Elizabeth Warren Accuses Obama Of Deliberately Hiding Trade Details

In one corner, we have Barack Hussain Obama. In the other corner, we have Emma Warren, potential Democratic Presidential hopeful in the 2016 elections.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) called on President Barack Obama to make details of the trade pact he is negotiating public a day after Obama said that Warren and other critics were wrong on the facts of the deal.

The Obama administration has briefed members of Congress on the deal, called the Trans-Pacific Partnership, but has blocked members from publicly discussing specifics. Last month, an Obama administration official told The Huffington Post that the briefings on the deal were classified because they were sensitive and ongoing.

But on Wednesday, Warren accused the administration of deliberately hiding unpopular details from the public.

Emma, Emma....did you just accuse the Obama admin of purposely hiding info from the public...something you, yourself have denied he has done in the recent past???

"The government doesn’t want you to read this massive new trade agreement. It’s top secret," Warren said in a statement on her website. "Why? Here’s the real answer people have given me: 'We can’t make this deal public because if the American people saw what was in it, they would be opposed to it.'"

"If the American people would be opposed to a trade agreement if they saw it, then that agreement should not become the law of the United States," Warren continued.

You've been lied to again, folks. Shocked, are ya?


Source

Something about "passing it so we can see what's in it" comes to mind.

Good on her for calling him out.

a reply to: Gully

My respect for her increased tenfold for calling Obama out. But I feel she is still not Presidential material.

For being 'transparent' he doing a sh##y job. The TPP is so so wrong, that's why he want's to keep it secret. I can't believe he's so evil. No one should support this and anyone who does doesn't give a crap about this planet or other countries rights to defend their own borders. Yes, defend their borders and their land. If Canada did something that negatively affected our land, you can be there would be hell to pay. Once again, the US has double standards and want's to have the option to negatively impact others around the world. What other countries think this is ok? This is a lose lose situation for EVERYONE else. How can the US be so selfish?

a reply to: Ultralight

"In one corner, we have Barack Hussain Obama. In the other corner, we have Emma Warren, potential Democratic Presidential hopeful in the 2016 elections."

They are in the same corner, this is just a political ploy... and sign that there is more to come.

originally posted by: Ultralight
Emma Warren

It's Elizabeth Warren, not Emma...

Anyway, good for her. There's a reason that most of Congressional Democrats don't want this trade deal. I don't know why Obama is so supportive of it, but I don't trust him here. And I've been a supporter of his. Either he's being threatened or there's a huge deal in it for him. I can't figure it out.

originally posted by: Ultralight
My respect for her increased tenfold for calling Obama out. But I feel she is still not Presidential material.

Maybe that's exactly the reason we need her (and Bernie Sanders).

If Elizabeth Warren wasn't anti-gun, she'd have my vote.

She's one of the only politicians I've seen recently that seems, at least comparatively, genuine when she speaks. She hasn't had enough time in Washington to totally ruin her personality.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

I have the same feelings as you do on this, BH....either people do not have ALL the information, or they simply do not understand it....Obama for the most part, has fought for the working American...maybe he has been threatened somehow. there are a lot of billionaire players in on this, and they do not like to be screwed with.

Funny when two known liars call each other liars.

The self-scapegoaters will be busy this election season.

Even Harry Reid said the TPP is bad.

Hmmm.

Controlled opposition and controlled dis-info at the same time.

What will they think of next?

Seems like a great publicity stunt in trying to make herself out to be transparent...


Being the democrat to stand up to Obama could gain some voters.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

It's Elizabeth Warren, not Emma...

Hell, I thought it was Sacagawea.



I think she did this to garner votes when she throws her feather into the ring. Hillary is being bum-rushed out of the election.

a reply to: Ultralight
This trade agreement cements Obama's effort to fundamentally transform "America". Indeed, the US will cease to be anything like what it once was, for better or for worse. You can read about what it does in detail at:
www.thenewamerican.com...

Quoting from the article: Touted as " the “most progressive trade agreement in history,” is also a “Trojan horse” to advance Obama’s “unrestricted immigration” agenda, according to political insiders and critics who have studied the secretive scheming. With the Big Government wing of the Republican Party currently plotting to empower the Obama administration with fast-track Trade Promotion Authority to make it easier to impose the TPP and other radical agreements on the American people."
"As The New American reported recently, a leaked chapter of the TPP deal would create NAFTA-style international “tribunals” with the purported authority to override American laws, courts, and even the U.S. and state constitutions — all for the benefit of special interests, foreigners, and crony capitalists. The American people and self-government would be the big losers." "“The Trans-Pacific Partnership includes an entire chapter on immigration,” observed Curtis Ellis, executive director of the American Jobs Alliance, in a post for The Hill."

An interesting kicker, which means its all but a done deal: "In fact, beyond simply refusing to address the subject, establishment GOP lawmakers are working overtime — with establishment Democrats — to empower Obama with Trade Promotion Authority. This week, lawmakers unveiled S. 995 to surrender their constitutionally delegated authority over trade to Obama via fast-track TPA." "Under TPA, any pseudo-free-trade deal negotiated by Obama, foreign governments, and special interests would merely get an up or down vote in Congress, denying lawmakers an opportunity to amend it. The scheme would also bypass the constitutional method for ratifying treaties — two-thirds majority support in the Senate — in favor of a simple majority vote in both houses of Congress. If approved, Obama’s immigration machinations, including a drastically expanded “temporary worker” program, would reportedly be set in stone, beyond the reach of the American people or their elected representatives."

The cool part:" Of course, Big Business and special interests — especially the anti-sovereignty internationalists hoping to crush national sovereignty in favor of regionalism and globalism — have made their support for massive, uncontrolled immigration clear. Aside from openly supporting amnesty for illegal immigrants already in the country, one corporate trade association cited in The Hill piece said it hoped to abolish all barriers: “The TPP should remove restrictions on nationality or residency requirements for the selection of personnel.” In other words, de facto open borders."

I take it the 4th of July celebrations will be a thing of the past.

a reply to: wasaka

Actually, they are not in the same corner. I have been following Warren and she doesn't say anything good about Obama but she does try her best to avoid mentioning him at all costs.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Thanks for the correction. My time to correct the thread is over.

Elizabeth...Elizabeth...got it!

originally posted by: Ultralight
a reply to: wasaka

Actually, they are not in the same corner. I have been following Warren and she doesn't say anything good about Obama but she does try her best to avoid mentioning him at all costs.

Are you sure about that?

From the Washington Times:

President Obama is going to renege on his campaign promise to Bill Clinton and press for Sen. Elizabeth Warren — not Hillary Rodham Clinton — to be the Democratic candidate for the White House in 2016, said “Blood Feud” author Edward Klein.

www.washingtontimes.com...

AND one more:

President Barack Obama is said to have begun quietly backing Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren as a potential successor in what would be a snub to his one-time rival and later Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

www.dailymail.co.uk...

I repeat: this is a political game... and more to come.

a reply to: wasaka

Yup, I think if Obama was going to endorse Hillary he would have done it already. He's waiting for the person he really wants to endorse to announce. And then Hillary's campaign goes into the trash, where it belongs.

I like the fact she will go after whomever she believes is not on the up and up.

One - I hope she can keep her soul and not sell out to the Washington establishment.

Two - I think she needs more time and experience before she thinks about running for the Presidency.

Three - I hope she can stay focused on serving the people who voted for her. And... not allow herself to be swayed to support the big lobby groups.

Four - As she goes after the stench in Washington and the thugs of Wall Street , and others, I hope she comes with solutions to the problems.

I will be keeping an eye on her. Wouldn't this be good that we finally have a leader we can count on in Washington.

a reply to: Ultralight

I'd still take Warren over anyone else R or D that I've seen lined up for the office.

a reply to: bucsarg

It would be historical.

Good maybe other Dems will look into what the TPP really is instead of supporting Obama on it. needs to be more support against it overall before it's too late.