Clinton's Two-faced (Private v. Public) Policy on TPP

The New American ^ | 12 October 2016 | C. Mitchell Shaw

[VitacoreVision]

In the second presidential debate between Clinton and Trump, aired live Sunday, Clinton was  asked about some of her leaked speech transcripts published by WikiLeaks. In particular, the Democrat candidate was asked about a remark she made that “you need both a public and a private position.” Clinton brushed it aside as if it were taken out of context.

The relevant portion of the speech transcript does not allow Mrs. Clinton’s interpretation, but that did not stop the left-leaning moderators of the debate from letting it slide. In the transcript from Clinton’s April 24, 2013 speech for the National Multi-Housing Council she said:

You just have to sort of figure out how to — getting back to that word, "balance" — how to balance the public and the private efforts that are necessary to be successful, politically, and that's not just a comment about today. That, I think, has probably been true for all of our history, and if you saw the Spielberg movie, Lincoln, and how he was maneuvering and working to get the 13th Amendment passed, and he called one of my favorite predecessors, Secretary Seward, who had been the governor and senator from New York, ran against Lincoln for president, and he told Seward, I need your help to get this done. And Seward called some of his lobbyist friends who knew how to make a deal, and they just kept going at it. I mean, politics is like sausage being made. It is unsavory, and it always has been that way, but we usually end up where we need to be. But if everybody's watching, you know, all of the back room discussions and the deals, you know, then people get a little nervous, to say the least. So, you need both a public and a private position. And finally, I think — I believe in evidence-based decision making. I want to know what the facts are. I mean, it's like when you guys go into some kind of a deal, you know, are you going to do that development or not, are you going to do that renovation or not, you know, you look at the numbers. You try to figure out what's going to work and what's not going to work.

In the debate, Clinton focused on the fact that the point she was making was in reference to the way Abraham Lincoln handled things. What she left out of her debate statement was that — in the speech — she said that, “if everybody's watching, you know, all of the back room discussions and the deals, you know, then people get a little nervous, to say the least,” and that “you need both a public and a private position.” In plain English, what that means is that you work to accomplish your true aims behind the scenes (“all of the back room discussions and the deals”) while telling the people something different publicly. There is a term for that behavior: double dealing.

Of course, this fits perfectly with the Clinton way of doing things. As an example, just look at her on-again-off-gain love affair with the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). As secretary of state, Clinton called the TPP the “gold standard” of trade deals. When she made that statement — in Australia, in 2012 — her publicly expressed policy position reflected her priivate policy. However, as a presidential candidate, she has tried to distance herself from TPP, even claiming she never liked it. The truth is that she has “both a public and a private position” on TPP. Her “public position” is dictated by the public's strong opposition to the deal. Her “private position” is dictated by her unchanging globalist agenda.

And what is that agenda, privately expressed? It includes her "dream" of a "hemispheric common market." The leaked speech transcripts reveal that less than one month after she made the remarks above, Clinton spoke at Banco Itau and said:

My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, some time in the future with energy that is as green and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity for every person in the hemisphere.

Open borders?! Can you imagine how much public support Hillary Clinton would garner if she were to publicly call for open borders, which would effectively mean no borders?

Yet her “dream” fits TPP like a glove. It is a foregone conclusion that Clinton will do all she can — out of sight of the people, who would naturally “get a little nervous, to say the least” — to make TPP and her “dream” of a “hemispheric common market,” — "open borders" — a reality.

Given that any deal she makes in the “back room” will still need to be approved by Congress, concerned Americans of every political persuasion would do well to put pressure on their representatives and senators to vote “no” to Hillary’s globalist “dream.” Because it would be a nightmare for the country.

[VitacoreVision]

Hillary Clinton was recently asked about her claim, made public as part of the WikiLeaks documents dump, that “you need both a public and a private position.”

[setha]

I’d bet that she now has both a public and private position for *that* as well.

[combat_boots]

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6616

[combat_boots]

All, I want to share our draft letter on trade. As you’ll recall, the idea here is to use this to lay out her thinking on TPA & TPP ahead of action on the Hill and a joint letter by all the former Secretaries of State and Defense. This draft assumes that she’s ultimately going to support both TPA and TPP. It focuses on what needs to happen to produce a positive result with TPP, and casts support for TPA as one of those steps. It also says that we should walk away if the final agreement doesn’t meet the test of creating more jobs than it displaces, helping the middle class, and strengthening our national security. We’ve tried to speak directly to the most prominent concerns expressed by Labor and Hill Dems, including Warren. Of course, if we go ahead with a meeting with HRC to lay out the pros and cons and then come to a different conclusion, this letter would change dramatically.

Thanks
Dan