More skulduggery. (See 1 below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Trump's Mid East peace plan deferred. (See 2 below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Democrats have perfected the tactic of blaming their opponents of what they engage in. Trump is now being accused of knowing his son was approached by Russians claiming they had dirt on Hillary and his son met with them and nothing came of the meeting. Trump acknowledged this over a year ago but it the Democrat's purpose to bring it up again so they can use it as a cover for the accusation that has been proved about Hillary.
Hillary actually purchased a Russian Dossier full of false claims, handed it to The FBI and you know the rest.
Meanwhile, Rahm Emanuel blamed everyone but himself for the assassinations in Chicago, America's safest sanctuary city/. The actual weekend tally came to 11, not 10, dead and over 70, not 60, shot. Sad but then I have not heard a peep from The Hollywood crowd who care so much for their fellow citizens. Oh that is only if they are illegals immigrants. Sorry about that.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Atlanta investment advisor gives his view of the economics behind China trade fight. (See 3 below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dick
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1) New Report Shows Government Gave DACA Protection to Thousands of Criminals
By Hans von Spakovsky
Historian Jacob Burckhardt once warned against being deceived by “terrible simplifiers.” If he hadn’t died in 1897, you might be tempted to think he was writing about defenders of President Barack Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.
The left consistently characterizes all DACA recipients as though they were innocent, law-abiding Phi Beta Kappa college graduates. They also treat anyone questioning DACA as a child-hater. That is just one of the mythssurrounding the program.
When President Donald Trump last tried to rescind DACA, a program that Obama implemented without legal authority or the approval of Congress, liberals decried the move as an attack on peace-loving immigrants. However, new research challenges that simplistic narrative.
Recently, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services did a comprehensive review of aliens who applied for benefits under DACA. Getting approved under DACA provided a period of deferred action (a promise that the alien would not be deported) as well as access to certain government benefits such as Social Security and Medicaid.
The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services found that approximately 8 percent of DACA beneficiaries had previously been arrested, including for crimes such assault, rape, and murder, yet were still approved.
Judicial Watch warned back in 2013 that DACA’s very limited vetting procedures were woefully inadequate, and the data has proven it right.
For those who think that, during the Obama administration, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services was actually checking the backgrounds of all DACA applicants, nothing could be further from the truth. It implemented a “lean and light” system in which only a few randomly selected DACA applications were ever actually investigated, and only rarely was any of the information on the applications themselves even verified.
This new data from the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services contradict claims that DACA has not been a shield for criminal aliens. Director L. Francis Cissna lamented: “The truth is that we let those with criminal arrests for sexually assaulting a minor, kidnapping, human trafficking, child pornography, and even murder be provided protection from removal.”
Not only were some of the DACA beneficiaries—the so-called “Dreamers”—criminals before they received deferred action, but a number of them committed crimes after they were given a free pass. Of the group of DACA beneficiaries with prior arrests, 13 percent of them—nearly 8,000 aliens—were arrested for another crime after they were in the United States.
The Center for Immigration Studies reported that, as of January, more than 2,000 individuals had their protection under DACA revoked for criminal or gang activity, including with MS-13, considered by many to be the most dangerous and brutal criminal gang in the country. Yet only 30 percent were actually deported or put in custody as a result.
Of course, those who want to treat illegal aliens as if they are legal immigrants want to ignore criminal activity both before and after individuals became DACA beneficiaries. One recent study from Arizona found that DACA-eligible immigrants made up 2 percent of the state population but 8 percent of the prison population.
The 8,000 crimes committed by DACA beneficiaries who were given the privilege of remaining in the U.S. would never have occurred if DACA didn’t exist—or at the very least if its prohibitions were actually enforced.
Obama’s unilateral executive action setting up the DACA program was beyond his constitutional and statutory authority—and dangerous.
The president was never meant to implement immigration policy with the stroke of a pen. The Constitution entrusts Congress, not the president, with the power to regulate immigration so that it can debate, deliberate, and work out the most effective solution to the country’s immigration issues.
The evidence from DACA’s actual implementation helps make sense of Congress’ refusal to pass the DREAM Act, which is DACA’s legislative equivalent. Like DACA, this legislation would be unfair to legal immigrants—those who abide by the rule of law when they come to America—and it would reward illegal behavior, acting like a magnet to draw in even more illegal aliens.
Congress, not the president, has the final word on this issue. And the No. 1 concern of Congress should be ensuring the safety of the American people.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2) Report: US postpones rollout of Mideast 'deal of the century'
White House, Arab officials cite congressional elections in November, possible Israeli elections in early 2019 as reasons for delay. Trump administration seeks staff for Middle East policy team under point men Jared Kushner and Jason Greenblatt.
A White House source and senior Arab officials on Thursday said the Trump administration was postponing by several months the rollout of its so-called “deal of the century” to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The U.S. official said the administration has already decided not to present the peace plan before the congressional mid-term elections on Nov. 6 because certain components of the plan call for Israeli concessions and could harm Republican candidates' election bids.
The official also said that if Israel goes to elections after the Jewish holidays this September, then the administration would postpone the peace plan even further, as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would not be able to adopt certain aspects during an election campaign.
Israel's next election is scheduled for November 2019. But a single party could force early elections by withdrawing from the government coalition. Due to the wide range of views among the coalition parties, Israeli governments rarely complete a full term.
Announcing the peace plan during an Israeli election campaign “would play into the hands of [Habayit Hayehudi Chairman Naftali] Bennett and the administration understands this,” the official said, referring to the politician deemed Netanyahu's chief rival for the premiership.
“During an election campaign, Netanyahu wouldn't be able to say 'yes' to such ideas. On the other hand, he also can't say 'no' to [President Donald] Trump. It appears, therefore, that the sides would rather play it smart and simply wait until the elections are over, in the U.S. and in Israel,” the official said.
If Israel does not hold elections this year, a window of opportunity for unveiling Trump's Middle East peace plan would be opened.
Senior Arab officials confirmed to Israel Hayom that the peace plan will likely be delayed by several months, because of assessments in Egypt and Saudi Arabia that Israel will hold elections in early 2019.
The officials said that regardless of the possibility of elections in Israel, the leaders of moderate Arab states, chief among them Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan, sent a joint message to the White House, saying they preferred to wait for the Congressional elections in the U.S. to conclude before the peace plan is presented.
A White House National Security Council official told Israel Hayom, “The release date for the peace plan won't be determined by political matters in the U.S. or the political situation in Israel, but rather by the date it is completed and when the timing is appropriate.”
Meanwhile, U.S. officials said Thursday that the Trump administration was staffing up the Middle East policy team at the White House in anticipation of unveiling the still largely mysterious peace plan.
Last week, the National Security Council began approaching other agencies seeking volunteers to join the team, which will work under Trump's Middle East peace point men, Jared Kushner and Jason Greenblatt, the officials said.
The team, which will organize the peace plan's public presentation and any negotiations that may follow, is to be made up of three units: one concentrating on its political and security details, one on its significant economic focus and one on strategic communications, the officials said.
The establishment of a White House team is the first evidence in months that the plan is advancing. Although Trump officials have long promised the most comprehensive package ever put forward to resolve the conflict, not even a small detail of the emerging plan has been offered by Kushner, Greenblatt or any other official.
The State Department, Pentagon, intelligence agencies and Congress have been asked to detail personnel to the team for six months to a year, according to the officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
The agencies declined to comment, but an NSC official said that Kushner, Trump's son-in-law and senior adviser, and Greenblatt, Trump's special envoy for international negotiations, “are expanding their team and the resources available as they finalize the details and rollout strategy of the peace initiative.”
White House officials say the plan will focus on pragmatic details, rather than top-line concepts, in a way that will help win public support.
The Palestinian leadership has been openly hostile to any proposal from the Trump administration, saying it has a pro-Israel bias, notably after Trump recognized Jerusalem as Israel's capital in December and moved the U.S. embassy there from Tel Aviv in May.
Since the Palestinian Authority and its President Mahmoud Abbas broke off contact after the Jerusalem announcement, the U.S. negotiating team has been talking to independent Palestinian experts.
The White House expects that the Palestinian Authority will engage on the plan and has been resisting Congressional demands to fully close the Palestine Liberation Organization office in Washington because Greenblatt and Kushner want to keep that channel open. But officials have offered little evidence to back that up.
Palestinian alienation has continued to grow as millions of dollars in U.S. assistance remains on hold and appears likely to be cut entirely. With just two months left in the current budget year, less than half of the planned $251 million in U.S. aid planned for the Palestinians in 2018 – $92.8 million – has been released, according to the government's online tracker, www.foreignassistance.gov.
The remaining amount is still on hold as is an additional $65 million in frozen U.S. assistance to the U.N. Relief and Works Agency, which provides services to Palestinians in the West Bank, Gaza, Jordan and Lebanon.
In addition, Israel's response to the plan is far from certain. Although Netanyahu is one of Trump's top foreign allies, it remains unclear if he will back massive investment in Gaza, which is run by the terrorist Hamas movement.
For the plan to succeed or even survive the starting gate, it will need at least initial buy-in from both Israel and the Palestinians as well as from the Gulf Arab states, which officials say will be asked to substantially bankroll its economic portion. Arab officials have thus far adopted a wait-and-see approach.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3) Wes Moss: The economics behind the trade fight with China
By Wes Moss,
While it’s difficult to leave politics at the door when talking about tariffs and the trade fight with China, I want to step away from the emphasis on Washington and toward an economic discussion of this critical issue. To do this, I want to dissect and discuss the recent insight into the current tariffs from the director of the National Economic Council, Larry Kudlow.
A few weeks ago, CNBC’s Jim Cramer interviewed Kudlow and asked him about the trade squabble. Kudlow was the chief economist for Bear Stearns from 1987-1994, and served as associate director for economics and planning in the Office of Management and Budget under President Ronald Reagan. But he’s probably best-known for hosting several shows on CNBC. In his talk with Cramer, Kudlow had some very wise things to say about where we are now and where we want to be.
Kudlow started by saying, “I’m not a big fan of tariffs … I don’t like blanket tariffs.” Still, Kudlow added, he has been a longtime critic of China, and he believes the president is doing what needs be done and should have been done long ago.
Georgia farmers ship nearly 20% of pecans to China
Kudlow believes that our world trading system is broken and that the World Trade Organization (WTO) is ineffective at resolving trade disputes. He also thinks that the biggest contributor to the current dismal state of things is China, as trade relations have particularly declined since that country came onto the WTO scene in 2000.
Incredibly, the WTO still considers China to be an underdeveloped, third-world country. This in spite of the fact that China has the second-largest economy on the globe, clocking in at a tremendous $12 trillion. What’s more, if we consider the GDP at Purchasing Power Parity (GDP PPP) (another way of looking at GDP that considers the spending power of their currency), China has the largest economy.
So, despite its size and dominance, China has been using this WTO designation as an excuse to impose its own high tariffs and other trade barriers.
According to Kudlow, China also continues to steal U.S. intellectual property (IP). China has policies that require the forced transfer of technology, meaning that when American companies set up a partnership or joint venture with a Chinese company to sell their goods in China, a technology transfer typically makes it into the bargain. This practice prevents an American company from fully owning (and protecting) the IP it brought to the deal.
Say, for example, that you open a firm in a Chinese province on a joint-venture basis, which is the vast majority of how these new businesses are formed. You now own 49 percent, and the Chinese government owns 51 percent. Next, local party leaders require that you detail all of your business plans and blueprints. Their experts then have the opportunity to review all of the material — including the new technology pieces.
This is a real problem. And “The problem is getting worse,” says Kudlow. Remember, China doesn’t really have an open-door economy; it is still largely controlled by the Chinese government. The U.S., on the other hand, is the lowest tariff country in the world — our doors are wide open. While our average tariff comes in at around 2.5 percent, Chinese tariffs average 14 percent.
So, the only way to mitigate and extinguish a problem that rises this high through China’s ranks is to involve our government and policies. And both experts and politicians, including our president, believe the solution lies in lower barriers — whether they be tariffs or other political obstacles — to doing business in China.
Most of the U.S. is also on board. According to a recent Gallup poll, 62 percent of Americans believe China’s trade policies with the U.S. are unfair, which suggests the public supports the concept of attempting to change China’s policies.
If China’s leaders were to slacken the reins and make their country more open for trade, America could benefit handsomely. Because we are the most competitive economy in the world, we could have a proverbial economic field day and our GDP could expand even more.
Is there hope for anything close to an open-door trade policy from China? Perhaps. According to Kudlow, there has been much progress with the Chinese economic team.
Kudlow recently met with Vice Premier Liu He, a key economic adviser to China’s President Xi Jinping. From Kudlow’s recount of the conversation, Liu was sincere in his expression of a desire to compromise and to change the course of Chinese trade policies.
At the moment, Xi is another story. Xi doesn’t seem to have any real intention of following through with previous discussions. Hence why President Donald Trump is dissatisfied with China and movement from these talks. This inertia is why we will likely continue to see Trump put pressure on the Chinese to level the playing field.
Of course, we have to be careful in taking this skirmish too far. The Chinese can come after our joint venture companies already in China. The U.S. film industry is an example of this point. Hollywood filmmakers currently take home only 25 percent of the revenue they generate in China; the Chinese government system takes the rest.
We can’t abide these percentages indefinitely. And we can’t allow China to continue to siphon our IP. American technology is what helps make us the strongest player in the world economy. Our innovation has been our launching pad for top economic performance globally since as early as the 1800s and the Industrial Revolution. It’s sewn into the fabric of who we are as a nation.
Unfortunately, China has yet to concede to our requests to curb IP theft and the forced divestiture of our technology. That doesn’t mean, however, that they don’t see the error of their ways, just as the rest of the world does. Europe, Canada and, according to Kudlow, even some Chinese officials agree that this practice is inherently wrong. And these Chinese officials also understand that these practices are under a global microscope right now.
This all means that something has got to give. The White House is doing something about it.Trump, Kudlow and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin are all working toward some sort of solution. The U.S. just wants a level playing field. Why wouldn’t we?
Let’s bring these issues together in a relatable, day-to-day example. Say you are in charge of your neighborhood association. For years, the last three heads of the association allowed the landscaping company to raise prices, and this is the largest expense in the community. Imagine, for instance, that the bill comes in at $10,000 each month. Why not shop around, you say? Well, because the deal is that the neighborhood has to use this company. Still, you know that realistically the landscaping should cost only $2,000 a month.
What would be your first item on the to-do list for this new position? No doubt, you’d call the company and negotiate your way back to more fair pricing. In fact, you may call them and demand that the terms go in a much more equitable direction. This is precisely what’s happening with the U.S. and China.
We need equal footing. China isn’t a third-world economy; its economy could become larger than ours (in size) before we know it. So, of course, the U.S. should be working toward a more level playing field. Once all the negotiations are said and done, I believe we’ll be more “level.” China stands to benefit because we will do much more business within its borders. And given more economic choice, the U.S. could see its own economic boon. That’s progress if you ask me.
Wes Moss has been the host of “Money Matters” on News 95.5 and AM 750 WSB in Atlanta for more than seven years now, and he does a live show from 9-11 a.m. Sundays. He is the chief investment strategist for Atlanta-based Capital Investment Advisors. For more information, go to wesmoss.com.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No comments:
Post a Comment