Did China Just Bribe Trump to Undermine National Security?

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: Whoisjohngalt

Eh. Whats to say that ZTE isnt a card being played in some other negotiation.

Oh yes he's playing 4D chess I take it? Where's Q?

In order to get something, you have to give something. Not exactly 4D chess. What do you expect him to do?

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: xuenchen

All Trump is doing is avoiding a trade war

He's been doing a bang up job avoiding one hasn't he?

well yeah

u.s. revenues are way up now

✴️

a reply to: Southern Guardian

Again, the term bail out doesn't apply.

His dropping sactions, making them avoid losses in the billions. He has not legitimate reason for doing this and he's stated rather clearly the company is set to suffer and so is China, hence he's stepping in. This is a bail out.

He's dropping sanctions at the cost of American interests being involved in ZTE. That's one legitimate reason. Negotiating further deals in other areas as opposed to embargo is another. Making the relationship work for both countries is the greater benefit.

It's so funny, you still haven't justified him doing this. Why is that?

Working through trade deals, negotiating, as opposed to a trade war is the justification. I shouldn't need to explain it to you.

The only numbers I've found are from 2016. $115.6 billion in goods sold to China by US companies. Is that a reason to negotiate? I think so personally.

Wasn't it just a few weeks ago that he was being criticized for not negotiating and taking too tough a stance on tariffs? Or did I imagine that?

I'm not defending Trump, he's not my cup of tea but come on. Fence straddling really?

originally posted by: RadioRobert
I guess I don't get it.

Everybody in the media threw a fit about a trade war and how Trump wouldn't come to an agreement. Mass howling. ZTE sells goods to unfriendly nations in violation of trade agreement. ZTE gets zinged for cheating and is slapped with fines and an embargo (hurting American suppliers for over half a billion a year). Everyone howls. "We have to stop the illicit technology transfer to NK/Iran. They must be punished". China expresses concern over yet another large company on the edge of solvency (ie potentially destabilizing job losses). Mnuchin comes up with a plan for heavier fines (punitive and more money to treasury), housecleaning in management(both punitive and preventative), and a board of Americans to provide oversight and ensure compliance to end the technology transfer to NK/Iran and simultaneously preserve over half a billion dollars a year in exports to China(ZTE) as part of a larger framework for addressing the trade imbalance an intellectual property rights. Everyone howls.

I mean, this is how sausage gets made. Everyone wanted negotiations until they happened. It looks like the new deal does what people wanted it to do: stops tech transfer, is punitive, and is part of a larger framework re: the trade deficit and IP rights. Now suddenly the same people who complained Trump was too hawkish and unilaterally punitive on trade are mad that he won't completely destroy a $150 billion Chinese company just (and hurt the US suppliers) simply to be punitive.

I guess you didn't get the memo that we are dealing with idiots hey?

Always keep in mind that we are dealing with idiots, morons and TDS sufferers.

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: JinMI

The term bail out doesn't apply here.

That's after Trump appeared to hold out a lifeline for the company when he tweeted he was working with China to help get ZTE "back in to business, fast".

His dropping sanctions, making them avoid losses in the billions. He has no legitimate reason for doing this and he's stated rather clearly the company is set to suffer and so is China, hence he's stepping in. This is a bail out.

It's so funny, you still haven't justified him doing this. Why is that?

Read RadioRoberts post above. A little education would do you good instead of this hyperpartisan garbage you're peddling.

originally posted by: Blaine91555
The only numbers I've found are from 2016. $115.6 billion in goods sold to China by US companies. Is that a reason to negotiate? I think so personally.

Wasn't it just a few weeks ago that he was being criticized for not negotiating and taking too tough a stance on tariffs? Or did I imagine that?

I'm not defending Trump, he's not my cup of tea but come on. Fence straddling really?

Trump negotiates= he's a loser.
Trump doesn't negotiate= the sky is falling.

Trump bombs Syria= proof that him and Putin's are working together to hide that he's Putin's puppet.
Trump doesn't bomb Syria= proof he's Putin's puppet.

No matter what if you use circular leftist logic Trump is always an idiot and your argument always wins.

It's a nice little racket the Leftist scum have cooked up to avoid losing any argument or debate.

a reply to: JinMI

This is a bail out, I've made my point.

How many responses have you made now JinMI and you've still avoided justifying this deal Trump made. You're doing everything to avoid the core point of the OP. Why are you trying so hard to protect him when even you can't bring yourself to defend his actions.

a reply to: RadioRobert

Bingo!
We have a winner!

a reply to: JinMI

From the article that you posted...

 Obama has a low approval rating compared with earlier presidents. But there are a number of reasons to believe that presidential approval doesn't mean the same thing that it used to

Interesting. I wonder if the author would grant Trump the same leniency. Rhetorically, of course.

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: JinMI

This is a bail out, I've made my point.

How many responses have you made now JinMI and you've still avoided justifying this deal Trump made. You're doing everything to avoid the core point of the OP. Why are you trying so hard to protect him when even you can't bring yourself to defend his actions.

Seriously?

What's the point in conversation if you refuse to read and acknowledge what I write.

You havn't proved that it's a bail out and I've rebutted that it is part of the a negotiation. (Not the same thing)

The justification is that there is no trade war.

originally posted by: Carcharadon

originally posted by: Blaine91555
The only numbers I've found are from 2016. $115.6 billion in goods sold to China by US companies. Is that a reason to negotiate? I think so personally.

Wasn't it just a few weeks ago that he was being criticized for not negotiating and taking too tough a stance on tariffs? Or did I imagine that?

I'm not defending Trump, he's not my cup of tea but come on. Fence straddling really?

Trump negotiates= he's a loser.
Trump doesn't negotiate= the sky is falling.

Trump bombs Syria= proof that him and Putin's are working together to hide that he's Putin's puppet.
Trump doesn't bomb Syria= proof he's Putin's puppet.

No matter what if you use circular leftist logic Trump is always an idiot and your argument always wins.

It's a nice little racket the Leftist scum have cooked up to avoid losing any argument or debate.

Except debates are won by public opinion, not by decree by fiat. I don't think Leftists understand that.

originally posted by: Arizonaguy
a reply to: JinMI

From the article that you posted...

 Obama has a low approval rating compared with earlier presidents. But there are a number of reasons to believe that presidential approval doesn't mean the same thing that it used to

Interesting. I wonder if the author would grant Trump the same leniency. Rhetorically, of course.

I made an ATS poll thread about media biases. The main takeaway was to keep an eye on the journalists, not the agencies. Something learned!

When it comes to op eds, looking at how strong the bias is in the author would seem, to me, an important factor on how legitimate the information is.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

Many on ATS know full well the Chinese economy isn't that hot. Over-leveraged, over manufactured with insufficient exports to keep the momentum from crashing.

Any of the three currencies go down, all three go down. Too interlocked, interdependent. I like it.

Win, win is better than win, lose.

Nice try, though...as usual.

Somebody needs to find how much ZTE buys from American companies.

It's Billions.

Intel, Qualcomm etc

It's Big 😎

Think of all the U.S. union workers !!

🔑🔓

a reply to: Blaine91555

Yep, and the EU is our largest trading partner, Canada is up there as well. Yet how many companies have fallen on the way side and it hasn't been our problem? What makes China and this company so special? Especially considering that Trump actually promised to be hard on the Chinese economy due to their trade practices. Again, you're not making much of a case if any at all Blaine.

I'm not defending Trump

Yet here you are defending him just like in countless other threads.

One the most telling things about the Trump president is the number of his supporters who are reluctant to admit they support him. I wonder why that is?

originally posted by: xuenchen
Somebody needs to find how much ZTE buys from American companies.

It's Billions.

Intel, Qualcomm etc

It's Big 😎

Think of all the U.S. union workers !!

🔑🔓

That justification doesn't matte Xuen. Trump fails so it's a win for the other team...same with NK. Speaking of which, what would happen in that arena should China face hard economic times?

a reply to: JinMI

The kicker is he dropped a total embargo in sales of US suppliers to ZTE. But they also raised the fines, and took steps to ensure the behaviour wouldn't continiee (and kept US companies selling over half a billion dollars in product annually to them).

Isn't that the end game of the embargo? It's accomplishing much the same thing while throwing out a bone to the Chinese economy and our domestic manufacturers. Finding a win-win is what it's supposed to be about, right?

I've also seen multiple reports that it is part of a larger framework regarding trade and IP rights. So the new deal also seemingly let's us make headway in other areas. Sooo, what does the complete embargo accomplish that this doesn't? The collapse of a large Chinese company? That's the new end goal? Cutting of our nose to spite our face? That's less likely to trigger a trade war than this? Really?

a reply to: Southern Guardian


Yes, here he is defending him although he has, like many here, stated their disdain for Trump.

Says tons more about your and others far reaching OP's than the posters.

a reply to: RadioRobert

As long as someone, somewhere gets to say "Trump FAILED!" is all that matters.

It's tragically funny.