Cables Show Hillary Clinton's State Department Deeply Involved in Trans-Pacific Partnership

Bill didn't have sex with Monica and Hilary had nothing to do with the TPP, if you believe this I have a bridge to sale you!

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton on Thursday attempted to distance herself from the controversial 12-nation trade deal known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership. During her tenure as U.S. secretary of state, Clinton publicly promoted the pact 45 separate times -- but with her Democratic presidential rivals making opposition to the deal a centerpiece of their campaigns, Clinton now asserts she was never involved in the initiative.

"I did not work on TPP," she said after a meeting with leaders of labor unions who oppose the pact. "I advocated for a multinational trade agreement that would 'be the gold standard.' But that was the responsibility of the United States Trade Representative.

But at a congressional hearing in 2011, Clinton told lawmakers that "with respect to the TPP, although the State Department does not have the lead on this -- it is the United States Trade Representative -- we work closely with the USTR." Additionally, State Department cables reviewed by International Business Times show that her agency -- including her top aides -- were deeply involved in the diplomatic deliberations over the trade deal. The cables from 2009 and 2010, which were among a trove of documents disclosed by the website WikiLeaks, also show that the Clinton-run State Department advised the U.S. Trade Representative’s office on how to negotiate the deal with foreign government officials."

source

a reply to: AlaskanDad

If your going to be a pathological liar, it's a good idea to remember your previous documented actions.

Either she has a memory problem, or is simply a pathological lying psychopath, in my opinion.

a reply to: AlaskanDad

Whatever our reasons for opposing the TPP (I am sure mine are different from the union's), these things should never be done is secret.

I think repealing existing laws is the only way to achieve truly free trade, not adding new legislation.

originally posted by: Isurrender73
a reply to: AlaskanDad

If your going to be a pathological liar, it's a good idea to remember your previous documented actions.

Either she has a memory problem, or is simply a pathological lying psychopath, in my opinion.

'Congenital Liar'

Homer may have nodded, but Bill Safire never did.

He responded to critics of the choice of “congenital” in his famous “On Language” column in February 1996:

When the ghost of the vituperative columnist Westbrook Pegler seized control of an ordinarily temperate New York Times columnist last month, readers were exposed to an opinion with the bark off. Pointing to examples of mendacity through 15 years of commodities trading, Travelgate and Whitewater, he concluded that the First Lady, Hillary Rodham Clinton, was a congenital liar.

The reaction that is of interest to language students centered on the meaning of congenital. An op-ed colleague called to ask: “Did you mean inherited? Shouldn’t you have used habitual?” . . .

What was the political vituperator’s semantic intent? Although he did not return repeated calls, it can be surmised that he rejected habitual, inveterate and chronic as too mild, baldfaced as too trite and pathological as too severe; congenital, with its sense of “innate” and connotation of “continual,” must have seemed just right. We know that he asked his copy editor beforehand to read him the definition in Webster’s New World Dictionary, and she reported that it came down on innate as the synonym. Safire notes, in passing, that “congenital” is regularly confused with the unrelated “congenial.” Of course, that confusion has never obtained in the case of Hillary Clinton.

a reply to: Isurrender73

Hilary is just a typical politician!

Say anything it takes to get votes, afterwards they read the news and see what they said is contradictory to previous statements.

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton on Thursday attempted to distance herself from the controversial 12-nation trade deal known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership. During her tenure as U.S. secretary of state, Clinton publicly promoted the pact 45 separate times -- but with her Democratic presidential rivals making opposition to the deal a centerpiece of their campaigns, Clinton now asserts she was never involved in the initiative.

"I did not work on TPP," she said after a meeting with leaders of labor unions who oppose the pact. "I advocated for a multinational trade agreement that would 'be the gold standard.' But that was the responsibility of the United States Trade Representative.

But at a congressional hearing in 2011, Clinton told lawmakers that "with respect to the TPP, although the State Department does not have the lead on this -- it is the United States Trade Representative -- we work closely with the USTR." Additionally, State Department cables reviewed by International Business Times show that her agency -- including her top aides -- were deeply involved in the diplomatic deliberations over the trade deal. The cables from 2009 and 2010, which were among a trove of documents disclosed by the website WikiLeaks, also show that the Clinton-run State Department advised the U.S. Trade Representative’s office on how to negotiate the deal with foreign government officials."

I don't see an inconsistency.

Advising someone on HOW to negotiate is different than advising them on WHAT to negotiate.

The State Department is point on all diplomatic relations and it is their job to advise on relations with Foreign Governments.

They can advise and facilitate negotiations and communications...it's the State Departments job, without advocating or opposing specific components of the negotiation or deal.

Frankly they would have failed at their stated mission if they were not in some way facilitating and advising on communication between the US and a Foreign government.

It's not State's expertise or wheel-house to outline parameters and specifics of a trade deal. That is the USTR's job as I understand it.

All of that said...I don't particularly "like" Hillary Clinton...but I separate that from logical thinking and objective analysis.

a reply to: AlaskanDad

"I advocated for a multinational trade agreement that would 'be the gold standard."

The one where she gets most of the gold leaving everyone else holding empty 'agreements'.

Her business is organizing deals between international corporations making things easy for them while the US taxpayer foots the bill.

a reply to: AlaskanDad

But of course.
Just like she was heavily involved in China Trade as well.

She serves the same masters the other "team" does.

When Corporate and Banking Lobbyists say jump, the corrupt politicians say how high?

originally posted by: Isurrender73
a reply to: AlaskanDad

If your going to be a pathological liar, it's a good idea to remember your previous documented actions.

Either she has a memory problem, or is simply a pathological lying psychopath, in my opinion.

I vote Pathological liar
second

wow....this is such a ..."SO WHAT"....thread....hey, here's a news flash......ssssshhh....she negotiated with Russia, too....

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: AlaskanDad

Whatever our reasons for opposing the TPP (I am sure mine are different from the union's), these things should never be done is secret.

I think repealing existing laws is the only way to achieve truly free trade, not adding new legislation.

Exactly.
We do not have an "Free Trade" Agreements if there rules and legislation required written by corporate lobbyists.
It is a rigged game.

The Crony Capitalist wants protected trade for their companies but want unprotected labor markets across the world

A little more on the TPP and Hilary:

Siddiqui, Monsanto’s man, was up to his ears in negotiating the TPP. On April 22, 2009, Siddiqui had addressed the press in a US State Dept. briefing disingenuously titled “Green Revolution”:

“What we need now in the 21st century is another revolution… you would not do it just by conventional breeding. You need to have use of 21st century technologies, including biotechnology, genetic [GMO]

technology… And these molecules, which are being used (inaudible), they are state-of-the-art technologies, using molecular biology. Especially in chemicals [pesticides], they have less harsh footprint on the

environment, they are more green, in terms of the adverse effects and ecological effects. They are also tested more thoroughly.”

The predicted outcome of the TPP vis-à-vis GMOs? It’s obvious. Nations who resist the importation of GMO food crops will be sued, in private tribunals, for interfering with “free trade.”

source bold lettering added for emphasis

Now a quick peek at Hilary's ties to Monsanto:

Hillary Clinton's connections to Monsanto go way back the Rose Law Firm where she worked. Rose represents Monsanto, Tyson, and Walmart - the world leaders in genetic engineering, animal production and industrialized food. She received favors there, as did Bill.

Obama chose Hillary Clinton to be Secretary of State. We cannot know what deals were struck to make her stop her destructive campaigning long after it was apparent she had lost. But we do know that Mark Penn, CEO for Burson-Marsteller, one of the world's large PR firms representing Monsanto. www.corporatewatch.org.uk/?lid=392 advised her for years and ran her campaign. And when she showed up again, by Obama's side, suddenly so did a man named Michael Taylor ... also again. MIchael Taylor is a Monsanto lawyer Bill Clinton once put in charge of the FDA where he approved Monsanto's rBGH. Hillary was back, and Obama was putting Taylor on his transition team. www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_15710.cfm

source

Hilary is nothing but a corporate whore!

I'm a bit late to this one, but I am confused by it - the TPP is a major international agreement..........so I would fully expect the State Department to be involved quite a lot - even if Trade is involved more.

But I don't see why the Sec of State would be considered to need to be personally involved.

What is the actual problem??