[Ed Note: What follows is the official press release from President Donald Trump at the White House. It marks the official stance of the United States pulling out of the Paris Agreement. Though there is certainly a political aspect to this, I would like to see if we can try to avoid political bickering and focus discussion on the actual details of the press release. See, also, our previous coverage, Report: Trump Plans to Exit Paris Climate Agreement. --martyb]
From the desk of President Donald J. Trump
For Immediate Release
June 01, 2017
President Trump Puts American Jobs First
“Our government rushed to join international agreements where the United States pays the costs and bears the burdens while other countries get the benefit and pay nothing.” – President Donald J. Trump
ALREADY THE WORLD’S ENERGY LEADER: The United States had already become the leader in cutting CO2 emissions while still leading in oil & gas production.
HARMFUL TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE: The Paris Climate Accord could cost the United States economy millions of jobs and trillions of dollars in economic output over the next several decades.
SHOULDERING THE BURDEN: Under the Paris Climate Accord, the United States would carry the burden while other countries would get the benefits.
INEFFECTIVE: Even if every nation fully complied with the Paris Climate Accord, it would barely impact the climate.
PROMISE TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE: President Trump is fulfilling his promise to the American people to stop international agreements that disadvantage the United States.
(Score: 3, Touché) by a-zA-Z0-9$_.+!*'(),- on Friday June 02 2017, @05:14PM (3 children)
'd like to go down your list, if I may.
"Where's our awesome gun laws?"
>>Pro-Freedom rulings are forthcoming. A Pro-America and Pro-Constitution Judge has been appointed to the Supreme Court for the first time in a long time. The President doesn't make the rules.
What happed to "winning so much we're tired of winning"? Or is it now "Winning when the President makes the rules, which is rarely, and when other people let him when, which is not so much"?
"Why are DACA immigrants not deported?"
>>I can give you a few examples who have been, and each one is a victory, because it dissuades dozens more criminals from coming in: Yes, all DACA recipients are criminals for illegally entering the country.
Technically speaking all DACA ("dreamers") are illegals, so singling out one or two bad apples is hardly "living up to his promises". He vowed to deport close to 100% of all illegal aliens of which the DACA immigrants were a symbolic target. He didn't do it. What happened to winning? Or is it - "winning only one at a time with a few bad apples"?
"Where's the ban on muslims and a registry?"
>>He created one, and it was destroyed by an Anti-Constitution and Anti-American establishment that was set up by the previous administration. Should a bridge builder be charged with "Not building a bridge" when a Suicide-Bomber of Peace blows it up? I should think not.
What happened to winning? Or it is "Winning when the darn Constitution abiding deep state let's us win"?
"Why is NAFTA still humming along?"
>>It is creaking along, sweating, and "literally shaking." Mexico is already reacting to the re-negotiation announcements, and tensions amongst our countries are at a high since wartime, which is another victory in itself.
What happened to winning? Trump didn't say he'd have a "tension around winning that might indicate winning at some future date". NAFTA and the drugs pouring over our border are still in play. Where's the winning?
"What happened to branding China a currency manipulator and 45% tariffs?"
>> This was bargained for. China is now buying coal from the US now, amidst other changes.
That's not what he promised. Where are the winning tariffs so we're not being flooded by cheap Chinese goods? This doesn't sound like winning to me. He pulled out of TPP and now Paris, but NAFTA is still chugging along.
"Obama's "weak foreign policy" has been replaced with... nothing."
>>Bombings, increased military spending, the increasing militarization of Japan, the cooperation with Russia in the middle east, NATO members finally getting serious about paying their dues...
Sorry to break this to you but bombing isn't a foreign policy, increased military spending isn't a foreign policy, the militarization of Japan has been happening some time and Trump has had little to do with it, at least some of the bombing you've mentioned actually hurt our cooperation with Russia, and NATO members have been paying dues - although Trump said it was irrelevant and now flip-flopped and said it's OK (after he decided to ignore his earlier anti-interventionist positions and become a democrat-hawk under the guidance of his son in law Kushner). I don't see any "Winning" here. This is just Obama era status quo++.
We're not winning, and Trump isn't winning, and we're not even close to getting sick of winning because - well - it's not happening. That is, unless someone let's it happen and apparently it's not under Trumps control.
https://newrepublic.com/article/114112/anonymouth-linguistic-tool-might-have-helped-jk-rowling
(Score: 2) by linkdude64 on Friday June 02 2017, @10:52PM (2 children)
"What happed to "winning so much we're tired of winning"? Or is it now "Winning when the President makes the rules, which is rarely, and when other people let him when, which is not so much"?"
This is not an argument.
"He vowed to deport close to 100% of all illegal aliens of which the DACA immigrants were a symbolic target. He didn't do it. "
This is an argument. He changed his mind - to me, personally - for the better. Yours is the fanatic's mindset in action: Trump changes his mind in a positive way, he's a weakling. Trump doubles down on his promise to leave the Paris Accord, he's bull-headed and shouldn't be President. Please realize that you have obvious double-standards.
"What happened to winning? Or it is "Winning when the darn Constitution abiding deep state let's us win"?"
This is not an argument. The Consitution explicitly grants the President rights to deny ANY GROUP OF PEOPLE OR PEOPLES FOR ANY REASON. A ban against countries is not a ban against individual citizens on any basis, Trump's words as a candidate are not equal to Trump's as the President, in terms of the legally drafted Executive Order, which was - as you surely know - based on the exact list of country's the Obama administration had listed as terrorist hot spots.
"Where are the winning tariffs so we're not being flooded by cheap Chinese goods? "
The resurgence in US manufacturing and sense of nationalism Trump is inspiring will replace the sales gradually.
You are expressing yourself like a child. I, nor any republican I have ever seen, read from, or spoken to EVER stamped their feet and said, "Well Obama, it's month 3! Where's the perfect EVERYTHING that you promised us?" I am almost dumbstruck at how high your expectations of Trump are - they are even higher than the standards I am sure you would have had for Hillary or had for Obama as far as their campaign promises go. Is it perhaps a Freudian-slip admission that you recognize him as far more competent, accomplished, and capable an individual than any candidate or President in recent history, having expected him to entirely reform the massively intrenched MIC, Congressional and lobbyist establishments, and "deep state" within 3 months time? In truth, the fact that one person was able to shake the foundations of said establishment (just look at how embarassingly the DNC is stumbling over their own feet - failure after failure - the people whom you would have rather seen in power) is incredible in itself. Single-handedly un-seating one of the most monied and powerful institutions in the world "on time and under-budget."
You don't have to give credit where it's due, but that says more about you than it does about anyone else.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 03 2017, @12:19PM
So, in other words, it doesn't matter what Don the Con actually does -- as long as he makes liberals cry, he's doing his job.
(Score: 2) by a-zA-Z0-9$_.+!*'(),- on Sunday June 04 2017, @01:07AM
You mean to actually *expect* that Donald Trump will deliver on his promises for the first 100 days ( a timeline he set btw not me) is wholly unrealistic and shows my childlike naivete?
And I quote:"What follows is my 100 day action plan to make America great again..."
https://assets.donaldjtrump.com/_landings/contract/O-TRU-102316-Contractv02.pdf [donaldjtrump.com]
So does this childishness also extend to everyone who voted for him? Or is it just me?
To sum up: he hasn't delivered. It's been a hundred days. Am I missing something?
https://newrepublic.com/article/114112/anonymouth-linguistic-tool-might-have-helped-jk-rowling