No reports from the press pool on this, and there is some important granular information, so here’s the transcript:
[Transcript] Aboard Air Force One – En Route Dubuque, Iowa – 11:27 A.M. EDT
GIDLEY: I know we’re about to land. We wanted to bring Secretary Ross back to have conversation about just what happened yesterday with the agreement with the European Union and steps moving forward, and what the President was able to do in that agreement.
So with that, I’ll turn it over to Secretary Ross, and he’ll take questions after. And if we could, let’s keep it to topic.
SECRETARY ROSS: Okay, thank you very much. I think you’ve heard the general outline of what was done yesterday, namely a commitment to move toward three zeros: zero tariffs, zero non-tariff trade barriers, and zero subsidies.
Basically, the idea that — is to level the playing field. Europe right now has much higher tariffs and much higher trade barriers than we do. Their trade barriers are both in the form of regulations that are not science-based, and standards that also are not science-based. So they have the practical net effect of keeping products out, even if they had no tariff at all.
(more…)

National Economic Council Chairman Larry Kudlow discusses the framework for the U.S./E.U. trade agreement. [Remember, the highly controversial auto-sector is removed from the entire negotiation.] Chairman Kudlow discusses the benefit of the U.S. and E.U. working together to confront China at the World Trade Organization; this is key.
Additionally, Kudlow discusses the forward-leaning meetings being conducted by both the U.S. trade team and the Mexican trade delegation. The multidimensional U.S. trade strategy is operating, and advancing, on several simultaneous fronts.

(more…)

For those following the nuance within ongoing U.S. trade discussions you have likely noted Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross and U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer speaking optimistically about a potential for a U.S. Mexico trade agreement. However, simultaneously the U.S. trade team is not optimistic about any deal with Canada.
Mexico’s President-Elect Lopez Obrador (AMLO) has changed the trade dynamic internally within NAFTA for two reasons: #1) because the agriculture sector is much more critical to Mexico than it is to Canada; and #2) AMLO acknowledges and accepts the NAFTA fatal flaw; his manufacturing economy is based on the assembly of imported parts – like Canada, Mexico doesn’t actually manufacture much (ex. no aluminum smelters).

[Pompeo congratulating AMLO – Not an accidental delegation]

In the big picture AMLO wants to advance the Mexican manufacturing base; expand the aggregate economic base; and also stop the corporate exploitation of the Mexican farm worker. In these objectives U.S. President Trump is more than willing to be a partner with President Lopez Obrador. Heck, President Trump would actually love to assist AMLO on that agenda; it is mutually beneficial.
Diametrically, in Canada Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has doubled-down on the retention of the fatal flaw and does not want an expanded domestic manufacturing base. The enviro-nuts of his base just will not support it. Therefore, Canada is loggerheads with the United States because Canada is demanding to retain their NAFTA access to the U.S. market, and simultaneously retain their ability to broker imported Chinese goods.
(more…)

This afternoon President Trump will deliver remarks on tariffs, trade and jobs in Granite City, Illinois following his tour of the Granite City Works steel plant.  The anticipated start time was 3:40pm; however, POTUS is running approximately 30 mins behind schedule.
UPDATE: Video Added

(more…)

Originally outlined a year ago. Reposted by request, because we are watching it play out in real time: Believe me, at the heart of the professional/political opposition the issue is the money; there are trillions at stake.

President Trump’s MAGAnomic trade and foreign policy agenda is jaw-dropping in scale, scope and consequence. There are multiple simultaneous aspects to each policy objective; they have been outlined for a long time even before the election victory in November ’16.
If you get too far into the weeds the larger picture can be lost. CTH objective is to continue pointing focus toward the larger horizon, and then at specific inflection points to dive into the topic and explain how each moment is connected to the larger strategy.

Today we repost an earlier dive into how MAGAnomic policy interacts with multinational Wall Street, the stock market, the U.S. financial system and perhaps your personal financial value. Again, reference and source material is included at the end of the outline.
(more…)

Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross appears on Mornings with Maria to discuss the objectives of the new trade negotiations between the U.S. and the European Union.
Yesterday, President Trump and EU President Jean Claude Juncker announced the parameters of the agreement and the intent to reach a comprehensive agreement between the U.S. and the EU.  Secretary Wilbur Ross fills in some of the details:

.
The U.S. trade team has assigned geographic responsibilities. There is overlap, and a great deal of synergy depending on the deal being negotiated; however, each member has a specific region of SME responsibility: ♦U.S.T.R Ambassador Robert Lighthizer has NAFTA; ♦National Economic Council Chairman Larry Kudlow and White House Manufacturing Policy Director Peter Navarro have China; ♦Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross has the EU (and all others). As a consequence it makes sense that Secretary Ross would be the point-person discussing the outlines of the U.S./E.U. trade agreement.
An agreement with the EU puts pressure on Mexico to quickly participate in a similar agreement. This domino effect puts significant pressure on the Chinese to agree to terms of free, fair, open and reciprocal trade. Last night Secretary Ross appeared on Lou Dobbs for discussion. That interview is below:
(more…)

There’s a lot of news this week reflecting a great deal of oppositional alignment against the presidency of Donald Trump. CTH can get down in the weeds of each specific issue to discuss the motives and intents (we will, and do), but the big picture MUST remain at the forefront of understanding. If we lose track of the big picture, the weeds are overwhelming.

…“It must be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to plan, more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to manage than a new system. For the initiator has the enmity of all who would profit by the preservation of the old institution and merely lukewarm defenders in those who gain by the new ones.”
~ Niccolò Machiavelli

♦POTUS Trump is disrupting the global order of things in order to protect and preserve the shrinking interests of the U.S. He is fighting, almost single-handed, at the threshold of the abyss. Our interests, our position, is zero-sum. Our opposition seeks to repel and retain the status-quo. They were on the cusp of full economic victory over the U.S.

(Reuters Article Link)

Summary of Action: President Trump structuring a plan to break up multinational BIG-AG, and their “controlled markets.”  STOP  In the interim, to return to supply-side principles, POTUS Trump proposes a bridge-subsidy approach to wean farmers off exploitative, globalist, multinational “contract farming”.  STOP  In this endeavor President Trump and Mexican President Lopez Obrador will be brothers-in-arms.  FULLSTOP
President Trump is disrupting decades of multinational financial interests who use the U.S. as a host for their ideological endeavors. President Trump is confronting multinational corporations and the global constructs of economic systems that were put in place to the detriment of the host (USA) ie. YOU; or in this example the U.S. farmer. There are trillions at stake; it is all about the economics; all else is chaff and countermeasures.
(more…)

Everything is about the economics.  All politics is about the economics.  The current battles waged are multinationals (economic globalists) fighting to retain their position against an uprising of previously diminished economic nationalists.  Peel all the layered skin from the onion and the core issue is about money; wealth.  Always the money.

As you read this, remember – the Mexican Electoral Tribunal (a political construct similar to the electoral college) has *not* formally declared AMLO President-Elect.

MEXICO CITY (Reuters) – Mexico’s incoming president Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador on Friday slammed a decision by the electoral authority to fine his party $10 million over a campaign financing breach, calling it an “act of vengeance” against his landslide victory.
[…] “This is an act of vengeance,” Lopez Obrador said outside his team’s offices in Mexico City, accusing the INE of behaving “tendentiously” and of overreaching.
“They’re acting this way because they don’t accept the new reality,” the 64-year-old said, resorting to the sort of combative tone he used in the campaign to attack the government.

(more…)

Yesterday U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross sat down for a discussion about the White House workforce development program that aims to bridge the skills gap for American workers.  Secretary Ross discusses the initiative and also shares insight to President Trump’s trade agenda.
The important and interesting trade discussion begins at 04:15 and Secretary Ross outlines his initial sense of contact with Mexican President-elect AMLO on NAFTA:

.
On the “trade-war” meme, I have to laugh at the anonymous interest [07:25] who worries the Wall Street equity markets could lose value at a rate of 23%.  Why laugh?  Here’s my reference point – Yes “equity markets”, ie. “investment markets” will drop while the U.S. economy expands….  Yes. It will happen. Here’s why: Main Street -vs- Wall Street.
Initiative/Executive Order – Expanded HERE
(more…)

There is a key issue in every NAFTA discussion that is omitted purposefully.  The issue always hidden is that NAFTA is not a North American “Trade Bloc”.
Most people mistakenly equate NAFTA with other multi-nation trade partnerships like the EU (European Union).  The NAFTA partnership is nothing like the EU trade bloc; it is not even close.

Within the EU example, each nation is committed to only trade with outside nations on terms of agreement within the trade bloc.  All trade parameters must meet and comply with the terms within the EU trade agreements.  The terms of trade inside the group are connected to the same terms outside the group. It is an agreement between themselves and their commerce toward all other external nations.
However, in NAFTA, the Canadian and Mexican trade ministers can negotiate freely with outside nations.  There are no restrictive parameters on their independent decisions.  NAFTA is more similar to an access agreement with *only* terms of internal trade and commerce between the U.S., Canada and Mexico subject to the agreement. NAFTA is only an agreement between the U.S., Canada and Mexico and does not extend to external nations.
(more…)