Thread: 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!!

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.

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.