USMCA Update – Rep. Riggleman Says “Likely” Passage – Rep. Barr says Only if before Oct 21st – Senator Ernst Says “Not Likely”…

This is a topic we have previously discussed.  The current status is unfortunately what CTH previously predicted….  The consequences here are very serious.

Representative Denver Riggleman (R-Va.), a member of the House Financial Services Committee, claims a significant number of House Democrats are ready to vote to approve the USMCA trade deal.  However, Nancy Pelosi is holding back the vote.


Everyone agrees that passage of the USMCA would provide leverage for the U.S. position in both China and EU trade negotiations.  Representative Andy Barr says despite a likely 300+ vote of support, he believes Pelosi is stalling to block that exact leverage.


As we previously pointed out, the October 21st election in Canada will be an influence.

Justin Trudeau made an agreement with Pelosi to stop the Canadian Parliament from considering ratification. If Trudeau loses the election, his replacement will likely move more quickly to ratify the USMCA, this will be a defeat for Pelosi.  However, if Trudeau wins, he will help keep the pressure off Pelosi by simultaneously stalling ratification in Canada.

This dynamic has yet to play out.

Senator Jodi Ernst, a member of GOPe leadership, appears to be sending the message that USMCA will not pass until after the 2020 presidential election. Ernst is a Decepticon in AG clothing; but generally, the outlook of McConnell, Cornyn, Thune and Ernst are more accurate.

The U.S. multinationals on Wall Street do not want the USMCA to pass because they don’t want President Trump to have leverage that allows him to continue the fight against China and the EU. It is a simple dynamic, USMCA ratification makes the Wall Street prior investments in China worth less.

Here’s Ernst.


The UniParty Message on USMCA:

The strategy to deal with each of the three primary negative trade elements (China, NAFTA, and the EU) is clear within President Trump’s trade reset.

  • Bilateral deals with ASEAN partner nations and simultaneous crushing tariffs on China deals with one problem.  China’s removal of U.S. wealth and jobs is halted.
  • The construct of the USMCA, and country of origin for source material and strict enforcement mechanisms, deals with the second problem: NAFTA’s fatal flaw.
  • An reciprocal and barrier removing agreement between the U.S. and U.K; which can open a tariff free trade highway between North America and Europe; creates the leverage for Trump (benefit for Johnson) that begins to deal with the EU problem.

In the big picture President Donald Trump has purposefully stalled the process of supply chain globalization and cheap labor evaluation.  Trump is resetting global manufacturing supply chains, with U.S. incentives for relocation.   This is bringing wealth and jobs back into the United States (and North America).

In essence Titan Trump is engaged in a process of: (a) repatriating wealth (trade policy); (b) blocking exfiltration of wealth (main street policy); (c) creating new and modern economic alliances based on reciprocity (bilateral deals); and (d) dismantling the post WWII Marshall plan of global trade and one-way tariffs (de-globalization).

In all of these efforts U.S. multinational corporations, big companies on Wall St, are heavily opposed to President Trump because they have invested in those overseas operations.  Those companies facilitated the loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs.

There is also now a clear alignment between those Wall Street multinationals, and democrats like Nancy Pelosi.   Wall Street’s ability to pay Pelosi and political leadership to protect their multinational interests; in combination with corporate promises of funding to Pelosi’s party; has created the unholy alliance of united interests.

That’s why Nancy Pelosi instructed Justin Trudeau to stall the Canadian ratification of the USMCA.  That’s the motive behind why Pelosi is working to stall, perhaps even eliminate, the USMCA ratification in the House.  This is also why Pelosi reacted so quickly to the framework of a deal between President Trump and British Prime Minister Boris Johnson.

It is a political strategy and calculation for Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer to attempt to sink the U.S. Main Street economy.  Weakening Trump’s China confrontation; blocking the USMCA; and impeding a trade agreement between the U.S. and U.K. are part of that calculation.

This is why we are seeing Wall Street, and the media pundits therein, openly cheering for an economic recession for exactly the same purpose.

The aligned interests of Wall Street, media pundits and Democrats are all contingent upon harming the U.S. economy.  That is how severely ideological modern democrats are.

The democrats are willing to destroy Main Street in order to retain power.

There are trillions at stake.

This entry was posted in Auto Sector, Big Government, Canada, China, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Donald Trump, Economy, European Union, Legislation, media bias, NAFTA, Nancy Pelosi, Notorious Liars, President Trump, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Trade Deal, Uncategorized, Union Activity - ALL, United Kingdom (UK) and Great Britain, US dept of agriculture, US Treasury, USA, USMCA. Bookmark the permalink.

118 Responses to USMCA Update – Rep. Riggleman Says “Likely” Passage – Rep. Barr says Only if before Oct 21st – Senator Ernst Says “Not Likely”…

  1. sundance says:

    Liked by 22 people

    • jrapdx says:

      I like that: “the news is real, the narrative is fake”. It’s like in the old Soviet Union, people learned to read between the lines to separate news from narrative. Astonishing that we now have to do the same, but by God we’re getting good at it. Maybe some day we’ll have a responsible press we can rely on, meanwhile we’ll continue to decipher truth amidst the fiction.

      Liked by 17 people

    • Conservative Foundations says:

      This the Ames True Temper plant, and I believe this picture is from Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. The sister wheelbarrow plant is the biggest in the world, and in continuous production since 1876. This is what POTUS is doing, and he visited one of the plants during the election.
      These are quality tools, not the cheap stuff.
      And last I checked, I think they were hiring.

      Liked by 7 people

  2. Cetera says:

    Force the issue. Withdraw from NAFTA. Start the 90-day clock.

    Liked by 15 people

    • Johnny says:

      That is my question.

      Sundance can you refresh us on President Trumps options.

      Will withdraw from Nafta work?

      Can he use that weapon against this dug in corrupt to the core congress?

      Liked by 1 person

    • L4grasshopper says:

      Agree. Force the issue.


    • trialbytruth says:

      Only question , and I don’t have the answer, how would Amlo respond?

      My guess is Trump continues to press up the tariffs. Some manufactures have already abandoned China. Others are making plans to export to non USA only with product manufactured there.

      In any case my guess is new assembly plant construction is grinding to a halt. China is suffering and smart multinationals are hedging their bets. They will be slow to go all in. They will resist Trump but they also know their is a path to win with Trump.

      Each time a Tariff goes up the calculus moves in Trumps direction. My Guess is POTUS knows exactly what critical mass is to force their hand. He is giving the smart CEOS time to realign the slow ones will be circulating resumes.

      If I was a CEO I would be concerned that if I made all the “smart” moves. I manuvered to survive the tariffs by moving USA only production out of China. That I was able to continue to sell into China. That at the end of the day China would be sanctioned for espionage, fentanyl, or militarization and territory disputes in the south China Sea.

      As a wise CEO of a global company, I would keep simple assembly operations going in China only and make sure I had no dollars capital or critical personnel in country.

      I don’t believe CEO s are as political as some seem. I think it’s all about the Benjamins. Pragmatism rules. I believe that goes for the low lives like Bezo and the other supposedly liberal millionaires. Rush has made the point many times they play the role for protection from the mob.


    • noswamp says:

      Trump can do that. And I think he will.


    • drlou007 says:

      It is probably prudent to see if Trudeau wins re-election. If he wins then withdraw. If he loses, the Pelosi gambit is over and she will have to give Trump what the country needs.


  3. Mark1971 says:

    They could use a discharge petition if they could get enough Dems to go along in defiance of Pelosi.


  4. listingstarboard says:

    Joni Ernst roasts my almonds. Another fraud.

    Liked by 16 people

    • GB Bari says:

      Jodi Ernst certainly didn’t say anything “wrong” in the interview with Maria.

      I guess it’s how she said it (rather lukewarm support) and what she did not say (that she would push for it..). Very DeceptiCON-ish of her.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Devil in the Blue Drapes says:

        If you’ve watched any of her remarks in committee hrgs for the past 3-4 yrs., I guess “lukewarm” is as diplomatic a comment one can muster.
        I’ve paid close attention to her and she’s as subtle as a sledgehammer as pertains to supporting (or lack thereof) this President.

        Liked by 5 people

    • Tl Howard says:

      Yeah, she’s another Susan Collins.

      Liked by 7 people

      • leftnomore says:

        She’s another T Partier that Palin worked to elect. Were any of those TP candidates honorable?

        Liked by 2 people

        • Chieftain says:

          A very good question.
          Sarah Palin often seemed more interested in electing women than conservatives.


          • Ma McGriz says:

            That’s absolutely not true.

            Are we to suppose you’d have preferred Ernsts’ democrat opponent had won?


            • Alligator Gar says:

              I know strong and committed women. Why not have them backed and running? If they are good, they will sell their platform even to the wussy weenies. Seems like the Rs pick the stupidest, most vapid, milquetoast females to run. Oh, are they “cute”, motherly, grandmotherly, and, above-all, non-threatening? Great! They must be a shoo-in for female R candidates. Let’s run the beauty queen and ‘grandmother of the year’ for national office. That works. What is her position? Is she committed? Is she honorable? Is her word her bond? Uhhhhhhh….gurrrl power.

              I guess that is the key, eh? Non-threatening, positionless, consensus-seeking females get the nod. That means that the aggressive, principled, incorruptible females do not get a chance to run. You know, the women who would not get wobbly, cannot be blackmailed b/c there is no “there” there, and will speak truth to power? Where are they?

              I prefer the latter to the former. Take the pink tutu, soft, mushy, people-pleasers and put them in the dumpster. They are not needed in politics. See Maggie Thatcher. “You want something said, ask a man. You want something done, ask a woman.” And she did. Not “persisted”, DID.

              And to the vile poster who told the prior poster to “eat excrement”, back atcha. Some people are tired of wimpy-azzed GURRRRRRL power, k? How about WOMEN power? You know, real, committed, powerful, principled, ideas over consensus, power over “relationships” women. Not putzy gurrrrrlz.


        • snailmailtrucker says:

          Eat-Shit !


        • Ma McGriz says:

          You’re just Palin-bashing.

          Still listing to port, are ya?

          Liked by 1 person

    • mopar2016 says:

      Joni turned into a RINO right after she was elected.
      She’s another Marco Rubio.

      Liked by 10 people

    • Devil in the Blue Drapes says:

      Your “almonds” are safe with Joni.
      She’s about as legit as that hokey “I castrated hogs” ad she ran.

      Liked by 1 person

    • thehawkeyehoneypot says:

      She saw to it the factory farmer who illegally hosted mollie tibbets illegal alien killer got 0 fines or punishment. Apparently her globalist cheap labor ties are thicker than water.

      Liked by 2 people

    • WVPatriot says:

      Does it not make you feel safer that she was a lieutenant colonel in the Iowa Army National Guard? Does the Army National Guard Oath of service mean nothing to this Decepticon?


      • WVPatriot says:

        Does it not make you feel safer that she was a lieutenant colonel in the Iowa Army National Guard? Does the Army National Guard Oath of service mean nothing to this Decepticon? sarc


  5. TwoLaine says:

    I saw Joni Ernst on another show the other day and did not even recognize her.


  6. Hebo Sabe says:

    Conservatives are so lame. If it wasn’t for Trump, they had given in long ago and many are still holding onto that surrender.

    Liked by 4 people

  7. Hebo Sabe says:

    The democrats are willing to destroy Main Street in order to retain power.

    And they can?

    Who allows them?

    /moving on

    Liked by 2 people

    • ezgoer says:

      Not only are Democrats selling out to the Wall St globalists to kill Main Street, but they run as the party looking out for the working guy. And the GOPe let them get away with the lie because they are owned by the same Wall St donors funding the Democrats. The whole system is hopelessly corrupt.


  8. Mark L. says:

    Doesn’t POTUS have a built in contingency plan if ratification fails?

    Liked by 1 person

    • GB Bari says:

      Of course he does. He doesn’t come this far without thinking through all the potential moves by his adversaries and having leverage in place with which to counter them.

      Liked by 7 people

    • SwampRatTerrier says:

      Failure is actually probably better for the U.S., but Failure means the Communist-Democrat Party just found new people to victimize in Mexico and Canada.


    • Allard Otten says:

      Withdraw from NAFTA if it doesn’t pass and give congress 6 months to figure something out. IOW, no NA free trade looming. Can we use tariffs to pay for the wall?

      I wonder how many corrupt US politicians CA and MX will need to cough up before the dems begin to see the big picture? Look for more. “win the campaign but lose the election”, quotes from Pelosi as the pressure from watching rock on her left edge toward the hard place on her right pegs the stress meter.


  9. visage13 says:

    And this is why we must crush them in the elections and get out as many Decepticons out as possible and replace them with MAGA conservatives.

    Liked by 6 people

  10. SpotTheSpook says:

    Just make it the US-MX trade deal and tell Canada to pound sand. One tweet from POTUS and they’ll make it a priority.

    Liked by 3 people

    • trapper says:

      Mexico already passed it.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Dutchman says:

      SpotTheSpook has it right. PDJT’ “contingency plan” is exactly what STS says, except SOME of us think this is his primary plan (kill NAFTA) and passage of USMCA is his “plan B”.

      Mexico negotiated USMCA, with the U.S. and Canada was dragged kicking and screaming. Mexico’s legislature has already passed it.

      He could easily draw a line thru “Canada”, and Mexico would agree to it.
      But, since its not HIS,fault it doesn’t pass, and SINCE they are renegotiating, and Canada is out of the mix, he,COULD codify IN THE NEW TRADE DEAL, (USMA?) that the increased border enforcement Mexico is doing would be included.

      I personally think theres greater benefit in making Nancy own it not ratifying, than her ratifying.

      Only reason he hasn’t yet started the,clock on killing Nafta, allegedly is because Mexico IS helping with immigration.

      When the time is right, he can start the clock, and justify it to Mexico, that he is doing it to put pressure on Trudope and Pelosi, and its not aimed at Mexico.

      Perhaps after Brexit, on holloween?

      Liked by 3 people

  11. citizen817 says:

    US. Chamber of Commerce says that there are enough votes in the house to pass the #USMCA

    Would give us tremendous leverage over China

    Liked by 5 people

  12. Derek Hagen says:

    Trudeau is going to win again. The Conservatives have nothing, all they have is that Speer guy. Is that the correct spelling? I don’t care. I saw him in an ad the other day. He sits there in a blue collar shirt, not a hair out of place or distinguishable, with no movement other than his lips whatsoever, telling us he is going to put more money in the pockets of every Canadian family. I mean, COME ON, MAN. All I have to say is “What the hell is this, 1959? This is the very reason, I as a Canadian, haven’t paid any attention to Canadian politics since Shiny Pony became Prime Minister.

    Trudeau is going to win again.


    • snarkybeach says:

      As someone who couldn’t believe Obama got elected twice, I feel your pain. Trudeau is an embarrassment.

      Liked by 10 people

    • Devil in the Blue Drapes says:

      The Canadians are running the equivalent of what we refer to as a RINO. Think JEB!

      You folks passed on a real Trumpian candidate when Bernier was dismissed.


    • Raptors2020 says:

      In the Conservative Party leadership race, to replace Stephen Harper, they had a real conservative named Max Bernier. He lead throughout the campaign, and on the early ballots of the leadership convention.

      On the the last ballot, the Tories chickened out, and switched to this squish named Scheer. If you see him, you won’t like him. Canada’s version of John Kasich.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Sparky5253 says:

        Maxime Bernier is the Canadian version of Trump. Very similar policies.

        Bernier is a true Conservative and has started a new national Conservative party called the People’s Party of Canada. He is running a Canada-wide full slate of candidates and hopes to steal votes from Scheer and his Conservative Party of Canada. Probably will split the conservative vote and Trudeau will end up winning again.

        Unfortunately, the Canadian press refuses to give Bernier any air time. He and Trump would work well together and would certainly form a united front against the globalists and progressives.


    • Dekester says:

      Derek, you just might be right.

      Our household out here in B.C. has little interest in our politics.

      We attended two PDJT rallies in 2016 in NW Washington State. They were electric.

      Trudeau visited a location last year a 5 minute walk from our house, and the only attendees were the usual suspects. 90% of whom were dopey females aged 30 – 70.

      Scheer was at a location here in South Surrey last week at a fund raiser.

      It was a dud..pathetic.

      There is only one PDJT, only one.

      God bless PDJT

      Liked by 9 people

    • ezgoer says:

      Trump is actually much too nice to his enemies. He could have taken actions to tank the Canadian economy to grease the skids for Trudeau. But he didn’t.


    • Beau Geste says:

      Yup, he should gesticulate wildly like Bernie Sanders, and flail around uncontrollably like beta o’rourke to enormously increase his competence !!!


  13. GB Bari says:

    I cannot see how Nanzi Pelousy thinks she can benefit from her recalcitrance re. bringing the USMCA to a vote, but then I must admit I am using traditional logic.

    Liked by 4 people

  14. Free Speech says:

    This is why the election fraud issue needed to be addressed before the midterms so you didn’t wind up with rubber face holding this power. That’s one thing I just don’t understand this administration’s passiveness on. Without legitimate elections, nothing this Congress does is legitimate.

    Liked by 2 people

    • MelH says:

      Free Speech, I too was dumb-struck by the outcome of the 2018 mid-terms. I concluded I must have way over-estimated Trump’s abilities to win EVERYTHING he really wants. Which makes me worried for 2020. i’ve heard very few assurances that fraudulent voting has been curbed. Last month Trump said we should have photo ID for voting, but the States get to do what they want.


  15. trapper says:

    Interesting timing. So, Trudeau loses and Canada quickly passes USMCA. Mexico already passed USMCA 3 months ago, so that would leave the US as the only holdout. How do democrats go back home and campaign with that albatross hanging from their necks? Especially when PDJT will be hammering away on it day in and day out

    The answer is, only the AOC leftist crew can campaign on that. Somehow her crew thinks killing 25,000 Amazon jobs for New York is a winning platform, but what about the rest of them? The republicans, and the mainstream dems (what’s left of them) can make them choke on that. And that’s how the R’s retake the House and the mainstream dems take back some power within their party. Pelosi’s nightmare.


    • SwampRatTerrier says:


      Don’t tell the DEMS. They don’t suspect a thing!

      There there Nancy, take your Communist China Sleeping Pill and go bac to sleep until after November………..


  16. Aeyrie says:

    Plenty pissed-off now, aren’t we! Paying attention now, are we? Engaged, enraged and watching like a hawk what has been going on with certain congress critters and our elections now? Good. We have had to watch elections stolen and corruption at its rankest to get to a place where we are willing to fight to earn our country and our God given Constitutional rights back. Why should anyone fight for our freedom for us if we don’t care enough to keep it when we get it? Logical thinking.

    Liked by 3 people

  17. ms doodlebug says:

    I’ve reached that point where I feel like vomiting every time I hear the word democrat.

    Liked by 5 people

  18. Bigly says:

    I predict if trump wants USMCA to pass he will put the peddle on the dems the closer we get to Canadian election – he then gets skinny jeans out and a solid deal done.

    If he wants it.

    He may want to go back to pre-nafta. The numbers have to be clear to him. I trust his play.

    Liked by 3 people

  19. Matthew LeBlanc says:

    But she is a woman who a man was once mean to so we should fall in line.


  20. Perot Conservative says:

    President Trump, Lighthizer, Ross & Co. had to anticipate this. POTUS seems only partly engaged on USMCA, not a full court press.

    There must be a strategy at play, moves to come. Leverage to use.

    Liked by 1 person

  21. Tiffthis says:

    Ok- hear me out- what if we just nix Canada from the agreement? Mexico already ratified it- Canada barely even wanted it. Would something like that: A) be doable, B) force nan to bring it to the floor?


  22. MicD says:

    Maria B. we love you out here.

    Liked by 2 people

  23. sarasotosfan says:

    Why hasn’t Trump put tariffs on Canadian drugs to induce a vote? That would get theim moving.

    Liked by 1 person

  24. Fools Gold says:

    I’m sorry to say but the uniparty Republicians are all in with that Pelosi deal. It’s the nature of all of the swamp rats living in congress. POTUS want have the upper hand with these creatures until he’s sworn in again and we take back the house. The only minor wild card to play is Brexit and that door seem certain to close unless Boris wants the tables to turn. Just my humble opinion but the key 🔑 unlocks the door in 2020 along with a lot of other things discussed here regularly…. .

    Liked by 1 person

  25. Zorro says:

    The trade game is “complicated business”, not easily explained. It needs to be put in terms of jobs and while the president can say that it would help that the message is also coming from people outside the admin.


  26. vikingmom says:

    “The democrats are willing to destroy Main Street in order to retain power….”

    And the Republicans, who are also members of the exact same club, are helping them to do it!!

    Liked by 3 people

  27. ozymandiasssss says:

    I know, freshman democratic congressman in Dallas, Colin Allred, who defeated Pete Sessions in Dallas is asking that it be put to a vote. He is under quite a bit of pressure. No luck though.

    Liked by 1 person

  28. MicD says:

    FYI: Blue Dress Democrats (sic) still control most voting precincts.
    They might let you vote, but Nobody Knows what happens to your vote.


    Liked by 6 people

  29. MAGADJT says:

    So what can we do to help pressure Congress to take up the vote on USMCA?

    Liked by 1 person

  30. JoeMeek says:

    “Ernst is a Decepticon in AG clothing”

    I have no idea what AG means here, although I doubt it means Attorney General.

    In any case, she served in the Army National Guard from 1993 to 2015, retiring as a lieutenant colonel, so how could she be anything other than completely honorable?

    Liked by 1 person

  31. It’s “Damn the torpedoes. Full steam ahead!” Who cares about the Constitution! Let’s win at any cost.

    I see you are the only one who has considered it in this conversation. What’s going on with folks? Do they just not care? What a shame. What a stinking shame.

    Who cares if we give up Congress’ unilateral authority to establish tariffs on foreign imports? That goes away in Article 2.4 of the USMCA.

    Who cares if Congress’ power to issue patents and copyrights are surrendered to a newly established global government dealing with patents and copyrights? That’s done in Chapter 20 of the USMCA. Does anyone here give a rip?

    Who cares if Congress’ power to control our money is handed over to the International Monetary Fund? That’s in Art. 33.1. In other words, our economy is to be handed over to the IMF.

    How about “migration”? Well, you guessed it. Congress’ powers there are subordinated to the International Labor Organization!! This is an agency of the UN!!!!! check out Art. 16.2 if you do not believe me.

    The real challenge should be to accomplish the same exact thing without dismantling our Constitution to do it. Any body with a little talent can give away the store.

    There’s more, but who cares about the Constitution any more? I sure hope the President does. This deal is not inked yet.

    Liked by 1 person

    • KnowSERENoFear says:

      FYI Treepers….wethepepoplehandbook was replying to my earlier post that has since gone “missing.”


    • amazed treetop downlooker says:

      Amen, AMEN &. A M E N, Agree, WTPH!!!
      SCREW UNCONSTITUTIONAL Treaty entanglements.

      Hopefully VSGPDJT was pushing USMCA primarily to get Mehico on board with illegal immigration curtailment & to further out Piglousy’s anti-Main Street anti-Americanism, as ‘20 campaign ad fodder, and …

      Is now just semi-pushing USMCA as a wind-up to later really pushing (hopefully, out of office soon) Trudope, before saying “We’ll I tried, but the Dims blocked it”, eventually to get what he really wanted in the first place, namely:

      Pro-MAGA strictly bilateral trade deals, initially with more cooperative nations, ASAP (e.g., Japan, Taiwan, Vietnam, Mexico, Poland, Hungary, England, Italy, Brazil & ??) as preparatory leverage to help get bilateral, decidedly pro-MAGA deals with “bigger, tougher cookies”, e.g. Chicoms, Canada, ??France, ??Germany…



    • j says:

      I just looked at one of your examples. I will check the others later. You assert that, “Congress’ powers there are subordinated to the International Labor Organization!! ”

      That is not wholly true. It applies only to business persons defined as: ” business person means a citizen of a Party who is engaged in trade in goods, the supply of services
      or the conduct of investment activities” and explicitly omits “natural persons”.

      Im not sure what you are trying to do with your post but it definately is not completely honest. Here is the exact wording from the USMCA found at :

      1. This Chapter applies to measures affecting the temporary entry of business persons of a
      Party into the territory of another Party.
      2. This Chapter does not apply to measures affecting natural persons seeking access to the
      employment market of another Party, nor does it apply to measures regarding citizenship,
      nationality, residence or employment on a permanent basis.
      3. Nothing in this Agreement prevents a Party from applying measures to regulate the entry
      of natural persons of another Party into, or their temporary stay in, its territory, including those
      measures necessary to protect the integrity of, and to ensure the orderly movement of natural
      persons across, its borders, provided that those measures are not applied in a manner as to nullify
      or impair the benefits accruing to any Party under this Chapter


      • Glad someone is paying attention, J.
        Due to rules of the site, I tried to be brief. Here’s the whole story.
        Art. I, §9, cl.1 grants to Congress power over Migration;
        Art. IV, §4 requires the United States to protect each of the States against Invasion;
        and Art. I, §8, cl. 15 authorizes the use of the Militia to repel invasions
        Our Framers understood that control over who enters our Country is an essential element of sovereignty.
        But the Treaty subordinates the United States’ sovereign power over immigration to global and multi-national bodies. USMCA Art. 16.2 declares:
        “3. Nothing in this Agreement prevents a Party from applying measures to regulate the entry of natural persons of another Party into, or their temporary stay in, its territory, including those measures necessary to protect the integrity of, and to ensure the orderly movement of natural persons across, its borders, provided that those measures are not applied in a manner as to nullify or impair the benefits accruing to any Party under this Chapter.” [italics added]
        Article 16.8 declares:
        “Except for this Chapter, Chapter 1 (Initial Provisions and General Definitions), Chapter 30 (Administrative and Institutional Provisions), Chapter 31 (Dispute Settlement), Chapter 34 (Final Provisions), Article 29.2 (Publication), and Article 29.3 (Administrative Proceedings), this Agreement does not impose an obligation on a Party regarding its immigration measures.” [italics added] 11
        USMCA Art. 23.1 cites the International Labor Organization’s (ILO) “Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work” (1998), as guiding the treatment of labor issues under the Treaty. The ILO is an agency of the United Nations (UN); and part of the ILO’s “social justice” agenda is to formulate “fair migration schemes in regional integration processes”.
        So this is how the UN is to dictate immigration policy for the “regional integration” of Canada, the United States and Mexico.


      • Much like the Constitution, it cannot be looked at in “stand alone” sections. For example, we tend to look at amendments as stand alone, but in reality, now Art. 3, Sec. 2 comes into play as now the subject of the amendment can now be possible cases “arising under this Constitution”. Much in the same way, this “agreement” has overlapping parts when looked at as a whole.


      • J, did this explain my contentions satisfactorily to you? You said you were going to check out the other assertions. Did you?


  32. Curt says:

    When the USMCA was negotiated and an agreement reached months ago, I stated right here that it was problematic that the House of Representatives would allow passage. I was roundly critiqued at that time. Some wanted to know where I got my information. I responded that the Dems would not allow Trump this kind of a victory no matter what the consequences for the country. Ugly politics in

    Liked by 1 person

  33. WSB says:

    Vacate the Chair!

    Liked by 2 people

  34. Loren says:

    Take it from this perspective.
    Clinton said, in 2008 she would “opt out of NAFTA” unless we renegotiate it.

    Obama in a debt said he would call the President of Mexico and the Prime Minister of Canada to amend NAFTA.

    VP Core said in a 1993 debate on NAFTA with Ross Perot, if NAFTA doesn’t work, you know, we give six months notice and we’re out of it.

    The old Reagan agreement was not that bad with Canada.

    It seems to me since Mexico ratified the new agreement already all they have to do is send the six month letter and the new agreement take effect with the U.S. If not it goes back to pre-NAFTA.


  35. Jake says:

    The Canadian news said Trudeau told Trump in a recent phone call he would pass the deal.
    On the campaign trail the Conservatives have criticized the deal.


  36. Lottacats says:

    Nasty and 44 paid a visit to Justin this summer. So much for the Democrats “For the People” lie. It’s all about Trump Hate because that’s “who we are” Democrats. Sick minded losers would drag all of America down over their butthurt from 2016.
    TRUMP2020. Make them cry again!

    Liked by 2 people

  37. Llyod says:

    Sem Ernst is completely corrupt POS. I suspected as much bc she suddenly got to be on a lot of prime committees.

    Liked by 2 people

  38. Well eff em All. Scum

    Our PRESIDENT will work it out.

    And I said ALL because I’m feeling generous tonight.


  39. dustycowpoke says:

    So, why not just terminate NAFTA and be done with it! Stop playing around and go to the mat.


  40. Alligator Gar says:

    USMCA has some serious implications for US sovereignty. See:

    Here is one issue for those of us in “right to work” states:

    FTA: “Article 23.3 of the USMCA’s Chapter 23 obligates each country to “adopt and maintain in its statutes and regulations, … the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining.” It is unclear how such provisions could conflict with states that have “right-to-work laws,” potentially opening the door to their abolition or repeal either through the USMCA’s implementation legislation or a future decision from a USMCA dispute resolution panel.”

    I’d like to see this b*sta*rd die the death and go back to bi-lateral trade as it has always been. Ron Paul was right on that score. Bi-lateral trade. Period.

    Oh, and you want a closed border and workers in the US to get dibs on jobs? You want to stop the importation of foreigners to take your job? Forget it with the USMCA. FTA:

    “Chapter 23 of the USMCA could also serve as a beachhead for a cross-border migration invasion similar to that experienced in the European Union. In language that is virtually identical to that found in the TPP, Article 17.5 of Chapter 17 of the USMCA states: “No party shall adopt or maintain … a measure that … imposes a limitation on … the total number of natural persons that may be employed in a particular financial service sector or that a financial institution or cross-border service supplier may employ … in the form of numerical quotas or the requirement of an economic needs test.”

    “This opens the door for Mexico and its incoming radical socialist government or for a Mexican, a Canadian, or even a U.S.-based company to sue the U.S. government for restricting the number of employees that such a company would want to bring across the border into the United States. As well, provisions from USMCA’s Chapters 17 and 23 have the potential to undermine President Trump’s border security measures and further open our nation’s borders. Article 23.8 on “Migrant Workers” requires each country to “ensure that migrant workers are protected under its labor laws, whether they are nationals or non-nationals” of the country they are residing in. (Emphasis added.)”

    Liked by 1 person

  41. covfefe999 says:

    This is just one of a hundred reasons why we must get back the GOP majority in the House. Forget about how you feel about your candidate in November 2020, just vote straight GOP. Even if (God forbid!) Trump doesn’t win again it’s ultra important that the GOP has majorities in both House and Senate. In fact it will be absolutely crucial to our country’s survival in the case that one of those horrid Dems wins the presidency. Straight GOP everyone, straight GOP.

    Liked by 1 person

  42. Publius Huldah says:

    How many of you who are urging that USMCA be passed have actually read it? I have read much of it and know what it does. With USMCA, the United States surrenders much of its sovereignty to global government. It is wicked to urge passage of something you know nothing about. Did any of you rail against the Democrats for passing obamacare when not a one of them had read it? For Heavens sake, get informed. I explained (parts of it) in my paper, “The USMCA “Trade Agreement” violates our Constitution and sets up Global Government”.

    USMCA is a nasty piece of work, and I expect none of you would support it if you too took off 3-4 weeks to read it.

    The comments on this site illustrate the link between Virtue and Freedom: I expect that neither Trump nor any of the Republicans in Congress have read it – it’s a long document and incorporates hundreds of other documents – and none of them have time to read it. Furthermore, it is not written so that men of ordinary sense and understanding can understand it [I’m a retired lawyer with many decades practice in reading long & complex documents and warning others of the traps.]

    Surely you see that it is immoral to vote for something one hasn’t read? When a document is too long to read – and is not understandable by men of ordinary sense and understanding – that’s a RED FLAG.

    Compare USMCA with the 2 pages long “Free Trade” Treaty James Madison sent during December 1815 to the Senate for ratification. [I link to the treaty in part 6 of the paper here: ]

    Why is USMCA not written the same way as Madison’s Trade Treaty? Because Madison wasn’t hiding anything and wasn’t committing TREASON against our Country. USMCA is part of the plot hatched by the Council on Foreign Relations to set up global government over us.

    And Trump is selling this globalist poison to those conservatives who “trust” and REFUSE to “verify”.

    Liked by 1 person

  43. Bob Guzzardi says:

    Fascinating analysis that I have not seen anywhere else. Would someone explain what “country of origin for source material” means? and why is it important?

    How does a recirprocal and barrier removing agreement between US and UK open a tariff free trade highway between North America and Europe.

    1)The construct of the USMCA, and country of origin for source material and strict enforcement mechanisms, deals with the second problem: NAFTA’s fatal flaw.

    2) An reciprocal and barrier removing agreement between the U.S. and U.K; which can open a tariff free trade highway between North America and Europe; creates the leverage for Trump (benefit for Johnson) that begins to deal with the EU problem.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s