Did China Just Bribe Trump to Undermine National Security?

It's becoming more and more evident:

In the past few years ZTE, a Chinese electronics company that, among other things, makes cheap smartphones, has gotten into repeated trouble with the U.S. government. Many of its products contain U.S. technology — technology that, by law, must not be exported to embargoed nations, including North Korea and Iran. But ZTE was circumventing the ban.

Initially, the company was fined $1.2 billion. Then, when it became clear that the company had rewarded rather than punished the executives involved, the Commerce Department forbade U.S. technology companies from selling components to ZTE for the next seven years.

And two weeks ago the Pentagon banned sales of ZTE phones on military bases, following warnings from intelligence agencies that the Chinese government may be using the company’s products to conduct espionage.

But all of a sudden, a complete 180 turn as far as the Trump administration was concerned. Too many jobs at risk in China!

All of which made it very strange indeed to see Trump suddenly declare that he was working with President Xi of China to help save ZTE — “Too many jobs in China lost” — and that he was ordering the Commerce Department to make it happen.

It’s possible that Trump was just trying to offer an olive branch amid what looks like a possible trade war. But why choose such a flagrant example of Chinese misbehavior? Which was why many eyes turned to Indonesia, where a Chinese state-owned company just announced a big investment in a project in which the Trump Organization has a substantial stake.

www.nytimes.com...

His businesses are set to benefit in the millions from this deal and America? Not much of anything. As a matter of fact the lawmakers and a number of Pentagon officials warned against this deal and the Trump administration completely ignored them. The administration hasn't made any legitimate justification on bailing out this foreign Chinese company aside from the fact it will hurt China. Makes no sense, no alarm bells ringing here? What happened to America first?

What happened to getting tough on China? It stinks to high heaven. This isn't the only time Trumps deals have come into question on conflict of interest.

Last year the administration, bizarrely, backed a Saudi blockade of Qatar, a Middle Eastern nation that also happens to be the site of a major U.S. military base. Why? Well, the move came shortly after the Qataris refused to invest $500 million in 666 Fifth Avenue, a troubled property owned by the family of Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law.

Qatar is now looking to make a deal on 666 Fifth Avenue now. What a coincidence?

Let's not forget that Trump lied about his intentions to set a blind trust for his businesses. He hasn't followed on that promise and he's just continued on as if he never made it in the first place.

Seems to be a lot of 'coincidences' lately. Of course supporters will argue technically there's no proof he got bribe, but it's becoming patently evident this is the case given this latest deal with Chinese Communications Corporation ZTE.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

These op eds are inane.

Don’t say there’s no proof: We’re not talking about a court of law, where the accused are presumed innocent until proved guilty. Where the behavior of high officials is concerned, the standard is very nearly the opposite: They’re supposed to avoid situations in which there is even a hint that their actions might be motivated by personal gain.

First, the court of public opinion is the basis. Automatic fail in my eyes.

Second, while I have always agreed that we should hold anyone who works for taxpayer money to a higher standard, the fact that it is only a reaction to a Trump presidency makes the argument lose all credibility.

From the same author:
www.rollingstone.com...

a reply to: JinMI

Second, while I have always agreed that we should hold anyone who works for taxpayer money to a higher standard, the fact that it is only a reaction to a Trump presidency

So with that logic, you know there's no real justification to bailing out this Chinese company but because, supposedly, only the Trump Administration is being pinged for this (whataboutism) we should move on?

JinMI you're smarter than that, you know this stinks and your response above says it all. The fact you didn't deny that this move from the administration is highly questionable says it all.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

You seem against Americas decision to cancel, wasn't it partly China's decision?

a reply to: Southern Guardian

No.

No matter who much leftist pout and whine.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

Man, is he the colludingest president ever or what?

And, btw, a complete 360 keeps you going in the same diretion.

Honestly, what could you possibly offer a 70+ year old billionaire that would motivate him to do anything? Trump's going to do what he wants and isn't going to care about anything from China or Russia.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Man, is he the colludingest president ever or what?

And, btw, a complete 360 keeps you going in the same diretion.

Direction* and I'll assume you're aware 'colludingest' isn't a word. Thanks for the heads above above, it's 180.

a reply to: SKEPTEK

You don't find the bail out of ZTE questionable?

a reply to: Southern Guardian

So with that logic, you know there's no real justification to bailing out this Chinese company but because, supposedly, only the Trump Administration is being pinged for this (whataboutism) we should move on?

No, that was a response to the journalism used and the spin applied. Buzzwords don't negate a conversation.

The term bail out doesn't apply here.

Under the agreement brokered by the Commerce Department, ZTE would pay a substantial fine, hire American compliance officers to be placed at the firm and make changes to its current management team.

In return, the Commerce Department would lift a so-called denial order that is preventing the company from buying American products, the person said.

www.nytimes.com...

You want to bring the facts? Great, fine. This BS op ed is just that, BS.

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Man, is he the colludingest president ever or what?

And, btw, a complete 360 keeps you going in the same diretion.

Direction* and I'll assume you're aware 'colludingest' isn't a word.

Lol...grammar nazi and ass hat all rolled into one.

yawn

making assumptions with no actual verifiable facts to back it up like all the other agenda driven threads

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.

a reply to: RadioRobert

They just want Trump to fail. Despite all logic and reason, as long as he fails.

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?

a reply to: Southern Guardian

I just want my friends on the right to realize the orange baffoon is a fraud. He is no ronald reagan.

Eh. Whats to say that ZTE isnt a card being played in some other negotiation.
As for protecting information from china...... well... that ship has sailed.
China knows everything. Between the cyber-spying and the network of spys they have in the military and roving around all the sensitive sites like site 42, there is nothing china doesnt already know about our technology.
Just look at the J31. China stole plans for a F35, said "how can WE actually AFFORD to make these?" Made some tweaks, and called it the J31.

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?

I think the author of the article's suggestion is ridiculous

There’s no proof of anything

None of it matters one way or the other

All Trump is doing is avoiding a trade war and we will get the best of it.

😎🚬

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?