YOu know, the people arguing against this would do much better if they informed themselves and stopped spouting blatant falsehoods
Someone has already pointed out that the article itself is in error as it uses the argument that the sale of a US COMPANY to a foriegn power triggers the 45 day review -- this is a sale of a FORIEGN COMPANY --P&O -- to another FORIEGN COMPANY. Additionally, it has been fully reviewed and vetted by DOJ, DHS, Customs, DoD, etc etc etc .... Anyone who watched the hearing and watched Hillary! and company get bitchslapped by the testifiers would know that. BUt, what the heck let's just follow the Dems off the cliff of Xenophobia and wreck relations with one of the few Arab Countries that is a staunch Ally.
Now on to your comment --- P&O OPERATES TERMINALS in these ports. THAT IS ALL THEY DO. They load and unload ships --- THE STATE MANAGES THE PORT. DHA and the COAST GUARD provide security for the port. P&O is just one of dozens of CUSTOMERS at each port. As a matter of fact..P&O facilities are less than 10% of the facilities at EVERY PORT in which they operate.
The Dems have used this to Split the Rep party, WEAKEN relations with a vital interest in the Gulf, and try to pose as being strong on National Security.
And the ignorant xenophobes on our side have fallen for it hook line and sinker.
Actually, nobody disputes that the law applies in this case. Even the merger agreement specifically includes dependencies on getting through this review.
The argument by congress NOW that all the facts are out has been whittled down to simply whether or not a 45-day formal review is REQUIRED, or if the reviewing agency is only AUTHORISED to do a 45-day review, but not REQUIRED to do one.
The procedures FOR the group have ALWAYS been to evaluate a sale, and only have a formal review if one of the participants finds an objection or a concern. That was true for many mergers and aquisitions evaluated during the Clinton administration (which may be why Bill isn't talking).
It may well be that a court would find the 45-day review is mandatory. I'm not a lawyer. But if it is, it wasn't Bush's fault they didn't do it, he isn't even allowed by the law to be a part of the process until after the reviews are completed.
I'm also wondering if the reason it was so easy for the government to approve this deal is because they have already have several reviews of this company.
For example, they must have closely evaluated this company when they were signing trade agreements a couple of years ago to enhance security of shipping containers (we require U.S. personell access to containers in foreign ports, and UAE was the first to sign these agreements).
We also must have evaluated UAE when putting together the agreements to have them service our military ships in their ports.
And, the same law must have been triggered in last year's sale of CSX's foreign port operations to DP World.
The democrats who last week said this deal was OBVIOUSLY wrong are now simply saying they want a full 45-day review just to make sure we can solve any little issues amicably. They seem "shocked" that no agency found anything bad-looking about this. But I think they just didn't think about the fact that this would not have been the first time an evaluation would have been done on this company.
Or that we have been closely monitoring UAE since 9/11 as part of the cooperation we are getting from them.