-motivated attack left him near death, Congressman Scalise made his way to the Values Voter podium last Friday to the sound of appreciative cheers. He moved with the aid of crutches, the only visible sign of his injuries. Once at the podium, he spoke in the strong and steady voice of a man eager to get to work.

As House Majority Whip, he has the unenviable task of herding the GOP cats when it’s time for votes on the House floor. HIs position is probably what earned him an invitation to speak at Values Voter. He understands first things first, though. Before he spoke about policy, he spoke about gratitude.

After he was shot, while he was in the hospital, he and his family received countless prayers and good wishes, including messages from people who are not in political harmony with him. That touched him deeply. He understood that the messages were not merely routine.

“You knew that this was an attack on the values of our country….I cannot thank you enough for those prayers and that love.” This from a man who spent three and a half months in a hospital.

He was candid in his speech about the tough times past and to come, as he and his family face long-term challenges arising from his injuries. His candor made his enthusiastic demeanor all the more meaningful. “We have a great and mighty God,” he declared, “and I am a living example of the miracles he can produce.”

Then, and only then, he addressed specific policy initiatives. He said, “I came back with an even sharper focus” on family, friends and America.

He Considers the Pain-Capable Act a victory. That’s the measure to restrict abortions after 20 weeks, the point in pregnancy when science indicates that unborn children can feel pain. Passage of the measure was a near thing. “As Majority Whip, I had to put that coalition together. But we did.” Now, the bill is in the Senate, its prospects uncertain in view of the particular batch of Republicans now serving. “Tell your Senators to pass it,” Scales urged. The President “wants to sign this bill into law.”

The bill includes cutting federal funding to the nations’s largest abortion provider. That gives me pause, as voter who questioned (and still questions) the depth of the President’s roots on the life issues. Scalise has no doubts. “He wants to sign this.”

He’s determined to support the President’s tax reform proposals. I don’t think I’ve heard anyone give a snappier summary and smile while doing it: reduce personal rates; reduce business rates to encourage families to bring jobs back to this country; repeal the death tax, double the child tax credit (now there’s a pro-life initiative).

He did not dwell on the unhappy fate thus far of efforts to repeal Obamacare, beyond saying “let’s not give up fights. President Trump wants these on his desk.”

All this was said in a tone that most other speakers at Values Voters didn’t approach. He was passionate and determined without breathing fire. He didn’t sound as though we were all under siege; in fact he radiated hope, both political and personal.

HIs final words to the crowd, coming after all he has experienced these past months, rang with truth that brought the audience to its feet yet again: “It’s great to be alive.”

Ellen is a New Hampshire writer and pro-life activist. Read more by and about her at ellenkolb.com.

Support independent journalism by making a donation to Da Tech Guy blog. Thank you!

As you may recall, now-President Trump went to Mexico during last year’s campaign, and, after he took over the press conference, both Pres. Peña Nieto and he stated that NAFTA should be renegotiated.

If you look up the history of NAFTA, you find:

The United States commenced bilateral trade negotiations with Canada more than 30 years ago, resulting in the U.S.-Canada Free Trade Agreement, which entered into force on January 1, 1989. In 1991, bilateral talks began with Mexico, which Canada joined. The NAFTA followed, entering into force on January 1, 1994.

Considering the changes in technology and global markets that have taken place during the past 23 years, it’s not unreasonable to take a second look at the treaty.

The next round of talks starts today (emphasis added)

One provision designed with that objective is a “sunset” clause that would force Nafta’s expiration in five years unless all three countries act to renew it, said people briefed on the plan.

Other proposals, these people said, would weaken or eliminate the mechanisms aimed at settling disputes between the three countries and curbing the unilateral threats and sanctions that frequently roiled trade ties in earlier years.

More importantly,

None of the U.S. proposals would alter the specific trade terms that have spurred a quarter-century of commercial integration between the U.S., Mexico and Canada, such as tax-free trade across borders.

The Trump administration’s goal appears to be to reduce the incentive to outsource by watering down the pact and reduce its influence on American companies through measures such as undoing the current policy of treating the three economies – Canada, U.S, Mexico – as one, narrowing the amount of U.S. federal spending to the same dollar amount as the trading partners (“dollar for dollar”), and requiring that some products contain not just a certain level of Nafta-regional content, but U.S.-specific content.

This goal goes hand-in-hand with the administration’s deregulation strategy to improve U.S. manufacturing. And, as the WSJ said in the above article, “None of the U.S. proposals would alter the specific trade terms.”

Since the new round of talks starts today, this of course does not mean that is what NAFTA will look like at the end.

However, I would love to see – if only once – an international treaty with an actual sunset clause.

A woman can dream.

Fausta Rodríguez Wertz writes on U. S. and Latin America at Fausta’s blog

An interesting followup to yesterday’s post suggesting that if Hillary Clinton had won in 2016 Harvey Weinstein would not today be exposed as the man he has been for years.

Two days ago just as I arrived for work Red Sox left fielder Andrew Benintendi hit a two run homer off of Astro Ace Justin Verlander making his first relief appearance ever giving the Sox a 3-2 lead in the bottom of the fifth of game 4 of their series. I walked in smiling and when I told my lead the score, at he confidently predicted an Astro win so we bet a candy bar on the result.

Yesterday I was running late and found myself, thanks to Houston’s late comeback rushing into Shaw’s in Leominster to buy the bar to pay off that bet. I found myself stuck in a line behind a woman who was visiting her daughter who had just had her first child. The conversation in the line and with the cashier was Trump vs Mexico. At this point I interjected, “Well consider this, if Donald Trump isn’t elected there is no way that Harvey Weinstein is exposed by the NYT as he was a vital ally and fund raiser for Hillary Clinton.” The cashier agreed that this was true but the woman ahead of me had a slightly different take, while she agreed with my premise she stated quite emphatically: “Still isn’t worth it.”

Given that Mr. Weinstein preyed on woman (which she was) I found that opinion interesting and as I was leaving it hit me that not only would her daughter be of the age that Weinstein would go after but there is no reason to believe that if that new grandchild of hers wanted a career in movies a Harvey Weinstein or someone like him, would in 15-18 years be making the same demands on her if she wanted to get ahead in the business.

This is how crazy the left has become, a liberal women so dislikes Trump that she would have been willing to not only let Weinstein’s crime be unexposed and unpunished but would have been OK with him being allowed to obtain new victims for the sake of keeping him Trump of the White House.

So for those who you Hate Trump but are outraged over Weinstein I have two questions for you:

Would the price of Weinstein never being exposed have been worth it to you if it meant Hillary Clinton beating Donald Trump in 2016?

If the answer to the first question is yes: At what number of new women victimized by Mr. Weinstein would that price become too high?

I think these two question really give this story the perspective it deserves don’t you and I’d love to see a roving reporter asking these question to a bunch of women’s studies majors at liberal universities across the nation wouldn’t you?

I’ll give the last word to Thomas Wictor


As I have no sexual secrets of rich liberals to keep for a price I have to make my buck by going places and doing interviews all the time hoping people like it enough to pay for it.

If you like the idea of new media on the scene at for these time of things and want to support independent journalism please hit DaTipJar below.




Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basis but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt Press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer


Choose a Subscription level



(or you can buy one here)