Anonymous ID: aa1d16 Dec. 30, 2018, 12:51 p.m. No.4525172   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>5216 >>5231 >>5307 >>5365 >>5723

Fellow anons. This one stumps me. I've been following this for some time and I can't figure this one out. Generally, Trump is against the globalist agenda. Pulling out of the Paris agreement, the UN migraction pact, etc. He openly stated NAFTA was terrible and he's vocally said at rallies and other speeches that he wants to put us into GOOD trade deals. So what is going on with this USMCA? I came across an article just now that's pretty interesting and it seems like the USMCA isn't actually a good thing. It seems like more of the same and it pushes that sustainable development crap as well as the globalist agenda "North American Union". I'll sauce the article at the end, but here's a quote towards the end:

 

"USMCA will not help the United States, Mexico, or Canada be more competitive individually or boost any one of three countries' economies. The Deep State does not wish for the United States alone to be competitive with the rest of the world, or maintain global economic dominance; instead it must surrender its sovereignty — along with that of its neighbors — to a new supranational body that will supposedly protect “North American” jobs, industry, and economy.

 

Rather than putting “America first,” as President Trump has repeatedly promised, or to “Make America Great Again,” his new NAFTA, the USMCA, demotes the United States to second tier in pursuit of making North America great. The USMCA makes North America great at the expense of the United States and its national sovereignty.

 

Under this scheme, the United States will be required to surrender its sovereignty in order for a chance to be a member of the winning team. Americans have been lied to and duped by their government into believing that their elected leaders are working in their interest, only to subordinate America's interests to those of North America. It's only a matter of time before the same charade is pulled on North America in order to integrate it with the world's other regional trade blocs (i.e. the European Union, African Union, Union of South America, Eurasian Economic Union, RCEP, TPP, T-TIP) into one world economic union and commission, under the auspices of the United Nations and the World Trade Organization.

 

The result of “promoting further economic integration” among the United States, Mexico, and Canada, necessitating the creation of an all-powerful, unelected so-called Free Trade Commission will be nothing less than a North American Union, and that alone should motivate patriotic Americans to vehemently reject the new United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement."

 

And this is from the actual USMCA itself in the environment section:

"1. The Parties recognize that a healthy environment is

an integral element of sustainable development and recognize the

contribution that trade makes to sustainable development.

  1. The objectives of this Chapter are to promote

mutually supportive trade and environmental policies and

practices; promote high levels of environmental protection and

effective enforcement of environmental laws; and enhance the

capacities of the Parties to address trade‐related environmental

issues, including through cooperation, in the furtherance of

sustainable development."

 

So my question is; why would Trump go with this? Did he not read it? Can someone help me understand what's up with this?

 

Article: https://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/north-america/item/30208-new-nafta-text-of-u-s-mexico-canada-agreement-usmca-revealed

Anonymous ID: aa1d16 Dec. 30, 2018, 12:59 p.m. No.4525262   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>5454

>>4525231

That was my thought too. He had to come to an agreement with Canada and Mexico which are clearly NWO (at least Canada heavily is). My thought was that was the best he could do for now. I'm hoping that's the case.

Anonymous ID: aa1d16 Dec. 30, 2018, 1:21 p.m. No.4525542   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>5588

>>4525454

True. I heard about this USMCA article on the Dave Janda show. The author was his interview guest. I can't seem to form an opinion of Dave Janda. He has a lot of good information but he says he has "sources" in the WH and he's been wrong on a lot too.