Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: A US State Dep't site search returns 790 texts and transcripts using "Trans-Pacific Partnership," [View all]ucrdem
(15,512 posts)1. "USTR Fact Sheet on Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement Outline"
posted Nov. 13, 2011:
link: http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/english/texttrans/2011/11/20111113202959su0.4597829.html#axzz3Nij1eFRg
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
86 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
A US State Dep't site search returns 790 texts and transcripts using "Trans-Pacific Partnership," [View all]
ucrdem
Jan 2015
OP
I'm reminded of the "sales job" of the Declaration of Independence, versus failures of the "Bill of
Trillo
Jan 2015
#69
So which one of the "790 texts" contains the current text of the actual agreement?
PoliticAverse
Jan 2015
#2
Hence the word 'current' implying it is a working draft that might change. n/t
PoliticAverse
Jan 2015
#22
Oh, we knew that. And we also knew it is 'being negotiated' without the input of the US CONGRESS!
sabrina 1
Jan 2015
#26
Would this be the same US Congress that has REFUSED to work with Obama? But Benghazi hearings!!!
Hekate
Jan 2015
#57
No. This would be 151 House Dems that said they will not support fast tracking the TPP
think
Jan 2015
#77
But wikileaks isn't, and that appears to be the source of these characterizations.
ucrdem
Jan 2015
#52
Okay but negotiating treaties is what the Constitution says the executive branch
ucrdem
Jan 2015
#13
Tne Constitution does not contemplate the president's negotiating treaties that would deprive
JDPriestly
Jan 2015
#51
Useless blabber. It is not concrete. You can assess nothing based on those generalities.
JDPriestly
Jan 2015
#53
Also info on the White House and Europa searchs. ' Liz and Bernie' and many others have
Sunlei
Jan 2015
#8
I asked this in another thread but has something actually HAPPENED with TPP in the last day or so?
Number23
Jan 2015
#9
So I just want to make sure because I haven't seen anything about TPP in WEEKS
Number23
Jan 2015
#12
Aw, aren't her fans here precious and predictable? Methinks you are definitely on to something...
Number23
Jan 2015
#84
Nov. 11, 2014: "Trans-Pacific Partnership Trade Ministers’ Report on Negotiations"
ucrdem
Jan 2015
#14
Who is involved in these 'negotiations'? We know that the Congressional Trade Committee has
sabrina 1
Jan 2015
#28
There are 12 countries involved, each with its own trade representative and team of negotiators.
ucrdem
Jan 2015
#56
And not one of those contains the provisions being fast tracked to avoid public review
whereisjustice
Jan 2015
#16
What we want is TRANSPARENCY. We want our Reps in Congress to have access to these
sabrina 1
Jan 2015
#31
Well we're all glad it worked for YOU. That, after all, is what matters. However it did NOT work
sabrina 1
Jan 2015
#32
There is just so much data out there proving the disastrous effects of NAFTA on wages, on jobs
sabrina 1
Jan 2015
#41