It’s true! Hillary Clinton’s real agenda is open borders and unrestricted trade

See: Clinton called for 'open trade and open borders' in private, paid speeches

” WASHINGTON – Hillary Clinton told bankers behind closed doors that she favored "open trade and open borders" and said Wall Street executives were best-positioned to help reform the U.S. financial sector, according to transcripts of her private, paid speeches leaked Friday.”

Contrary to what Hillary Clinton has recently been saying in public ___ that she is against the Trans-Pacific Partnership deal (TPP) [another NAFTA type trade deal] ___ behind closed doors Hillary Clinton has assured Wall Street Bankers who have been major donors to her political campaign that she favors unrestricted trade and open borders which will allow America to be flooded with cheap foreign labor.

For those who do not understand what the TPP is really about, it is the same un-American type deal as the NAFTA, which was never about “free trade”. It was always about ending Congress’ power to regulate commerce with foreign nations and place this power in the hands of un-elected individuals who would then be free to promote the financial interests of international corporate giants who have no allegiance to America or any nation, and screw an America First Trade Policy! If you don’t believe this to be true, take the time to study the fine print of the NAFTA deal, especially its establishment of by-national panels who have usurped Congress’ power to make binding trade decisions:

SEE: Establishment of Binational Panels


And, under 1904:Review of Final Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Determinations the United States is forbidden to “provide in its domestic legislation for an appeal from a panel decision to its domestic courts.”


Also, under 1904: Review of Final Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Determinations the United States is required to amend its statutes and regulations “to ensure that its courts shall give full force and effect, with respect to any person within its jurisdiction, to all sanctions imposed pursuant to the laws of the other Parties to enforce...”


This of course puts American businesses and industries involved in trade with Canada and Mexico under the jurisdiction of a foreign power. Is this not one of the indictments contained in the Declaration of Independence, namely: “He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our law; giving his Assent to the Acts of pretended Legislation”.


And, if the above is not enough to cause concern for freedom loving Americans, Under Annex 1904.15: Amendments to Domestic Laws Schedule of the United States the United States is required to “amend section 301 of the Customs Courts Act of l980, as amended, and any other relevant provisions of law, to eliminate the authority to issue declaratory judgments in any civil action involving an antidumping or countervailing duty proceeding regarding a class of kind of Canadian or Mexican merchandise.”


This, in essence, deprives American domestic businesses and industries the protections of our judicial system, and requires them to submit to a foreign judicial power if they complain or question what foreigners involved in commerce are doing on American Soil!”


Hillary Clinton in her support for the NAFTA has violated her oath to support and defend our Constitution by ignoring the exclusive power to regulate commerce is placed in Congress' hands, and not some unelected panel which is created under the NAFTA to advance the interests of our Global Governance Crowd

JWK



What did Hillary Clinton, the grandmother of Obamacare, repeatedly tell the American people about a federal takeover of our nation’s healthcare system? CLICK HERE to hear Hillary Clinton lie to the American people.

Yes, this is why we protected traders oppose most "free trade" agreements. It's treason in every sense of the word UNLESS they are so constructed to protect our country that the benefit to the other country is so marginal, why bother? This is one of the reasons why the FairTax i such a great solution at least in large part if not a total solution to the trade problems. When people fully understand the FairTax especially its impact on stopping illegal immigration and leveling the playing field for our producers without the trials and tribulations of "trade agreements", people will see and understand why I'm a FairTax Fanatic!!

:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

Yes, this is why we protected traders oppose most "free trade" agreements. It's treason in every sense of the word UNLESS they are so constructed to protect our country that the benefit to the other country is so marginal, why bother? This is one of the reasons why the FairTax i such a great solution at least in large part if not a total solution to the trade problems. When people fully understand the FairTax especially its impact on stopping illegal immigration and leveling the playing field for our producers without the trials and tribulations of "trade agreements", people will see and understand why I'm a FairTax Fanatic!!

:)

---

The alleged "fairtax", as I have repeatedly proven to you, is an attempt to enlarge Congress' taxing powers. Why do you support such tyranny which does not make any attempt to withdraw Congress' power to lay and collect taxes calculated from profits, gains, salaries, wages tips and other "incomes"?

JWK




“Honest money and honest taxation, the Key to America’s future Prosperity“ ___ from “Prosperity Restored by the State Rate Tax Plan”, no longer in print.

Johnwk, you have not proven it, because you never answered the questions I posed to you. I love your posts except your confusion on the FairTax. We disagree on the FairTax, lets just leave it there. If you understood it, you would understand how it protects our trade without the need for any trade agreements, how it stops illegal immigration because illegal aliens don't receive the rebate, thus putting them at a 23% comparative wage disadvantage to American Workers, how it creates jobs because it relieves all businesses and employers of all income tax and compliance costs, how it shuts down these phony 501 C 3 "charity" frauds that suck $1.4 trillion a year out of our economy, how it relieves all individual taxpayers of compliance costs as well as frees them from the manipulation of the income tax implications on both personal and business decisions, how it restores freedom and privacy, the keystone of freedom, to the lives of our citizens and the operations of our businesses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

Johnwk, you have not proven it ....

---

The only tax reform we need begins with the following 32 words which brings us back to our Constitution's original tax plan as our founders intended it to operate:

The Sixteenth Amendment is hereby repealed and Congress is henceforth forbidden to lay ``any`` tax or burden calculated from profits, gains, interest, salaries, wages, tips, inheritances or any other lawfully realized money

The alleged "fairtax" has no provision to forbid Congress from laying and collecting taxes calculated from profits and gains, as was upheld by the Supreme Court in Flint vs Stone Tracy, a decision made prior to the adoption of the 16th Amendment.

The "fairtax" also circumvents the rule of apportionment and would have the people of the most productive states paying the lion's share of the cost of government without having a proportionately equal voice in Congress relative to their contribution into the federal treasury. Why are you so eager to circumvent the rule of apportionment?

JWK



If, by calling a tax indirect when it is essentially direct, the rule of protection could be frittered away, one of the great landmarks defining the boundary between the nation and the states of which it is composed, would have disappeared, and with it one of the bulwarks of private rights and private property.___POLLOCK v. FARMERS' LOAN & TRUST CO., 157U.S. 429 (1895)

Because it's a voluntary tax, not a mandated tax. If productive states collect more revenue from the FairTax, that's because the people of that state have chosen to spend it on taxable new goods and services. They have chosen to pay the FairTax through their own consumption, by choice, not force.

The rule of apportionment applies to a mandated tax, that FORCES people in a state to ante up to feed the beast of the federal government. The apportionment rule does not apply to indirect taxes like the FairTax that are VOLUNTARILY PAID through their own private decisions to buy something new or hire a service of some type. Your essentials to survive are exempt through the Rebate. No one is forced to pay a dime of FairTax against their will, they do so purely by choice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

Because it's a voluntary tax, not a mandated tax. .

---

Judy,

You are making stuff up or have never read the proposed legislation! The alleged fairtax is not voluntary for those who sell the property each has in their own labor!

`(2) EXCEPTION WHERE TAX PAID TO SELLER-A person using or consuming a taxable property or service in the United States is not liable for the tax imposed by this section if the person pays the tax to a person selling the taxable property or service and receives from such person a purchaser's receipt within the meaning of section 510.

`(f) Barter Transactions- If gross payment for taxable property or services is made in other than money, then the person responsible for collecting and remitting the tax shall remit the tax to the sales tax administering authority in money as if gross payment had been made in money at the tax inclusive fair market value of the taxable property or services purchased

`(a) In General- Any person liable to collect and remit taxes pursuant to section 103(a) who is engaged in a trade or business shall register as a seller with the sales tax administering authority administering the taxes imposed by this subtitle.

Now let us examine how this tax upon “property” would affect Mary and Joe Sixpack, ordinary working people. Mary and Joe have two children and find it necessary to earn extra money to pay their bills. Mary baby sits for neighbors in the community and cleans homes on weekends to raise extra money while Joe, who works for a plumbing company as a full-time job, also provides the same plumbing service on his own time to people living in his community to raise extra cash.

Under the alleged fairtax Mary and Joe Sixpack’s inalienable right to sell the property they have in their own labor becomes a taxable event for them, and, they must first register with government to sell the property they have in their labor, collect a federal tax for Congress, file federal sales tax returns under the penalty of perjury, and they will be compelled to keep any records Congress may dream up, not to mention the threat of audits which will constantly haunt them if they dare to sell the property they have in their labor.

The thing is, our founding fathers, during the Constitutional Convention of 1787, were fully aware of the oppressive nation of taxes imposed upon property and this is the very reason for our founding fathers demanding in our Constitution that No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.


JWK

"The property which every man has in his own labor, as it is the original foundation of all other property, so it is the most sacred and inviolable. The patrimony of the poor man lies in the strength and dexterity of his own hands; and to hinder him from employing this strength and dexterity in what manner he thinks proper, without injury to his neighbor, is a plain violation of this mostsacred property." ___ Butchers’ Union Co. v. Crescent CityCo., 111 U.S. 746 (1884)

I have read the entire legislation numerous times. You don't understand the FairTax as it relates to itself or the Constitution. Sorry to cut this short, but I'm watching Trump now on O'Reilly. Bye!

That Hitlery is for open borders and the end to our nation's sovereignty is no surprise to any of us who have been paying attention. Irony alert - she wants to be the leader of a nation she wants to eliminate, effectively putting herself out of a job. I never thought I would live to see the day when we had an unpatriotic America hater like obama in the Oval Office and another one maybe soon to be there. Very sad indeed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by patbrunz

That Hitlery is for open borders and the end to our nation's sovereignty is no surprise to any of us who have been paying attention. Irony alert - she wants to be the leader of a nation she wants to eliminate, effectively putting herself out of a job. I never thought I would live to see the day when we had an unpatriotic America hater like obama in the Oval Office and another one maybe soon to be there. Very sad indeed.

---

In a few more weeks the American people will be deciding the fate of America!


Do we want to continue importing the poverty stricken populations of other countries into our country which drives down earned wages for American citizens and creates unemployment [Hillary’s plan], or do we want to secure our borders and regulate immigration into America in a manner which promotes the best interests of American citizens [Trump’s plan]?

Do we want to increase the flow of Syrian “refugees” into America by 550 percent when vetting them is problematic at this point in time [Hillary’s plan], or do we temporarily halt immigration from war torn Islamic controlled countries until we can figure out a way to more effectively vet these “refugees” [Trump’s plan]?

Do we want to continue making destructive trade deals such as the NAFTA which promote the interests of international corporate giants who have no allegiance to America or any nation and are not in America’s best interests [Hillary’s plan], or do we want to negotiate trade deals which promote an America first trade policy and are in the best interests of America’s labor force [Trump’s plan]?

Do we want to continue with Obama’s federal takeover of our nation’s health-care delivery system [Hillary Clinton’s plan], or do we want to repeal and replace Obama / Hillary care with a free market competitive system in which people will be able to exercise their unalienable right to choose their doctors and health insurance needs [Trump’s plan]?

Do we want two or three more Justices put on our Supreme Court who will engage in judicial tyranny and advance their personal views of fairness, reasonableness, or justice as the Supreme Law of the land [Hillary’s plan], or do we want judges and Justices appointed who will be faithful to their oath of office and support and defend the text and documented “legislative intent” of our Constitution [Trump’s plan]?

Indeed, while both Hillary and Donald have displayed a number of characteristics which are offensive, we ought to be focusing on the bigger picture which are the promised policies of each candidate should they become our next president ___ policies which will actually affect the common defense and general welfare of our country. Unfortunately, this is what our Fifth Column news media personalities are determined to avoid discussing, and this ought to sound the alarm among American citizens regardless of their political party affiliation. The future of our country hangs in the balance!

JWK


We are here today and gone tomorrow, but what is most important is what we do in between, and is what our children will inherit and remember us by.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

I have read the entire legislation numerous times. You don't understand the FairTax as it relates to itself or the Constitution. Sorry to cut this short, but I'm watching Trump now on O'Reilly. Bye!

---

Nice pivot, especially when the conversation was getting interesting. You made some excellent points, Johnwk. I'm with you, the so-called fairtax is not fair at all. ;)

Arguing over virtues or lack thereof of the Fair Tax is arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin at this point my fellow ALIPACers.

Johnwk wrote:

Quote:

---

The alleged "fairtax" has no provision to forbid Congress from laying and collecting taxes calculated from profits and gains, as was upheld by the Supreme Court in Flint vs Stone Tracy, a decision made prior to the adoption of the 16th Amendment.

---

The FairTax Act repeals all income based taxes, income taxes collected from profits, gains, net income, gross income, adjusted gross income, dividends, interest, payrolls, gifts, estates, capital gains, etc., etc., etc. The FairTax Act repeals the entirety of the revenue act pertaining to the income tax.

The FairTax legislation doesn't repeal the 16th Amendment. There will be a second legislation to propose the repeal of the 16th Amendment that would then be circulated to the States. Meanwhile, the FairTax is implemented and the problems of the federal income tax removed from our society and its burdens lifted from our people and businesses. No one knows whether the States would approve the repeal of the 16th Amendment, one would think so, but you don't know. There are many "blue" states that like the tyranny of the income tax, that don't care about the consequences of the income tax on our people and economy, so it would take a state by state effort and we need 3/4 of the states to achieve that, 75% of 50 which is 38 states. Most of US believe that once the FairTax is implemented while the Constitutional Amendment is circulating that people will like the FairTax so much that even "blue" states will approve it.

There's nothing more that Congress can do in that regard. "Blue" states will never repeal the 16th Amendment before there is a replacement of the income tax like the FairTax.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by patbrunz

Arguing over virtues or lack thereof of the Fair Tax is arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin at this point my fellow ALIPACers.

---

I agree with you completely. Unfortunately, the alleged "fairtax" seems to be squeezed into topics in which it has no relevance, especially in a subject concerning Hillary Clinton's agenda.

What is important at this point in time is:

Do we want to continue importing the poverty stricken populations of other countries into our country which drives down earned wages for American citizens and creates unemployment [Hillary’s plan], or do we want to secure our borders and regulate immigration into America in a manner which promotes the best interests of American citizens [Trump’s plan]?

Do we want to increase the flow of Syrian “refugees” into America by 550 percent when vetting them is problematic at this point in time [Hillary’s plan], or do we temporarily halt immigration from war torn Islamic controlled countries until we can figure out a way to more effectively vet these “refugees” [Trump’s plan]?

Do we want to continue making destructive trade deals such as the NAFTA which promote the interests of international corporate giants who have no allegiance to America or any nation and are not in America’s best interests [Hillary’s plan], or do we want to negotiate trade deals which promote an America first trade policy and are in the best interests of America’s labor force [Trump’s plan]?

Do we want to continue with Obama’s federal takeover of our nation’s health-care delivery system [Hillary Clinton’s plan], or do we want to repeal and replace Obama / Hillary care with a free market competitive system in which people will be able to exercise their unalienable right to choose their doctors and health insurance needs [Trump’s plan]?

Do we want two or three more Justices put on our Supreme Court who will engage in judicial tyranny and advance their personal views of fairness, reasonableness, or justice as the Supreme Law of the land [Hillary’s plan], or do we want judges and Justices appointed who will be faithful to their oath of office and support and defend the text and documented “legislative intent” of our Constitution [Trump’s plan]?


JWK



CLICK HERE to listen to Hillary Clinton's plan to increase "refugees" from Islamic controlled countries by 550%. And this does not even include her plan to give legal status and work permits to millions of foreigners who have invaded our borders from Mexico and Central America.