.
.
.
U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer has made it official. Delivering an official statement today following a discussion between the United States, Mexico and Canada, USTR Jamieson Greer informed the group the USA will not be renewing the USMCA trilateral trade agreement. [SOURCE]
[SOURCE]
Unfortunately, yet predictably given how much false information has been pushed on this issue, the Canadian team will now believe they have a period of ten consecutive years of negotiation before the trade deal is over. This is structurally and completely false. The Canadian media will likely continue selling this false hope.
In reality, with the non-renewal announcement now made, President Trump and USTR Greer can now complete the bilateral trade discussions with Mexico (noted in the announcement) and then move to stage two.
Stage two will be the United States announcing a complete withdrawal from the USMCA, which triggers a six-month countdown clock. The formal notification of withdrawal will likely happen once the U.S. and Mexico complete the bilateral free trade agreement.
I understand that I am somewhat of a nerd on this USMCA construct and the Trump approach toward it. Therefore, it is unfair of me to judge perspectives of pundits. I have studied the granular details for several years, read dozens of transcripts from the USTR office, watched every interview and statement from President Trump and USTR Greer; yet I am still gob-smacked at the inability of the Canadian media to recognize what is evident and explain what is about to take place.
There is a possibility in this non-renewal phase the Canadian people might just start to question why they are being misled by their government and the media; however, I am not optimistic they will realize it yet.
As noted by this article from Barrons, the denial is off the charts. [SEE HERE]
President Trump has said repeatedly he does not see value in retaining the USMCA (CUSMA) and the only purpose it served was to eliminate NAFTA. The USMCA had one job, eliminate NAFTA.
Both President Trump and USTR Jamieson Greer have been very clear; Trump in direct words, Greer in direct action.
President Trump has said the USMCA was not a trade agreement he wanted to retain, while USTR Greer has been building a bilateral free trade agreement with Mexico for 18 months. No effort has been extended toward Canada, because the last stage, stage #3, is where a U.S-Canada bilateral trade agreement will be introduced.
Stage #1 – Announce the non-renewal of the USMCA.
Stage #2 – Complete the bilateral trade agreement with Mexico.
Announce the formal withdrawal from the USMCA, trigger the 6-month countdown.
Stage #3 – Begin negotiating with Canada while the 6-month doomsday clock is ticking. This is optimal leverage.
No part of this process should be a surprise. The Canadian government is willfully obtuse, but they are not stupid. They are hearing, reading and seeing the same things as me. They know what is coming. The Canadian government, with the assistance of the Canadian media, are willfully lying to their domestic audience.
The Canadian electorate are angry at the USA. The Canadian electorate should be angry at their media and government.
For some bizarre reason, and I mean this with great seriousness and sadness, the Canadian people do not comprehend the nature of their economic relationship with the United States.
Canada doesn’t sell 75% of their products to the United States. The United States buys 75% of Canadian products.
The USA is the customer in the relationship. Canada is the seller. The customer holds the leverage in this relationship, not the seller.
The customer is under no obligation to purchase goods from a hostile seller: who ridicules them, belittles them, shouts at them, makes each visit uncomfortable for them, tells them how stupid they are, and is generally abusive to them.
For some unknown reason, Canadians just cannot see the nature of this relationship. There is a very weird abusive psychology behind it, created by the Canadian government. It is the strangest thing I have ever witnessed.
{{Steps off Soapbox}}
Bottom line, you all know what is going to come next. {GO DEEP} I love, genuinely love and respect our Canadian Treepers, but Trump is going to unload all of that above sentiment over the next several months.
I doubt seriously anyone of relative importance in Canadian politics has the awareness or capability to grab the people that matter by the scruff of the neck and tell them to ‘knock it off‘ and find some humility. It’s no longer a Canadian trait.
…During this period, President Trump carries massive leverage against Canada. He will likely probe their trade position and willingness to comply with reciprocity after the non-renewal announcement. The outcome of those probes will determine the timeline of his exit announcement.
During this non-renewal phase, we may even see President Trump tease the exit, then retract, then tease the exit again. Each time Trump tests the Canadian government with statements, the Canadian economy will pulsate and weaken; it will drive the Canadian government to either extreme anger, or defeated compliance.
Timing the completion of the U.S-Mexico deal within the probes of Canada will be super interesting. At some point as the U.S. closes in on the deal with Mexico, Canada is going to realize they are naked without any agreement.
The worst-case scenario for Canada is President Trump announcing the USMCA exit on the same day he announces a completed bilateral deal with Mexico. (more)
Last point. Expect the U.K and EU to financially backstop Canada and purchase sovereign debt in an effort to support them financially. It will not be enough, but they will try to offset Trump’s leverage. Keep watching.
Everyone once in a while the cultural marxist way to describe a middle eastern attacker gets a new euphemism. Today’s update comes from politically correct Scotland.
“Tanned European man”
I wonder how long it took them to come up with that one?
I am currently working through another layer of background problem-solving directly related to CTH requests for subscriber notifications. At the core of the problem are decisions on what terms and conditions we are willing to accept.
Currently people can subscribe to have a notification of a new article post. Many people have written over the past several months saying they are no longer getting those notifications. The problem is multi-layered, and at the core is something no one is willing to discuss, because the biggest control mechanisms in your online travel try to keep this information hidden.
Internet Service Providers (ISPs), they’re the entity who you select to use to access the internet (ATT, Comcast, Verizon, or whatever service you pay), long ago began a process to control the content of the information that is processed by their service.
This issue has become more problematic as various nations and governments have also gone beyond their geographic boundary controls with demands upon ISPs to filter information based on determinations of their various bureaucracies.
As an example, the govt of China, Russia, Europe and even Canada may restrict the flow of information available to citizens within that country. Traditionally, they would put control mechanisms in place to block websites or traffic they deemed averse to the interests of that government.
However, as you might have realized with the Social Media restrictions in the USA based on COVID-19 (example), the issue is not always limited to “hostile” countries but can specifically be determined by the subject matter of interest.
With the advent of Virtual Private Networks (VPNs), the need for control creates ever-increasing tentacles. One of those tentacles for internet content control extends to ISP companies, who now find themselves subject to terms and conditions of operation; that means they must also adhere to the fiats of the country from which, or to which, the dataflow is connected.
ISPs now create ‘terms and conditions’ for internet traffic. This may be, often is, invisible to you. However, if ATT (example only) complies with the terms (legal requirement), that means putting blocks in place for the traffic. [This is also part of the age verification and digital id stuff.]
How does this apply to email and/or service subscriptions? Well, in order to send you information, a third-party subscription (or even an email service itself) needs to ‘authenticate’ with the ISP.
The authentication is part of the agreement to the terms and conditions. If the information provider does not authenticate, the information transmission can be blocked – you never get the email or the notification.
The ISP demand for authentication or registration is sold as a need to ‘eliminate spam’ or unwanted/harmful content. The ISP is protecting you. However, we have moved way beyond that issue, and now the ISPs are adhering to regulation, and compliance demands on the content itself. This, as you can easily imagine, is a big deal.
The EU has moved beyond blocking sites to blocking content – the actual information itself. [This issue is not isolated to the EU, only provided as an example.]
If an ISP company wants to sell internet access services to the EU, they must accept EU terms and conditions on the content of their service. That ISP company then demands anyone who transmits information through their internet service to authenticate or register with the ISP. If Gmail doesn’t authenticate with the ISP, then Gmail will not work on the network. The terms and conditions from the ISP are now forced upon the information providers.
As an outcome of this mess, in order to send you an email notification, we must now be compliant with the terms and conditions of each ISP. Those multi-hundred-page legal terms and conditions are now determined by rules and regulations that may have nothing to do with the country of origin from where the information originates.
This is a hot mess, but in the era where anonymous internet traffic is now viewed as a threat, it is a natural outcome. My response to all these demands and conditions is….
CTH did not build a battle tank website of information only to later agree to remove the tracks and drive only on rails that other people (ISPs) put into place. Nope. Not happening.
While most information websites in the website universe began forcing registrations and/or deleting their comment systems, CTH built a comment system from the ground up that is specifically designed for you to remain anonymous. I know this can also be annoying at times, but there’s a big picture reason for it.
Here’s the bottom line. I’m looking at options, but I am not going to agree to terms and conditions that ultimately control content – regardless of the pontificating pretenses from those who say, “It’s not about controlling content.” Yes, it is, and I will fight it like hell.
If your email notifications stop coming, first check your spam folder. If it’s not there, it is more than likely your internet service provider has deemed the information too dangerous for your mind to absorb.
In fact, and I’m not kidding about this, 90+% of all internet user issues, problems, blocks and website issues, can ultimately be traced back to this increased control system by ISP providers…. who are ultimately -in my opinion- adhering to government dictates and fiats.
The only thing I can guarantee is that CTH will transmit the signal. The rest of the process is becoming incompatible with the free delivery of information, when contrast against the interests of those who wish to block that signal.
If I figure out a subscriber solution that: (a) does not come with content restrictions, and (b) safeguards your privacy upon subscribing; I will let you know. In the interim, we will keep transmitting as much as possible.
Love to all,
~ Sundance
Like many of you I am profoundly angered by the Supreme Court decision that fractures our nation and conveys citizenship to the children of illegal aliens born in the United States. [PDF HERE] In fact, I was so angered to my core, I went for a long walk before doing any further commenting on the matter.
U.S. Citizenship is now determined by how good at violating our nation’s borders, by conniving, by scheming and by deception to create a qualified child where no adult qualification exists. This is the most detrimental decision by the Supreme Court in generations and will profoundly impact our nation.
There is no longer an apple, it’s all worms.
Today, the Supreme Court on Tuesday struck down President Donald Trump’s executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship – the guarantee of citizenship status to everyone born in the United States.
In a decision authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, five supreme court justices agreed with the challengers saying Trump’s order cannot be reconciled with the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which confers citizenship on anyone “born … in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”
(6-3) Writing for the majority, Roberts emphasized that the “children born of parents unlawfully or temporarily present in the United States” “satisfy both elements of the Citizenship Clause.” “Under the Constitution,” he concluded, “they are citizens at birth.”
Roberts was joined in the majority by Justice SOTOMAYOR, KAGAN, BARRETT, JACKSON and KAVANAUGH.
Justice THOMAS filed a dissenting opinion with GORSUCH and ALITO.
SCOTUS BLOG – In his dissenting opinion, Justice Samuel Alito called the ruling, “one of the most important decisions in the history of the Court” and “a serious mistake.” “Careful analysis of the text of the Fourteenth Amendment and the process that led to its adoption,” Alito argued, “shows that it does not degrade the concept of United States citizenship in this way. Instead,” he contended, “the Fourteenth Amendment confers citizenship on only those children who, at birth, owe allegiance solely to this country.”
Justice Brett Kavanaugh agreed with the result that the court reached – that the president’s executive order is invalid – but not its reasoning. In his view, Trump’s order “does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment” but does violate a federal law providing that children who are “born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” are U.S. citizens. Congress, Kavanaugh suggested, “could amend” that law “or otherwise enact new legislation establishing exceptions to birthright citizenship for children born to foreign citizens unlawfully or temporarily in the country. But,” he noted, “Congress has not yet done so.”
Justice Clarence Thomas penned a lengthy dissent, which Justice Neil Gorsuch joined. He called the majority’s account “not historically accurate” and said that it “adds to the sad history of the Fourteenth Amendment, which was designed and understood to secure equal rights for the freed blacks but has instead been repurposed for political projects that the Reconstruction Congress did not support.”
Gorsuch also wrote a separate brief dissent, in which he appeared to suggest that Trump’s executive order might violate the Constitution as it applies to the children of undocumented immigrants who intend to live in the United States permanently. “If those parents are not domiciled here,” Gorsuch queried, “then where are they domiciled? And if the answer is nowhere,” he continued, “how can we reconcile that conclusion with this Court’s longstanding recognition that every person is domiciled somewhere?” Because the challengers in this case have argued that Trump’s order is invalid in all circumstances, rather than just some, Gorsuch explained, “these questions may not be properly before us. But their answers are undeniably important to a Nation committed to a view of citizenship open to all children born here to parents who can call this country their home.” (SOURCE)
Consequences and possibilities to come in the next few articles on the matter.
As a pragmatic and patriotic American I respectfully suggest and recommend the U.S. State Department immediately institute the “Roberts Requirement” following similar visa entry protocols previously used for COVID-19 tests prior to U.S. admittance.
The Roberts Requirement: Each female visa applicant must present a valid negative pregnancy test taken no longer than 10 days prior to travel to the United States.
The certified document, negative pregnancy test, together with all related visa approvals must be presented to Customs and Border Patrol at each port of entry. Failure disqualifies the traveler.
This is the same protocol as COVID-19, only using pregnancy status as the disqualifying health issue. It is a lawful regulation, born from a new standard established by the Supreme Court, that does not need congressional approval.
Don’t get stuck on details about why it will not work, it will.
Start thinking like a person who realizes the goal is to create severe antagonism through regulation. That antagonism can then be directed.
Aim isolation, ridicule and marginalization at those who created the problem. This can be done without visible vitriol.
The objective is not just making sure pregnant women do not get visas; that is one small element. The bigger objective is to make it extremely difficult to come to the USA and THEN pin that global compliance requirement on Chief Justice John Roberts, making him live every day with the consequences of his blinded American stupidity; facing him, belittling him, ridiculing him, sitting on the front pages of his peers and global friends.
Chief Justice John Roberts created this mess, now put it on his doorstep every day.
But people will lie – doesn’t matter.
But people will create fake documents – doesn’t matter.
But people will still overstay their visas – doesn’t matter.
You are putting the emphasis on the wrong aspect.
Make every overburdensome visa rule and travel permit regulation specifically attributable to John Roberts decision. Pre-screenings, pregnancy tests, supplemental bond requirements for 15-to 45-year-old females, shortened visa terms and much more.
No exclusions for diplomats, sports figures, foreign actors, employees, H1Bs, student entry or any other visa type – the works. Make the total visa entry system subject to a regulatory and compliance nightmare at a scale that is unheard of. That is the scale of the problem Roberts has created. Now blame John Roberts for it.
This ‘Roberts Requirement’ applies to all visa types.
The objective, and it can accompany many other requirements such as a “bond” attachment required for 15- to 45-year-old females to travel, is to create such an overwhelmingly restrictive visa process that it creates ridicule on the SCOTUS decision.
Make every regulation specifically cited to the Supreme Court decision and make it exceptionally burdensome.
Make SCOTUS own the outcome.
Canadians and Mexicans also need to comply. The same rules apply to every nation and no longer are visas determined by timeline, but by the number of extensions required or allowed within it.
Every visa has a maximum duration of 3 months, with various extensions possible.
A one-year visa becomes a three-month visa with 4 extensions allowed. At each extension the same origination requirements must be fulfilled.
A two-year USA visa, is now a U.S. visa with 7 extensions allowed, etc.
Student visas carry the same requirement for 3-month extensions.
Require a – refundable at exit – surety bond purchase valued at $500,000 for any non-tourist visa. [Later the bond issuer, sell those non-refunded bonds and release the bounty hunters.]
No visas are exempt from the entry requirements.
This is a new era with new rules that specifically come as an outcome of new judicial rulings. This is not a White House or State Department issue. This is an issue created by the Supreme Court that needs an immediate response.
Congress can fix it, but in the interim – maximum regulatory pressure is applied directly to the wound.
♦ Example of point and counterpoints.
POINT: Canada, Mexico, India or [XXX] will scream this is unfair given the nature of our collaborative visa designations.
Counterpoint: Yes, you are correct. That was then; this is now. The nature of our visa system has changed because SCOTUS has just codified new distinctions on citizenship that now become new visa factors. Your nation does not convey birthright citizenship, so I understand your inability to accept our new terms. Unfortunately, our nation now does convey birthright citizenship, and as a consequence changes are needed.
Don’t back down. Make SCOTUS own it.
Sure, there will be legal challenges, all the way up to the same SCOTUS, and what are they going to do?
Think about it!
Make everyone live by the new rules – that are created by those who didn’t think about the consequences.
The Canadian dollar is starting to feel the effects of long-term uncertainty. It will get worse.
...”Since the start of June, the currency has weakened 2.9%, which would be its steepest monthly decline since October 2024, as Canadian bond yields fell further below U.S. yields.”… {source}
Now, this is where you really need to pay attention to details. Remember, the U.K and EU have a vested interest in protecting Canada from economic collapse.
President Trump doesn’t want immediate collapse either -because Xi will move in fast- but Trump is not going to provide the same financial and economic lifelines that the other four-eyes will trigger.
Reuters is reporting that tomorrow the U.S. will formally declare a “non-extension” of the USMCA trade agreement {ARTICLE} and that triggers a 10-year period to decoupling. It is very important to understand there is a difference between announcing a “non-extension” and announcing a “withdrawal“. The Canadians are completely confused about what is about to happen.
In a non-extension announcement, the USA is saying they do not want to extend or renew the terms of the agreement beyond the current trade agreement terms. Yes, this is a 10-year exit. However, that’s not the part that matters. Announcing a decision to exit the USMCA (CUSMA), a full withdrawal from the trilateral deal, triggers a six-month countdown to exit.
The deadline to announce the decision to extend is tomorrow, July 1st. There is no deadline on the timeline to announce an exit or withdrawal from the USMCA. That announcement can happen at any time.
Put simply, announcing a non-renewal is a 10-year exit. Announcing a withdrawal is a 6-month exit. The announcement to withdraw can come at any time after the statement of non-renewal.
WASHINGTON, June 30 (Reuters) – U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration is expected to formally declare on Wednesday that it will not extend the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement on trade, starting a decade-long clock to wind down the 32-year-old North American free trade zone as the three countries haggle over proposed changes.
That declaration will kick off a six-year review session, part of a “sunset clause” negotiated by President Donald Trump’s first administration. However, it will do little to alter contentious negotiations over the pact’s future, including sweeping demands to boost U.S. and regional content in North American automotive production and trade protections to block Chinese goods from benefiting from USMCA. (read more)
The most likely scenario is Trump/Greer first say the USA is not renewing (not extending). Then, at a later date determined by them (in my opinion it will be after the U.S-Mexico agreement is finished), Trump and Greer will then announce the withdrawal, which will trigger the 6-month countdown to exit.
There is no rush to announce the withdrawal; the only immediate action is to announce a USMCA renewal is not happening.
What this scenario does is put maximum pressure on Canada. As soon as President Trump says the USA will not extend the agreement, all investment into Canada becomes extremely tenuous. The Canadian dollar will weaken further; a slow contraction will begin. However, Canada will still be oblivious to what comes next because their media will tell them they have a decade to work things out. They don’t.
At a time determined by President Trump and USTR Jamieson Greer, they will announce a decision to exit the USMCA which then triggers a 6-month phase before the agreement is terminated.
This is where Canada will be caught off guard and the economic collapse will likely be rapid and catastrophic.
Canada will only just begin to think about the “exit” scenario, once the non-renewal announcement is made. It will take them a while to realize how vulnerable they are – they are currently in full denial mode.
During this period, President Trump carries massive leverage against Canada. He will likely probe their trade position and willingness to comply with reciprocity after the non-renewal announcement. The outcome of those probes will determine the timeline of his exit announcement.
During this non-renewal phase, we may even see President Trump tease the exit, then retract, then tease the exit again. Each time Trump tests the Canadian government with statements, the Canadian economy will pulsate and weaken; it will drive the Canadian government to either extreme anger, or defeated compliance.
Timing the completion of the U.S-Mexico deal within the probes of Canada will be super interesting. At some point as the U.S. closes in on the deal with Mexico, Canada is going to realize they are naked without any agreement.
The worst-case scenario for Canada is President Trump announcing the USMCA exit on the same day he announces a completed bilateral deal with Mexico.
It would be the worst-case scenario for Mark Carney because the ignored voices of those few people in Canada who have been trying to warn about this would suddenly get a lot of attention.
During an oval office event to highlight President Trump signing three executive orders informing all agencies of government that federal officials will not be enforcing any rule that blocks citizens from repairing or modifying their own vehicles, President Trump took questions from the media on today’s Supreme Court rulings. WATCH (prompted):
.
Now the good news. As noted by Justice Thomas, this decision when contrast against the Lisa Cook decision does not find alignment.
By a vote of 6-3, the justices struck down a federal law that bars the president from firing members of the Federal Trade Commission except in cases of “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.” [PDF Ruling Here] That law, a majority of the justices ruled, violates the constitutional separation of powers between the three branches of government.
This lengthy 108-page decision supports the Unitary Theory of government in that the President can remove any agency head within the Executive Branch through plenary power, and the Legislative Branch and Judicial Branch cannot interfere. This is a major win for President Trump and beyond.
(6-3) Chief Justice ROBERTS delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ALITO, GORSUCH, KAVANAUGH and BARRETT joined, and in which THOMAS joined as to all but Part III–B. [GORSUCH filed a concurring opinion.] Justice SOTOMAYOR filed a dissenting opinion, in which KAGAN and JACKSON joined.
SCOTUS Blog – […] “Monday’s decision was a major victory for proponents of the “unitary executive” theory – the idea that the president should have complete control over the executive branch. Under this theory, the president should be able to fire any member of the executive branch, and laws – like the one that the court struck down – that restrict his ability to do so violate the separation of powers. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts contended that “the President must have the assistance of officers he can trust. Although it is up to the Senate to decide whether to confirm those with whom the President would prefer to work, neither Congress nor the courts may saddle him with those with whom he cannot work. Subordinates who exercise the President’s power are subject to removal by him. Then, and only then, can they remain accountable to the President, and the President to the people.” (more)
At issue in Trump v Cook is not whether Lisa Cook can appeal her removal, but rather where her position rests while the appeal is underway. Does she work for the govt? Or is she technically removed from govt, pending appeal?
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Lisa Cook remaining in her position as a member of the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors whom President Donald Trump had attempted to fire. By a vote of 5-4 [PDF HERE] [the court says Cook can continue to remain in her job while her challenge to Trump’s removal moves forward.
Chief Justice John Roberts delivered the opinion of the Court, and SOTOMAYOR, KAGAN, KAVANAUGH and JACKSON concurred.
Justice Clarence Thomas filed a dissenting opinion. ALITO filed a dissenting opinion, in which GORSUCH joined, and BARRETT also filed a dissenting opinion.
This is a rather goofball decision when you consider the previous issues with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the high court prior ruling that President Trump can remove the head of the agency.
Additionally, if Lisa Cook does not work for the President of the United States, meaning if she doesn’t work for the Executive Branch, then who exactly is she working for? She doesn’t work for the legislative branch, and she doesn’t work for the judicial branch. Therefore, a de facto mysterious 4th branch of government is created.
Writing the majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts said if the Trump administration were correct, it “would in effect transform the Federal Reserve’s for-cause protection into at-will employment, an leap out of step with the statute Congress enacted and our Nation’s tradition of central banking protected from political interference.”
Justice Clarence Thomas said the 5-4 ruling was “incorrect.” “Although the Court expresses concern that the President removed a Board member for ‘the first time in the Federal Reserve’s 111-year history, it expresses no such concern that it today upholds an injunction [here] against the President’s removal of an executive officer for the first time in the Constitution’s 237-year history.”
If the Federal Reserve Board of Governors are not subject to the plenary power of the executive branch, then who controls it? If no one, then the Federal Reserve Board (FED) exists to control the American economy without any oversight from any mechanism within the U.S. Constitution.
The federal reserve is a fourth branch of government?
This decision seems rather weird….. Especially when the next ruling is considered.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
De Oppresso Liber
A group of Americans united by our commitment to Freedom, Constitutional Governance, and Civic Duty.
Share the truth at whatever cost.
De Oppresso Liber
Uncensored updates on world events, economics, the environment and medicine
De Oppresso Liber
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Australia's Front Line | Since 2011
See what War is like and how it affects our Warriors
Nwo News, End Time, Deep State, World News, No Fake News
De Oppresso Liber
Politics | Talk | Opinion - Contact Info: stellasplace@wowway.com
Exposition and Encouragement
The Physician Wellness Movement and Illegitimate Authority: The Need for Revolt and Reconstruction
Real Estate Lending
Centinel2012 