First, here is a quick update about the anti-Kavanaugh charges:
The Mediaite website reported about accuser Julie Swetnick:
She provided four names to NBC News that she said could confirm her descriptions of the (rape) parties in the 1980s (allegedly attended by Kavanaugh). NBC News contacted all four: one said they did not remember a Julie Swetnick, one was dead, and two did not respond….
Fox News reported:
The ex-boyfriend of Julie Swetnick… told Fox News exclusively on Monday that she had threatened to kill his unborn child and at times even bizarrely asked him to hit her.
The Gateway Pundit reported about two minor traffic charges on the internet from 1985 against accuser Christine Blasey Ford:
The interesting thing about these two cases against Christine Blasey Ford is that they were last updated on July 7, 2018.
In her testimony Ford said she contacted the Washington Post tip line (and Democrat lawmakers) on July 6th.
That is why July 7th, 2018 is so coincidental.
So why would anyone be tampering with a report of a minor 33-year old criminal charge? Good question. Breitbart News reports about new anonymous and uncorroborated charges:
The Senate Judiciary Committee questioned Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh last Wednesday regarding a letter delivered to Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) in which an anonymous woman claims she was repeatedly raped by the judge without providing any details to investigate.
According to committee transcripts released Sunday, the accuser, who signed the mysterious letter as “Jane Doe,” alleges Kavanaugh and a friend raped her “several times” after giving her a lift home from a party — making no attempt to claim a time or place for the lurid story.
Thus this all appears to be more and more brazen fraud against judge Kavanaugh. Democrats will never stop with these charges since they have become massively corrupt.
Now here is today’s main commentary:
Trump Reveals Historic Trade Pact
In a July 22, 2018 commentary called Is Trump Starting – and Losing – a Trade War? Nikitas 3.com argued that president Trump was doing an excellent job on trade and that his tactics in the ‘trade war’ – primarily tariffs on imports into the US – are going to produce great results over the long term.
And Trump indeed is winning even though the term has not even been all that long. Europe and Mexico have made concessions and China has started to do so. Nikitas3.com predicts that China will continue to make concessions since China is not as strong economically as we are being led to believe.
We see China as an economic monolith that cannot be stopped. Its economy is the world’s second largest at about $12 trillion annually (according to Chinese figures that are suspect), compared to the US at $21 trillion. But things are not so rosy in Cathay – the historical name for China. The New York Times reported on July 15, 2018:
On the surface, China’s economy is humming along smoothly. It’s the numbers behind the numbers that point to mounting challenges for the world’s other economic superpower.
The Chinese government on Monday reported that the economy grew 6.7 percent in the three months that ended in June compared with a year ago. That is pretty close to the rate that China has reported quarter after quarter over the past two and a half years. The pace puts it comfortably within its target of achieving growth of around 6.5 percent for the full year.
Those figures belie warning signs elsewhere. More detailed data show weakening investment in infrastructure and less exuberant spending by China’s usually ebullient consumers. Private businesses complain that government efforts to tame debt have made it hard for them to borrow money. A tiny but growing number of Chinese companies have defaulted on their loans. The currency has lost some of its value. Chinese stocks are in bear market territory.
It may just get tougher from here.
So that is one reason why China is vulnerable on trade. The other was reported by CNBC.com:
China’s economy, much more vulnerable to exports, is likely to take a bigger hit than the U.S. from the escalating trade war.
… The U.S. slapped tariffs of 10 percent on $200 billion in Chinese goods, and China retaliated by putting tariffs on $60 billion in U.S. goods. Economists expect Chinese growth to take a hit of 0.5 to 0.6 percentage points in 2019 if tariffs are raised to 25 percent on Jan. 1 as the U.S. has announced.
“If you put tariffs across the board on both countries…it’s a four times bigger hit to China because they export four times as much as they import,” said Ethan Harris, head of global economics at Bank of America Merrill Lynch.
So Trump knows what he is doing. He knows that China is feeling pain. In other words most nations need the American market more than America needs their individual markets. So president Trump is using America’s economic power to get us better deals. Brilliant. It pays to be king.
Meanwhile Fox Business reports on October 1 about another major Trump trade success:
The United States and Canada confirmed Sunday they had reached a deal on a “new, modernized trade agreement,” which is designed to replace the 1994 NAFTA pact.
In a joint statement the two nations said the new deal would be called the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA).
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said following a cabinet meeting, “It’s a good day for Canada.”
President Trump tweeted about the deal on Monday morning, calling it a “great deal for all three countries” and that it will open markets to farmers and manufacturers.
“Late last night, our deadline, we reached a wonderful new Trade Deal with Canada, to be added into the deal already reached with Mexico,” Trump tweeted. “The new name will be The United States Mexico Canada Agreement, or USMCA. It is a great deal for all three countries, solves the many deficiencies and mistakes in NAFTA, greatly opens markets to our Farmers and Manufacturers, reduce Trade Barriers to the U.S. and will bring all three Great Nations closer together in competition with the rest of the world. The USMCA is a historic transaction!”
The agreements reportedly boost U.S. access to Canada’s dairy market and protect Canada from possible U.S. autos tariffs.
President Trump is doing something that should have been done decades ago; he is forcing world leaders to wean themselves off of tariffs that were only working one way – against the US.
His goal is to show them that free trade is better for all in the long run rather than the short-term, one-way benefits of rigged trade.
If Canada did not sign the new deal, Trump had threatened to impose steep tariffs on all automotive imports. This gave Canada a big impetus to sign.
Imagine Facebook A and Facebook B
Imagine going onto the internet and discovering that there are two Facebooks.
That sounds odd, but it could happen. Look at this from Bloomberg News called Anti-Trust Probe Commences Against Internet Giants:
The White House has drafted an executive order for President Donald Trump’s signature that would instruct federal antitrust and law enforcement agencies to open investigations into the business practices of Alphabet Inc.’s Google, Facebook Inc. and other social media companies.
The order is in its preliminary stages and hasn’t yet been run past other government agencies, according to a White House official. Bloomberg News obtained a draft of the order.
The document instructs U.S. antitrust authorities to “thoroughly investigate whether any online platform has acted in violation of the antitrust laws.” It instructs other government agencies to recommend within a month after it’s signed actions that could potentially “protect competition among online platforms and address online platform bias.”
The document doesn’t name any specific companies. If signed, the order would represent a significant escalation of Trump’s antipathy toward Google, Facebook, Twitter and other social media companies, whom he has publicly accused of silencing conservative voices and news sources online.
“Social Media is totally discriminating against Republican/Conservative voices,” Trump said on Twitter in August. “Speaking loudly and clearly for the Trump Administration, we won’t let that happen. They are closing down the opinions of many people on the RIGHT, while at the same time doing nothing to others.”
This is groundbreaking news. Anti-trust actions are vastly more drastic than regulation. Anti-trust means that these big internet companies could actually be broken into pieces under government order and direction just as the government did to Bell Telephone and Standard Oil.
So imagine that Facebook is broken in two. Here is one possible way that that could be manifested:
Facebook A remains in the hands of the people who founded, own and manage it. Facebook B is given over to conservative managers.
Both sides could be accessed at any time by anybody. Facebook A and Facebook B would carry much of the same information, i.e., they would both have billions of individual pages while page hosts could check a box to be only on A or B.
For instance the conservative Diamond & Silk page has been removed from Facebook. However it could appear on the conservative Facebook B side. Meanwhile liberal pages could be banned from the conservative side.
Each side could offer a liberal or conservative bias based on whom they post and how they control the flow of information. But they would remain linked. For instance a person looking on the Facebook B side could access a Facebook A page (say, a liberal acquaintance or business interest) through the link.
But the conservative side could use conservative algorithms to control the flow of information in a conservative manner just as Facebook does today with liberal algorithms.
Imagine that – two Facebooks. And don’ think that it couldn’t happen. There very well could be anti-trust action coming.