Proposed President Biden’s Administration

Posted on July 21, 2020July 21, 2020 by Denise Simon

Just consider, based on all that the nation has been through in recent days and weeks based on law suits, protests and defunding of law enforcement. Consider what you have seen of Joe Biden in press settings and his possible list of Vice Presidential candidates. Have you recently viewed the 2016 Democrat National Committee platform recently? How about remembering things like the lies told about Border Patrol and ICE. What about that Green New Deal? We have had attacks on conservatives while dining in a restaurant and we have released documents regarding RussiaGate. Then there was the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings and the 1619 Project not to mention the Lincoln Project or the Thousand Currents. You want those people leading you into 2024 and beyond?

Howie Carr: Joe Biden needs a nap source
It is certain you have your own list of names that you are not only wary of but terrified of and rightly so. Pull out your list and fill in below as you apply some strategic thinking for what could be ahead.
Below is only a suggested look at a Biden Cabinet/administration. You’re invited to plug in your own names.
Here goes:
Vice President: Susan Rice
Press Secretary: David Corn
Secretary of Agriculture: Saikat Chakrabarti
Attorney General: Kamala Harris
Director of the Central Intelligence Agency: Andrew Weissman
Secretary of Commerce: Eric Garcetti
Secretary of Defense: Wendy Sherman
Secretary of Education: Nicole Hannah Jones
Secretary of Energy: Cenk Uygur
Director of the Environmental Protective Agency: Alexandria Ocasio Cortez

Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation: Justin Cooper
Director of Health and Human Services: Bernie Sanders
Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security: Luis Gutierrez
Director of Housing and Urban Development: Kirsten Gillibrand
Secretary of the Interior: Gretchen Whitmer
Secretary of Labor: Julian Castro
Director of the Office of Management and Budget: Maxine Waters
Director of National Intelligence: Adam Schiff
Director of the Small Business Administration: Zack Exley
Secretary of State: Ben Rhodes
Secretary of Transportation: Ed Markey
Secretary of the Treasury: Susan Rosenberg
Trade Representative: Victoria Nuland
Secretary of Veteran’s Affairs: Mark Kelly
Chief of Staff: Lori Lightfoot
Director of the Securities and Exchange Commission: Elizabeth Warren
National Security Advisor: Anita Dunn

Of course, much like the Obama administration, Biden will have advisory councils and czars. This is where hundreds of other progressives and Marxists will work the major influence and policy channels.

Rather terrifying right? Don’t hesitate to fill in your own names, those like John Brennan, Don Lemon, Peter Strzok, James Comey, Loretta Lynch, John Kerry, Lois Lerner, Jim Acosta, Sidney Blumenthal, Bruce Ohr and Eric Holder. Go ahead, plug in a few names too.

Imagine all the new regulations, the further degradation of the 1st Amendment much less the 2nd Amendment. Consider how much more education will fail and how sovereignty will evaporate to a total border-less nation. Taxes? Yikes, too hard to even describe and small business will fail under $15/hr minimum wage nationwide. No more E-Verify, no more doctors of your choosing and we could end up with 12 or 15 Justices on the Supreme Court while George Soros has his own permanent White House office in the West Wing.
It is a nightmare….

Russian ‘Dukes’ Overtly Hack Vaccine Trial Data

Posted on July 16, 2020July 16, 2020 by Denise Simon

Primer: Will this cause an Article 5 response?

In response to malicious activity targeting COVID-19 research and vaccine development in the United States, United Kingdom (UK), and Canada, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), UK’s National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), Canada’s Communications Security Establishment (CSE), and the National Security Agency (NSA) released a Joint Cybersecurity Advisory to expose the threat. A malicious cyber actor is using a variety of tools and techniques to target organizations involved in COVID-19 research and vaccine development.

Tools include SOREFANG, WELLMESS, and WELLMAIL malware.

CISA encourages users and administrators to review the Joint Cybersecurity Advisory and the following Malware Analysis Reports for more information and to apply the mitigations provided.

LONDON (AP) — Britain, the United States and Canada accused Russia on Thursday of trying to steal information from researchers seeking a COVID-19 vaccine.

The three nations alleged that hacking group APT29, also known as Cozy Bear and said to be part of the Russian intelligence service, is attacking academic and pharmaceutical research institutions involved in coronavirus vaccine development.

UK, US, Canada accuse Russia of hacking virus vaccine ... source

Britain’s National Cybersecurity Centre made the announcement, which was coordinated with authorities in the U.S. and Canada.

“It is completely unacceptable that the Russian Intelligence Services are targeting those working to combat the coronavirus pandemic,″ Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab said in a statement. “While others pursue their selfish interests with reckless behaviour, the U.K. and its allies are getting on with the hard work of finding a vaccine and protecting global health.″

The persistent and ongoing attacks are seen by intelligence officials as an effort to steal intellectual property, rather than to disrupt research. The campaign of “malicious activity″ is ongoing and includes attacks “”predominantly against government, diplomatic, think-tank, healthcare and energy targets,″ the National Cybersecurity Centre said in a statement.

It was unclear whether any information actually was stolen but the center says individuals’ confidential information is not believed to have been compromised. The Russian Foreign Ministry did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Cozy Bear, also known as the “dukes,″ has been identified by Washington as one of two Russian government-linked hacking groups that broke into the Democratic National Committee computer network and stole emails ahead of the 2016 presidential election. The other group is usually called Fancy Bear.

The director of operations for the British cybersecurity center, Paul Chichester, urged “organizations to familiarize themselves with the advice we have published to help defend their networks.”

The statement did not say whether Russian President Vladimir Putin knew about the vaccine research hacking, but British officials believe such intelligence would be highly prized.

A 16-page advisory made public by Britain, the U.S. and Canada on Thursday accuses Cozy Bear of using custom malicious software to target a number of organizations globally. The malware, called WellMess and WellMail, has not previously been associated with the hacking group, the advisory said.

“In recent attacks targeting COVID-19 vaccine research and development, the group conducted basic vulnerability scanning against specific external IP addresses owned by the organizations. The group then deployed public exploits against the vulnerable services identified,” the advisory said.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s cybersecurity agency warned in April that cybercriminals and other groups were targeting COVID-19 research, noting at the time that the increase in people teleworking because of the pandemic had created potential avenues for hackers to exploit.

Vulnerable targets include health care agencies, pharmaceutical companies, academia, medical research organizations, and local governments, security officials have said.

The global reach and international supply chains of these organizations also make them vulnerable, the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency said in an alert published in conjunction with its counterparts in Britain.

CISA said it and the British cyberseucity agency have detected the threat groups scanning the external websites of targeted companies and looking for vulnerabilities in unpatched software. It did not name any of the targeted companies.

U.S. authorities have for months leveled similar accusations against China. FBI Director Chris Wray said last week, “At this very moment, China is working to compromise American health care organizations, pharmaceutical companies, and academic institutions conducting essential COVID-19 research.”

Cold War with China Escalating due to S. China Sea?

Posted on July 13, 2020July 13, 2020 by Denise Simon

South China Sea dispute - INSIGHTSIAS source

WSJ/HONG KONG—The U.S. plans to formally oppose a swath of Chinese territorial claims in the South China Sea, according to people familiar with the matter, as Washington takes a harder line against Beijing’s efforts to assert control over the strategic waters.

While Washington has previously said it sees Beijing’s expansive sovereignty claims over most of the South China Sea as unlawful, the State Department is preparing to issue a position paper that officially rejects specific Chinese claims for the first time, the people said.

Such a gesture departs from past U.S. practice of not taking sides on territorial disputes in the South China Sea, the people said.

The paper could be issued this week, the people said, just after the fourth anniversary of a 2016 ruling by an international tribunal that found no legal basis for Beijing’s claims to historic and economic rights in most of the South China Sea.

Recently, the Trump administration has criticized Beijing for asserting “unlawful maritime claims” in the South China Sea while ramping up naval operations to challenge those claims This month, the U.S. sent two aircraft carriers to participate in one of its largest naval exercises in recent years in the South China Sea—at the same time that China was holding drills in the area.

The State Department didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.

China has repeatedly rejected the ruling, issued by a tribunal at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague following a legal challenge brought by the Philippines in 2013. Beijing didn’t take part in the tribunal, which it has insisted had no jurisdiction on the matter. Instead, China continued efforts to build artificial islands around disputed South China Sea features and fortify them with weaponry.

At the time of the ruling, the Obama administration called on relevant parties to respect it while stating that the U.S. doesn’t take sides on specific territorial disputes in the South China Sea. Washington has long insisted that it has an interest in maintaining freedom of navigation in the area.

In the paper, the U.S. would state that “China’s maritime claims pose the single greatest threat to the freedom of the seas in modern history,” according to a draft seen by The Wall Street Journal. “We cannot afford to re-enter an era where states like China attempt to assert sovereignty over the seas,” the draft said.

The U.S. rejects a number of Chinese claims to certain areas and features in the South China Sea that are also claimed by Southeast Asian countries, including Brunei, Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines and Vietnam, according to the draft.

Washington also states its view that Chinese efforts to “harass Southeast Asian fishing or hydrocarbon development, or to unilaterally undertake such activities on its own, in these areas, are unlawful,” according to the draft.

***

The U.S. is not a party of the UN Law of the Sea treaty that sets out a mechanism for the resolution of disputes. Despite that, the State Department noted that China and its neighbors, including the Philippines, are parties to the treaty and should respect the decision.

The United States has no claims to the waters but has deployed warships and aircraft for decades to patrol and promote freedom of navigation and overflight in the busy waterway.

China claims almost all of the South China Sea and routinely objects to any action by the U.S. military in the region. Five other governments claim all or part of the sea, through which approximately $5 trillion in goods are shipped every year.

China has sought to shore up its claim to the sea by building military bases on coral atolls, leading the U.S. to sail warships through the region in what it calls freedom of operation missions. More here.

Monuments are Silent Teachers

Posted on July 8, 2020July 8, 2020 by Denise Simon

The Left shames everyone by stating they ‘celebrate’ the monuments of those that supported slavery and committed treason. Then the only faction that gets to vote for removal are the misguided politicians, Black Lives Matter and ANTIFA. No one else is allowed to be part of the discussion. So, President Trump announced a solution in an Executive Order that few even know about or that the media even bothered to read much less report.

National Park Service | U.S. Department of the Interior

No nation has a perfect history and yet who was assigned then and now to pass judgment on the good and evil of history? There should be no judgement, there should only be lessons.

Congressman Jim Jordan (R-OH) gets it right.

Image may contain: text

You have a chance for some real input on this debate thanks to President Trump.

Executive Order on Building and Rebuilding Monuments to American Heroes

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Purpose. America owes its present greatness to its past sacrifices. Because the past is always at risk of being forgotten, monuments will always be needed to honor those who came before. Since the time of our founding, Americans have raised monuments to our greatest citizens. In 1784, the legislature of Virginia commissioned the earliest statue of George Washington, a “monument of affection and gratitude” to a man who “unit[ed] to the endowment[s] of the Hero the virtues of the Patriot” and gave to the world “an Immortal Example of true Glory.” I Res. H. Del. (June 24, 1784). In our public parks and plazas, we have erected statues of great Americans who, through acts of wisdom and daring, built and preserved for us a republic of ordered liberty.

These statues are silent teachers in solid form of stone and metal. They preserve the memory of our American story and stir in us a spirit of responsibility for the chapters yet unwritten. These works of art call forth gratitude for the accomplishments and sacrifices of our exceptional fellow citizens who, despite their flaws, placed their virtues, their talents, and their lives in the service of our Nation. These monuments express our noblest ideals: respect for our ancestors, love of freedom, and striving for a more perfect union. They are works of beauty, created as enduring tributes. In preserving them, we show reverence for our past, we dignify our present, and we inspire those who are to come. To build a monument is to ratify our shared national project.

To destroy a monument is to desecrate our common inheritance. In recent weeks, in the midst of protests across America, many monuments have been vandalized or destroyed. Some local governments have responded by taking their monuments down. Among others, monuments to Christopher Columbus, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Francis Scott Key, Ulysses S. Grant, leaders of the abolitionist movement, the first all-volunteer African-American regiment of the Union Army in the Civil War, and American soldiers killed in the First and Second World Wars have been vandalized, destroyed, or removed.

These statues are not ours alone, to be discarded at the whim of those inflamed by fashionable political passions; they belong to generations that have come before us and to generations yet unborn. My Administration will not abide an assault on our collective national memory. In the face of such acts of destruction, it is our responsibility as Americans to stand strong against this violence, and to peacefully transmit our great national story to future generations through newly commissioned monuments to American heroes.

Sec. 2. Task Force for Building and Rebuilding Monuments to American Heroes. (a) There is hereby established the Interagency Task Force for Building and Rebuilding Monuments to American Heroes (Task Force). The Task Force shall be chaired by the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary), and shall include the following additional members:

(i) the Administrator of General Services (Administrator);

(ii) the Chairperson of the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA);

(iii) the Chairperson of the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH);

(iv) the Chairman of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP); and

(v) any officers or employees of any executive department or agency (agency) designated by the President or the Secretary.

(b) The Department of the Interior shall provide funding and administrative support as may be necessary for the performance and functions of the Task Force. The Secretary shall designate an official of the Department of the Interior to serve as the Executive Director of the Task Force, responsible for coordinating its day-to-day activities.

(c) The Chairpersons of the NEA and NEH and the Chairman of the ACHP shall establish cross-department initiatives within the NEA, NEH, and ACHP, respectively, to advance the purposes of the Task Force and this order and to coordinate relevant agency operations with the Task Force.

Sec. 3. National Garden of American Heroes. (a) It shall be the policy of the United States to establish a statuary park named the National Garden of American Heroes (National Garden).

(b) Within 60 days of the date of this order, the Task Force shall submit a report to the President through the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy that proposes options for the creation of the National Garden, including potential locations for the site. In identifying options, the Task Force shall:

(i) strive to open the National Garden expeditiously;

(ii) evaluate the feasibility of creating the National Garden through a variety of potential avenues, including existing agency authorities and appropriations; and

(iii) consider the availability of authority to encourage and accept the donation or loan of statues by States, localities, civic organizations, businesses, religious organizations, and individuals, for display at the National Garden.

(c) In addition to the requirements of subsection 3(b) of this order, the proposed options for the National Garden should adhere to the criteria described in subsections (c)(i) through (c)(vi) of this section.

(i) The National Garden should be composed of statues, including statues of John Adams, Susan B. Anthony, Clara Barton, Daniel Boone, Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain, Henry Clay, Davy Crockett, Frederick Douglass, Amelia Earhart, Benjamin Franklin, Billy Graham, Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, Martin Luther King, Jr., Abraham Lincoln, Douglas MacArthur, Dolley Madison, James Madison, Christa McAuliffe, Audie Murphy, George S. Patton, Jr., Ronald Reagan, Jackie Robinson, Betsy Ross, Antonin Scalia, Harriet Beecher Stowe, Harriet Tubman, Booker T. Washington, George Washington, and Orville and Wilbur Wright.

(ii) The National Garden should be opened for public access prior to the 250th anniversary of the proclamation of the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 2026.

(iii) Statues should depict historically significant Americans, as that term is defined in section 7 of this order, who have contributed positively to America throughout our history. Examples include: the Founding Fathers, those who fought for the abolition of slavery or participated in the underground railroad, heroes of the United States Armed Forces, recipients of the Congressional Medal of Honor or Presidential Medal of Freedom, scientists and inventors, entrepreneurs, civil rights leaders, missionaries and religious leaders, pioneers and explorers, police officers and firefighters killed or injured in the line of duty, labor leaders, advocates for the poor and disadvantaged, opponents of national socialism or international socialism, former Presidents of the United States and other elected officials, judges and justices, astronauts, authors, intellectuals, artists, and teachers. None will have lived perfect lives, but all will be worth honoring, remembering, and studying.

(iv) All statues in the National Garden should be lifelike or realistic representations of the persons they depict, not abstract or modernist representations.

(v) The National Garden should be located on a site of natural beauty that enables visitors to enjoy nature, walk among the statues, and be inspired to learn about great figures of America’s history. The site should be proximate to at least one major population center, and the site should not cause significant disruption to the local community.

(vi) As part of its civic education mission, the National Garden should also separately maintain a collection of statues for temporary display at appropriate sites around the United States that are accessible to the general public.

Sec. 4. Commissioning of New Statues and Works of Art. (a) The Task Force shall examine the appropriations authority of the agencies represented on it in light of the purpose and policy of this order. Based on its examination of relevant authorities, the Task Force shall make recommendations for the use of these agencies’ appropriations.

(b) To the extent appropriate and consistent with applicable law and the other provisions of this order, Task Force agencies that are authorized to provide for the commissioning of statues or monuments shall, in expending funds, give priority to projects involving the commissioning of publicly accessible statues of persons meeting the criteria described in section 3(b)(iii) of this order, with particular preference for statues of the Founding Fathers, former Presidents of the United States, leading abolitionists, and individuals involved in the discovery of America.

(c) To the extent appropriate and consistent with applicable law, these agencies shall prioritize projects that will result in the installation of a statue as described in subsection (b) of this section in a community where a statue depicting a historically significant American was removed or destroyed in conjunction with the events described in section 1 of this order.

(d) After consulting with the Task Force, the Administrator of General Services shall promptly revise and thereafter operate the General Service Administration’s (GSA’s) Art in Architecture (AIA) Policies and Procedures, GSA Acquisition Letter V-10-01, and Part 102-77 of title 41, Code of Federal Regulations, to prioritize the commission of works of art that portray historically significant Americans or events of American historical significance or illustrate the ideals upon which our Nation was founded. Priority should be given to public-facing monuments to former Presidents of the United States and to individuals and events relating to the discovery of America, the founding of the United States, and the abolition of slavery. Such works of art should be designed to be appreciated by the general public and by those who use and interact with Federal buildings. Priority should be given to this policy above other policies contained in part 102-77 of title 41, Code of Federal Regulations, and revisions made pursuant to this subsection shall be made to supersede any regulatory provisions of AIA that may conflict with or otherwise impede advancing the purposes of this subsection.

(e) When a statue or work of art commissioned pursuant to this section is meant to depict a historically significant American, the statue or work of art shall be a lifelike or realistic representation of that person, not an abstract or modernist representation.

Sec. 5. Educational Programming. The Chairperson of the NEH shall prioritize the allocation of funding to programs and projects that educate Americans about the founding documents and founding ideals of the United States, as appropriate and to the extent consistent with applicable law, including section 956 of title 20, United States Code. The founding documents include the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Federalist Papers. The founding ideals include equality under the law, respect for inalienable individual rights, and representative self-government. Within 90 days of the conclusion of each Fiscal Year from 2021 through 2026, the Chairperson shall submit a report to the President through the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy that identifies funding allocated to programs and projects pursuant to this section.

Sec. 6. Protection of National Garden and Statues Commissioned Pursuant to this Order. The Attorney General shall apply section 3 of Executive Order 13933 of June 26, 2020 (Protecting American Monuments, Memorials, and Statues and Combating Recent Criminal Violence), with respect to violations of Federal law regarding the National Garden and all statues commissioned pursuant to this order.

Sec. 7. Definition. The term “historically significant American” means an individual who was, or became, an American citizen and was a public figure who made substantive contributions to America’s public life or otherwise had a substantive effect on America’s history. The phrase also includes public figures such as Christopher Columbus, Junipero Serra, and the Marquis de La Fayette, who lived prior to or during the American Revolution and were not American citizens, but who made substantive historical contributions to the discovery, development, or independence of the future United States.

Sec. 8. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

DONALD J. TRUMP

THE WHITE HOUSE,
July 3, 2020.

Legislation to Regain US Control of Critical Minerals from China

Posted on May 21, 2020May 21, 2020 by Denise Simon

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, today introduced the Onshoring Rare Earths Act of 2020 or ORE Act, legislation to end U.S. dependence on China for rare earth elements and other critical minerals used to manufacture our defense technologies and high tech products by establishing a supply chain for these minerals in the U.S., including by requiring the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) to source these minerals domestically.

Upon introducing the legislation, Sen. Cruz said:

“Our ability as a nation to manufacture defense technologies and support our military is dangerously dependent on our ability to access rare earth elements and critical minerals mined, refined, and manufactured almost exclusively in China. Much like the Chinese Communist Party has threatened to cut off the U.S. from life-saving medicines made in China, the Chinese Communist Party could also cut off our access to these materials, significantly threatening U.S. national security. The ORE Act will help ensure China never has that opportunity by establishing a rare earth elements and critical minerals supply chain in the U.S.”

*** Rare earth mineral deal inked by US and Australia — what ... photo

Noted by Forbes:

A whole slate of new bad behaviors by China’s repressive regime have been laid bare by the COVID-19 crisis. There were already plenty of complaints before the pandemic began, but the coronavirus seems to be supercharging the pressure on U.S. companies to reduce their Chinese sourcing. One of the biggest recent challenges in that regard has been China’s dominance in mining and processing critical rare earth minerals. These are vital building blocks for everything from smart phones, EV batteries and medical imaging machines to advanced defense weaponry, so our reliance on a less-than-friendly nation for our supply presents a huge political and economic risk. But right now China controls 90% of global rare earth production.

It’s amazing good fortune, then, that out in the barren scrub of Far West Texas 85 miles east of El Paso, an unassuming 1,250-tall mountain called Round Top holds the promise of making America largely self-sufficient in these critical minerals. The mountain contains five out of six light rare earths (such as neodymium), 10 out of 11 heavy rare earths (dysprosium, for example), and all five permanent magnet materials. What’s more, Round Top has large deposits of lithium, critical for batteries in EVs and power storage. More here.

See the U.S map here.

The global map is here.

According to the United States Geological Survey, as of 2018, China produced around 80% of world demand for rare earth metals (down from 95% in 2010). Their ores are rich in yttrium, lanthanum, and neodymium.

Since August of 2010, fears over Chinese dominance of crucial rare earth supplies have lingered as China restricted export quotas of the metals with no official explanation, immediately sparking debate over decentralization of world rare earth production.

Rare earth element mines, deposits, and occurrences photo

Great quantities of rare earth ores were found in California in 1949, and more are being sought throughout North America, but current mining is not significant enough to strategically control any portion of the global rare earths market (the Mountain Pass mine in California still has to ship its minerals to China to be processed).

Rare earths are traded on the NYSE in the form of exchange-traded funds (ETFs) that represent a basket of supplier and mining stocks, as opposed to trading in the metals themselves. This is due to their rarity and price, as well as their almost strictly industrial consumption. Rare earth metals are not considered a good physical investment like precious metals, which hold low-tech intrinsic value.

*** How did this happen?

In part:

Economically, the biggest changes happened in the 1990s and early 2000s, starting when the United States conferred permanent “Most Favored Nation” status on China.

These decisions proved disastrous.

“Prior to that, we could only give China [Most Favored Nation status] one year at a time because we had a law that said you can’t give a communist country permanent [Most Favored Nation] trade treatment,” said Mulloy. “Each year, if China wasn’t behaving properly, we could take it away.”

“It was a terrible mistake to give it up because we were unable to manage or govern the Chinese after that,” agreed Halper.

The next shoe to drop came with China’s inclusion in the World Trade Organization.

The U.S. only approved China’s entry on the condition that we could continue to punish what we considered unfair trade practices by China or anyone else. But when that position was challenged within the World Trade Organization, we agreed not to penalize anyone unless we won a dispute at the World Trade Organization.

We handcuffed ourselves and we’ve been handcuffed ever since. What was once an $80 billion trade deficit is now at $4.5 trillion. It should have been foreseeable, but Wall Street and multinational corporations, which foresaw big returns from China, lobbied Congress hard to get these things approved.