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 Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

kpete

(72,898 posts)
Wed Mar 25, 2015, 07:43 PM Mar 2015

BREAKING: WikiLeaks Leaks TPP Draft!!! [View all]

UPDATED TO ADD THIS IMPORTANT SNIPPET:
:large


After more than five years of negotiations under conditions of extreme secrecy, on March 25, 2015, a
leaked copy of the investment chapter for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) was posted.
Public
Citizen has verified that the text is authentic. Trade officials from the United States and 11 Pacific Rim
nations – Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore
and Vietnam – are in intensive, closed-door negotiations to finish the TPP in the next few months.
http://citizen.org/documents/tpp-investment-leak-2015.pdf

HERE!!!!!!!!!!
https://wikileaks.org/tpp-investment/WikiLeaks-TPP-Investment-Chapter.pdf


WED MAR 25, 2015 AT 04:30 PM PDT
BREAKING: WikiLeaks Leaks TPP Draft!!!

Here it is, for the world to see.

Per WikiLeaks:

This is an advanced January 2015 version of the confidential draft treaty chapter from the Investment group of the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) talks between the United States, Mexico, Canada, Australia, Malaysia, Chile, Singapore, Peru, Vietnam, New Zealand and Brunei Darussalam. The treaty is being negotiated in secret by delegations from each of these 12 countries, who together account for 40% of global GDP. The chapter covers agreements on investments from one TPP nation to another, including empowering foreign firms to "sue" other states' governments, as well as regulations around investor-state dispute settlements and tribunals. This document was prepared by TPP investment chapter negotiators in advance of the informal round of negotiations held in New York City 26th January to 1st February, 2015

Global Trade Watch has just provided an analysis of the leaked text via email (and now on its website more details): http://citizen.org/documents/tpp-investment-leak-2015.pdf

The TPP would grant foreign investors and firms operating here expansive new substantive and procedural rights and privileges not available to U.S. firms under U.S. law, allowing foreign firms to demand compensation for the costs of complying with U.S. policies, court orders and government actions that apply equally to domestic and foreign firms. This includes:

§ Foreign investors would be empowered to challenge new policies that apply equally to domestic and foreign firms on the basis that they undermine foreign investors’ “expectations” of how they should be treated. This includes a right to claim damages for government actions (such as new environmental, health or financial policies) that reduce the value of a foreign firm’s investment (what the leaked text calls “indirect expropriation”) or that change the level of regulation a foreign investor experienced under a previous government (a violation of what the text calls a “minimum standard of treatment” for foreign investors).

§ The leaked TPP text largely replicates the “minimum standard of treatment” language found in previous U.S. pacts that tribunals have used to issue some of the most alarming ISDS rulings. Tribunals often have broadly interpreted this vague “right” to fabricate new obligations for governments that do not actually exist in the texts of ISDS-enforced pacts, such as “not to alter the legal and business environment in which the investment has been made.” Due to such expansive interpretations, the “minimum standard of treatment” obligation has been the basis for three of every four ISDS cases “won” by the foreign investor under U.S. pacts.

The text allows foreign investors to demand compensation for claims of “indirect expropriation” that apply to much wider categories of property than those to which similar rights apply in U.S. law. To the limited extent that “indirect expropriation” compensation is permitted in U.S. law, it is generally available only for government actions affecting real property (i.e. land). But the leaked text would allow foreign investors to claim “indirect expropriation” if government regulations implicate their personal property, intellectual property rights, financial instruments, government permits, money, minority shareholdings or other forms of non-real-estate property.

· Foreign corporations could demand compensation for capital controls and other macro-prudential financial regulations that promote financial stability. This obligation restricts the use of capital controls or financial transaction taxes, even as the International Monetary Fund has shifted from opposing capital controls to officially endorsing them as legitimate policy tools for preventing or mitigating financial crises. Proposed provisions touted as “temporary safeguards” for capital controls would fail to protect many standard forms of capital controls, including those successfully used by TPP governments in the past to ward off financial crises.

· The leaked text could newly allow pharmaceutical firms to use TPP ISDS tribunals to demand cash compensation for claimed violations of the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) rules regarding the creation, limitation or revocation of intellectual property rights. Currently, WTO rules are not privately enforceable by investors. But the leaked TPP investment text could empower individual foreign investors to directly challenge governments over policies to ensure access to affordable medicines, claiming that they constitute TPP-prohibited “expropriations” of intellectual property rights if ISDS tribunals deem them to violate WTO rules.

· There are no new safeguards that limit ISDS tribunals’ discretion to create ever-expanding interpretations of governments’ obligations to foreign investors and order compensation on that basis. The leaked text reveals the same “safeguard” terms that have been included in U.S. pacts since the 2005 Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA). CAFTA tribunals have simply ignored the “safeguard” provisions that the leaked text replicates for the TPP, and have continued to rule against governments based on concocted obligations to which governments never agreed. The leaked text also abandons a safeguard proposed in the 2012 leaked TPP investment text, which excluded public interest regulations from indirect expropriation claims, stating, “non-discriminatory regulatory actions … that are designed and applied to achieve legitimate public welfare objectives, such as the protection of public health, safety and the environment do not constitute indirect expropriation.” Today’s leaked text eviscerates that clause by adding a fatal loophole that has been found in past U.S. pacts.

· Most TPP countries, including the United States, have decided to expose decisions regarding the approval of foreign investments to ISDS challenge. Australia, Canada, Mexico and New Zealand have reserved the right to pre-approve foreign investors. But the United States took no exception for reviews by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States of planned foreign investments to determine whether they pose threats to national security.

· The amount that an ISDS tribunal would order a government to pay to a foreign investor as compensation would be based on the “expected future profits” the tribunal surmises that the investor would have earned in the absence of the public policy it is attacking as violating the substantive investor rights granted by the TPP.

· The text would submit the U.S. government to the jurisdiction of World Bank and United Nations tribunals. All TPP nations have agreed to be so bound with the potential exception of Australia, which has indicated that it might do the same, “subject to certain conditions.”

· None of the structural biases or conflicts of interest inherent in the ISDS system would be remedied. TPP ISDS tribunals would be staffed by highly paid corporate lawyers unaccountable to any electorate or system of legal precedent. They still would be allowed to rotate between acting as “judges” and advocates for the investors launching cases against governments. Corporations launching cases would still directly select one of the “judges.” The text includes no requirements for tribunal members to be impartial, reveal conflicts of interest or recuse themselves in instances of direct conflict. There is no internal or external mechanism to appeal the tribunal members’ decisions on the merits, and claims of procedural errors would be decided by another tribunal of corporate lawyers. The leaked text provides tribunals with discretion to determine the amount of compensation governments must pay investors and the allocation of costs, such as the tribunal members’ fees. A proposal that appeared in the 2012 leak of the text to standardize hourly fees for tribunal members at the lower end of the range of fees currently paid (about $375 per hour, compared to the $700 per hour that some tribunal members receive) has been eliminated.

· An overreaching definition of “investment” would extend the coverage of the TPP’s expansive substantive investor rights far beyond “real property,” permitting ISDS attacks over government actions and policies related to financial instruments, intellectual property, regulatory permits and more. Proposals in the 2012 leak of the text that would have narrowed the definition of “investment,” and thus the scope of policies subject to challenge, have been eliminated. Also omitted is a proposal from the earlier leaked version that would not have allowed ISDS cases related to government procurement, subsidies or government grants.

· An overreaching definition of “investor” would allow firms from non-TPP countries and firms with no real investments to exploit the extraordinary privileges the TPP would establish for foreign investors. Thus, for instance, one of the many Chinese state-owned corporations in Vietnam could “sue” the U.S. government in a foreign tribunal to demand compensation under this text.

· The leaked text reveals that U.S. negotiators are still pushing, over the objection of most other TPP nations, to empower foreign investors to bring to TPP ISDS tribunals their contract disputes with TPP signatory governments relating to natural resource concessions on federal lands, government procurement of construction for infrastructure projects, as well as contracts relating to the operation of utilities. (In the leaked chapter, text that is not yet agreed upon appears in square brackets; Public Citizen has seen a version of the text that lists which countries support various proposals.)



More from Global Trade Watch:

The leaked text provides stark warnings about the dangers of “trade” negotiations occurring without press, public or policymaker oversight. It reveals that TPP negotiators already have agreed to many radical terms that would give foreign investors expansive new substantive and procedural rights and privileges not available to domestic firms under domestic law.

The leaked text would empower foreign firms to directly “sue” signatory governments
in extrajudicial investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) tribunals over domestic policies
that apply equally to domestic and foreign firms that foreign firms claim violate their new substantive investor rights. There they could demand taxpayer compensation for domestic financial, health, environmental, land use and other policies and government actions they claim undermine TPP foreign investor privileges, such as the “right” to a regulatory framework that conforms to their “expectations.”

The leaked text reveals the TPP would expand the parallel ISDS legal system by
elevating tens of thousands of foreign- owned firms to the same status as sovereign governments, empowering them to privately enforce a public treaty by skirting domestic courts and laws to directly challenge TPP governments i n foreign tribunals.


MORE - get reading folks:
http://citizen.org/documents/tpp-investment-leak-2015.pdf
https://wikileaks.org/tpp-investment/WikiLeaks-TPP-Investment-Chapter.pdf
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/03/25/1373335/-BREAKING-WikiLeaks-Leaks-TPP-Draft

286 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
and a big K & R! n/t wildbilln864 Mar 2015 #1
Going to take some time to read all that, but summary is Rex Mar 2015 #2
No, they want power OVER governments. Jackpine Radical Mar 2015 #41
Hmmm...I am already under the belief they have power over the government(s). Rex Mar 2015 #49
Bingo. You got it MaggieD Mar 2015 #81
America is "exceptional," in that it has been coopted more than most BlueStreak Mar 2015 #277
Wow, great description of the republican platform. peoli Mar 2015 #109
They get to sue governments for unseen profits marym625 Mar 2015 #47
But do they get to make their own corporate tribunals? We already have 'pay for' prisons Rex Mar 2015 #54
La Rage marym625 Mar 2015 #59
Most excellent, madam! May I?.. johnnyreb Mar 2015 #86
Arch Enemy...hell yeah!!! U4ikLefty Mar 2015 #99
Great marym625 Mar 2015 #115
They organize their own secret tribunals. bvar22 Mar 2015 #237
That is someone's interpretation treestar Mar 2015 #124
Did you read it? marym625 Mar 2015 #128
Article II 21 Selection of Arbitrators? treestar Mar 2015 #135
First, you're right marym625 Mar 2015 #140
It looks like all our laws, Environmental eg, would mean nothing. Iow, a Foreign Corporation would sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #84
Well the IMF and the WTO have always wanted to rule the world. Rex Mar 2015 #85
Yes, and everywhere the IMF/World Bank has been, disaster for the people can be found. But success sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #90
world bank. marym625 Mar 2015 #132
Excellent summation of what I also believe is happening. AllyCat Mar 2015 #194
I've wondered from the beginning what happens to the first country Buns_of_Fire Mar 2015 #104
It's considered bad politics to renege on agreements. randome Mar 2015 #136
This isn't really about "countries" Aerows Mar 2015 #198
No. I don't. randome Mar 2015 #200
So national sovereignty means nothing to you? Rex Mar 2015 #203
I don't see it that way, although I understand the concern. randome Mar 2015 #209
Yes but the problem arises from the simple fact that they don't need us. Rex Mar 2015 #215
It is my opinion Aerows Mar 2015 #205
They oppose democracy while gnashing their teeth about voting TheKentuckian Mar 2015 #239
That's it, in a nutshell Art_from_Ark Mar 2015 #257
At least there is no wiggle room here, you either support 'free trade' or you support Rex Mar 2015 #204
I can't fathom Aerows Mar 2015 #206
Well the authoritarian sect is all for it, no surprise there Rex Mar 2015 #208
It doesn't do that, from what I can see. randome Mar 2015 #211
And who gets to decide what's 'bogus' about a given environmental law? Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #219
Well, if we want international cooperation with trade... randome Mar 2015 #220
hope away LiberalLovinLug Mar 2015 #238
Obama characterized the TPP as a rewrite of NAFTA. randome Mar 2015 #246
I don't smoke anything Aerows Mar 2015 #252
Revolution is critical. nt Zorra Mar 2015 #3
This is important. Faryn Balyncd Mar 2015 #4
Traitors Rule Our Country billhicks76 Mar 2015 #39
Pretty much what they are doing marym625 Mar 2015 #48
We have to attack the root problem, campaign donations, Super PACs, and the Revolving Door! Dustlawyer Mar 2015 #117
That's not a root. That's a twig. Scootaloo Mar 2015 #251
Snark is easy, what's the big problem then and what is your solution? Dustlawyer Mar 2015 #268
It's not a personal attack, Dustlawyer. Nor snark Scootaloo Mar 2015 #269
Bookmarking to read later. City Lights Mar 2015 #5
NOW are we allowed to complain about it? cui bono Mar 2015 #6
We're supposed to love it just like the republicans do. arcane1 Mar 2015 #7
The uglican concritters don't read anything anyway erronis Mar 2015 #40
republicans don't love it. they oppose it more than democrats do. n/t pampango Mar 2015 #133
The TPP apologists will tell you that this isn't a signed version and that rhett o rick Mar 2015 #12
+1000 BeanMusical Mar 2015 #46
Want to lay any bets marym625 Mar 2015 #52
No bets marym625. nm rhett o rick Mar 2015 #144
...^ that 840high Mar 2015 #72
Bingo. +1 million LondonReign2 Mar 2015 #139
no, we must awoke_in_2003 Mar 2015 #16
But it's just a draft! And Julian Assange is wanted on 8 continents! And most of the oceans! Doctor_J Mar 2015 #42
He's also wanted on all the planets of the solar system. BeanMusical Mar 2015 #50
Though there is some debate about the validity of the warrent issued for Pluto nt dflprincess Mar 2015 #53
Lol, true. BeanMusical Mar 2015 #61
I've heard that's because Pluto still refers to itself as a "planet" Art_from_Ark Mar 2015 #105
Wouldn't you have to read it first? treestar Mar 2015 #123
Did you miss all the leaks that have happened along the way? cui bono Mar 2015 #282
Aaaand - this is just one reeking chapter. djean111 Mar 2015 #8
K&R. pacalo Mar 2015 #9
Kick, kick, kick. hifiguy Mar 2015 #10
imo this just codifies whats already happened. elehhhhna Mar 2015 #20
Thank you kpete for all your hard work here. This is an important story. nm rhett o rick Mar 2015 #11
kpete rules. nt Snotcicles Mar 2015 #19
There are a handful of posters here that are indespensible. kpete is high on the list. nm rhett o rick Mar 2015 #22
I agree, kpete keeps the important, important marym625 Mar 2015 #130
then so does kpete Mar 2015 #158
I suspect their long-term goal ... GeorgeGist Mar 2015 #13
I've thought about that long and hard. Countries or what ever takes their place as groups of rhett o rick Mar 2015 #26
Yes. Without some sense of belonging to a certain group how would TPTB keep us fighting cui bono Mar 2015 #70
K&R!!!!!!!!!!! newfie11 Mar 2015 #14
The NYT is even reporting on it. octoberlib Mar 2015 #15
k&r awoke_in_2003 Mar 2015 #17
I have noticed there is always a brief interlude before they descend, most likely in order to get Dragonfli Mar 2015 #24
I've heard rumors that they hang out at another site to plot their attacks. rhett o rick Mar 2015 #27
Yep, if it's the site that I'm thinking about then it's more than a rumor. BeanMusical Mar 2015 #66
I think it's childish, like the school yard. "let's all gang together and beat up the smart kid." nm rhett o rick Mar 2015 #96
It sure is. BeanMusical Mar 2015 #98
The sockpuppet army must get their ducks arranged, er, in a row. Enthusiast Mar 2015 #114
Isn't amazing how there seems to always be initial silence LondonReign2 Mar 2015 #141
and those who don't want to read anything til it's signed, sealed and delivered. ND-Dem Mar 2015 #25
Which will apparently be 4 years after implementation. stillwaiting Mar 2015 #31
So much for "transparency," huh? Buns_of_Fire Mar 2015 #43
jeez, i didn't know that part. so the folks here at DU who keep saying we have to wait ND-Dem Mar 2015 #71
Some of these people remind me of brainwashed cultists. BeanMusical Mar 2015 #94
HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!! WillyT Mar 2015 #18
Kick and Recommended Liberalynn Mar 2015 #21
k&r. looks like a lot of the things they've been predicting would happen. a big clusterfuck, ND-Dem Mar 2015 #23
Where are all the Obama and TPP defenders now? WillTwain Mar 2015 #28
I'm definitely an Obama supporter maxrandb Mar 2015 #190
Let the groupies follow WillTwain Mar 2015 #196
With the exception of Ed Schultz maxrandb Mar 2015 #213
Nicely put. randome Mar 2015 #214
I see the comment "All this hyperbole is equivalent to "Death Panels in the ACA"." as hyperbole. WillTwain Mar 2015 #217
The ACA was done out in the open in full public view. SomethingFishy Mar 2015 #231
And this will be too maxrandb Mar 2015 #233
Did you vote for Mitt? WillTwain Mar 2015 #262
So you are saying that what is written in the bill isn't really SomethingFishy Mar 2015 #281
Spoken like a true believer. cui bono Mar 2015 #284
How did they feel about Cheney negotiating a secret energy policy in 2000? WillTwain Mar 2015 #261
This message was self-deleted by its author Corruption Inc Mar 2015 #256
WiKiLeaks peddles as much BS as the Gubermint! Cryptoad Mar 2015 #29
And McCorporations! Don't forget about them! Rex Mar 2015 #62
K and R big time glinda Mar 2015 #30
My first question, do we believe the leaked document of 2014 or 2015? Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #32
What difference does that make? cui bono Mar 2015 #285
You have made my point, opinions are posted when the final focument has not been released Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #286
Adam Smith: "People of the same trade seldom meet together, johnnyreb Mar 2015 #33
Bingo! ... If Adam Smith were alive in today's USA, he would be in the Warren/Sanders wing of the... Faryn Balyncd Mar 2015 #51
+10. How little changes from so long ago, mind blowing. Appreciate the exerpts. appalachiablue Mar 2015 #78
And people wonder why Karl Marx called himself a follower of Adam Smith. happyslug Mar 2015 #149
Well in order to talk about Smith, you have to talk about the social safe net. GOPers can't do that Rex Mar 2015 #222
IF this were to protect the Planet then great but %400 doubtful on that one. glinda Mar 2015 #34
What a horror show LittleBlue Mar 2015 #35
Call your Senators, Representatives and Whitehouse to express your opposition to this global Dont call me Shirley Mar 2015 #36
Someone did a post here about FAXING your comment to a Rep. because they will receive and possibly appalachiablue Mar 2015 #76
I heard on Thom Hartmann that for every one person who calls their rep/WH, they represent Dont call me Shirley Mar 2015 #119
That's very good to know- appalachiablue Mar 2015 #169
My level of pissed is off the charts. nt Curmudgeoness Mar 2015 #37
Thanks! Bradical79 Mar 2015 #38
Huge K&R! Quackers Mar 2015 #44
On a mostly serious note, do you think that when one of the foreign/transnationals actually Doctor_J Mar 2015 #45
nah, from what I've seen, people will just say, "It's God's will." nt antigop Mar 2015 #55
And by then, most of us will have learned the joy of genuflecting to our betters n/t deutsey Mar 2015 #134
It will be interesting to see the reactions. silverweb Mar 2015 #58
I expect some kind of "3D chess" analogy or some other way to explain away all the bad... Veilex Mar 2015 #91
It will take a while to unfold. silverweb Mar 2015 #95
What revolution? Rex Mar 2015 #63
It costs tens of thousands to file a suit. joshcryer Mar 2015 #113
Are you fucking kidding me? LondonReign2 Mar 2015 #146
No. joshcryer Mar 2015 #148
No, the problem is not with companies Aerows Mar 2015 #197
Exxon Mobil nets about 30 billion a year. a lawsuit costing 100 grand would set them Doctor_J Mar 2015 #234
IT is dishonest to pretend we the people can challenge a monopoly. Rex Mar 2015 #242
Exxon would not use this to sue the US. joshcryer Mar 2015 #243
They could sue any governmental entity JackRiddler Mar 2015 #265
You running for King of Rationalizations? JackRiddler Mar 2015 #264
Great job, WikiLeaks! Now, go get the 28 pages!!! KansDem Mar 2015 #56
At least we can count on Democratic presidential contenders to lead the fight Karmadillo Mar 2015 #57
If one of them is Bernie Sanders, then "Yes." Maedhros Mar 2015 #195
Note: I do not consent to this corporate power grab, giveaway, etc... midnight Mar 2015 #60
Big K and R, let the disinfectant shine. morningfog Mar 2015 #64
K&R. Sent another round of emails to my legislators opposing the TPP. Overseas Mar 2015 #65
Huge K & R Thespian2 Mar 2015 #67
On Prime Minister Harper: blkmusclmachine Mar 2015 #77
Of Course Thespian2 Mar 2015 #82
Time to raise some hell NBachers Mar 2015 #68
Damn straight Oilwellian Mar 2015 #88
K&R. nt OnyxCollie Mar 2015 #69
The New TTP World Unknown Beatle Mar 2015 #73
And Obama is STILL fighting tooth and nail to get this monstrosity passed into law. blkmusclmachine Mar 2015 #74
http://www.thecommentator.com/system/articles/inner_pictures/000/005/415/original/obama-laughing.jpg blkmusclmachine Mar 2015 #75
Just wait until aspirant Mar 2015 #79
K&R Big Time! 2banon Mar 2015 #80
This is going to break the consensus for Free Trade. leveymg Mar 2015 #83
Question ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2015 #87
This message was self-deleted by its author MFrohike Mar 2015 #103
"Questions will not be tolerated." NanceGreggs Mar 2015 #110
Bottom Line: We get to pick who we trust - Robert Reich or President Obama WillTwain Mar 2015 #221
ISDS is boilerplate. joshcryer Mar 2015 #112
Thank you for that reasonable and informative response ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2015 #118
I don't know about you, but I'm not a big fan of the idea of our corporations being able to go after F4lconF16 Mar 2015 #192
The US isn't the multinationals that headquarter here, they are largely our enemies TheKentuckian Mar 2015 #126
Wrong. ICSID handles US related disputes. joshcryer Mar 2015 #137
Wrong about what? That the US isn't the multinationals that headquarter here? TheKentuckian Mar 2015 #181
Under ISDS the US would force ICSID tribunals. joshcryer Mar 2015 #275
The US is not the corporations that headquarter here. The US isn't the captured government TheKentuckian Mar 2015 #279
The US has never lost an ISDS case. Not one. nt msanthrope Mar 2015 #127
Fascinating. joshcryer Mar 2015 #138
ISDS is to our advantage.....and while I think Warren is correct to question msanthrope Mar 2015 #142
"ISDS is a red herring" joshcryer Mar 2015 #147
So, again ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2015 #159
Because maybe constantly screwing over other countries isn't in the best longterm interests of Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #223
Aren't US legislators responsible for ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2015 #229
Demagoguery. joshcryer Mar 2015 #274
Many believe that the expansion under this chapter of the ISDS cali Mar 2015 #180
Peru, right? nt msanthrope Mar 2015 #278
Indeed it is. And "the key issue on which we are consulting is whether the proposed approach pampango Mar 2015 #145
They want to be the victims of a huge conspiracy treestar Mar 2015 #125
Amazing! 6 1/2 years ago ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2015 #172
The needs for the evidence to point to conspiracies treestar Mar 2015 #187
And the solution ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2015 #201
Yes. The NYT has verified it. See my OP cali Mar 2015 #178
Which OP ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2015 #202
Was there a special on strawmen this week? LondonReign2 Mar 2015 #189
You tell me. n/t 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2015 #227
I'm still waiting, with curiosity, for the TPP apologists to show up Jim Lane Mar 2015 #89
Same here. Where are they tonight? Where are the DU "Free Traitors"? Elwood P Dowd Mar 2015 #92
There are a couple in this thread and they pretty much are babbling their usual nonsense. BeanMusical Mar 2015 #97
Yes, because asking questions ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2015 #173
Anonymous leaks are remarkably consistent with early reporting. WillTwain Mar 2015 #235
Because they are (likely) all coming from the same source ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2015 #250
Cheney negotiated U.S. energy policy in secrecy in 2000, did not trust that either. WillTwain Mar 2015 #260
"Strange Bedfellows" aspirant Mar 2015 #270
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz WillTwain Mar 2015 #271
K&R n/t Michigan-Arizona Mar 2015 #93
Assange is a rapist!!1!1! U4ikLefty Mar 2015 #100
I went over to freerepublic to see what they think.. grasswire Mar 2015 #101
I can't imagine they'd support this if they know about it. drm604 Mar 2015 #108
Some DUers refuse to believe this info Omaha Steve Mar 2015 #102
LBN post: Hissyspit Mar 2015 #106
Kick and R. BeanMusical Mar 2015 #107
K&R McCamy Taylor Mar 2015 #111
K&R! This post deserves hundreds of recommendations! Enthusiast Mar 2015 #116
Perhaps someone could boil down all this text to one or two points why people should be worried. randome Mar 2015 #120
This is all about bashing the President and Democrats, it is not about a trade deal. tridim Mar 2015 #131
So are you in favor of the TPP? LondonReign2 Mar 2015 #176
I thought Global Trade Watch did just that.. G_j Mar 2015 #154
A mechanism is in place to sue when disputes arise. randome Mar 2015 #155
Why? Because it is nothing but Obama Bashing 101. It's not about a trade deal. tridim Mar 2015 #157
I know, I know, I was simply being ironic or...something. randome Mar 2015 #160
ugh.. G_j Mar 2015 #162
Yes, people have been hyper-overreacting for years... tridim Mar 2015 #164
why don't you just say you are in favour of NAFTA, CAFTA, TPP G_j Mar 2015 #165
Because I'm not. tridim Mar 2015 #166
that's not worth a serious response G_j Mar 2015 #168
You say you want enlightenment? Start reading this and then form your own opinion on it. Autumn Mar 2015 #156
My opinion is that the TPP is a mechanism that concerns corporations. randome Mar 2015 #161
Not my job to convince you of anything. Autumn Mar 2015 #163
Spreading bullshit is most definitely spreading something. tridim Mar 2015 #167
Now we get to the crux of your displeasure with the discussion of the TPP. Autumn Mar 2015 #170
It's not much of a discussion if I say 'Aye' and you say 'Nay'. randome Mar 2015 #171
Not my job to be on defense either. Autumn Mar 2015 #174
. randome Mar 2015 #175
k&r Starry Messenger Mar 2015 #121
K&R deutsey Mar 2015 #122
No wonder President Obama calls TPP critics ''Conspiracy Theorists.'' Octafish Mar 2015 #129
Quote from Adam Smith: LongTomH Mar 2015 #218
I for One.... Sparhawk60 Mar 2015 #143
A transition to a corporate world government that will hasten the flow of profit to the top 1% PatrickforO Mar 2015 #150
The recipe for global fascism... cascadiance Mar 2015 #151
ISDS favors "us"? Babel_17 Mar 2015 #152
K & R GoneFishin Mar 2015 #153
So does this mean Medicare can't negotiate drug prices because valerief Mar 2015 #177
Yes Aerows Mar 2015 #199
Any safety regulations--on lead in kids' toys, for example--can now be destroyed by lawsuit Wella Mar 2015 #179
And those lawsuits can be refuted by a tribunal. It works both ways. randome Mar 2015 #182
Which destroys sovereignty by making this private (world) tribunal the real arbiters of laws Wella Mar 2015 #183
I, personally, don't have much of a problem with that. randome Mar 2015 #184
It's not a personal issue for you to have a problem with Wella Mar 2015 #185
This piece of shit TPP IS NOT GOING TO UNITE THE WORLD. Elwood P Dowd Mar 2015 #186
How is it at our expense, though? randome Mar 2015 #188
You already said you have no problem losing your sovereignty Rex Mar 2015 #225
The entire tribunal setup is designed to prevent abuse. randome Mar 2015 #228
Thanks for the link I will check it out. Rex Mar 2015 #241
There is only ONE goal for the tribunals: bvar22 Mar 2015 #247
How does giving all the power and control to an elite group of non-governing Rex Mar 2015 #224
Well, the U.N. is involved in the tribunal selection. randome Mar 2015 #230
An Appeals Process???? bvar22 Mar 2015 #240
I'm hoping there is an appeals process. It would make sense to have one. randome Mar 2015 #245
Which means that the sovereignty of this country no longer exists. You may be fine with that sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #207
I don't have a problem giving up some of our sovereignty. randome Mar 2015 #210
Fortunately what you don't have a problem with, isn't relevant. As I said, the 'war' can be sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #216
Those that don't mind being indentured servants will never understand, it seems. Rex Mar 2015 #226
Revolutionary war? Taxation without representation? Aerows Mar 2015 #255
I would hope people on DU can read so, no, I don't expect them to be stupid. randome Mar 2015 #266
Were you the one Aerows Mar 2015 #272
I never said Democracy was outdated. randome Mar 2015 #276
I will agree with you on one point LiberalLovinLug Mar 2015 #283
Message auto-removed Name removed Mar 2015 #191
Many work for, few work against. We are what we do, everyday. raouldukelives Mar 2015 #193
Lovely Piece of Legislation d_legendary1 Mar 2015 #212
Stepping ever closer to world wide fascism. eom JEB Mar 2015 #232
A simple way to see things: chknltl Mar 2015 #236
Obama Is All In On This colsohlibgal Mar 2015 #244
You do realize there is currently nothing to prevent corporations from doing business anywhere. randome Mar 2015 #248
This message was self-deleted by its author Corruption Inc Mar 2015 #259
Hillary helped draft the TPP, so I don't expect much help from her. Maedhros Mar 2015 #263
I know I'm supposed to be unquestionably enraged but I cannot bring myself to do it. great white snark Mar 2015 #249
Invariably. NanceGreggs Mar 2015 #258
so it is basically more bureacracy for the bureaucrats WDIM Mar 2015 #253
This message was self-deleted by its author Corruption Inc Mar 2015 #254
If we lose our country aspirant Mar 2015 #267
kick rec Teamster Jeff Mar 2015 #273
K&R. woo me with science Mar 2015 #280
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»BREAKING: WikiLeaks Leaks...