Bernie Sanders Calls Out Media For Not Covering Obama’s Trade Deal

The Huffington Post
By Posted: 03/01/2015 4:14 pm EST
Updated: 3 hours ago

Adding to the chorus of protest over President Barack Obama’s push for a controversial new trade pact with Asia, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) sounded off on theTrans-Pacific Partnership, and accused mainstream media of not covering what could be one of the biggest trade agreements in history.

“The major television networks are not covering the TPP. Incredible as it may sound, this trade agreement—the largest trade agreement in the history of the United States of America—has received virtually no coverage, no coverage, on the major networks,” Sanders said from the Senate floor on Thursday.

TPP is a trade deal being negotiated between the U.S., Canada and ten other Asia-Pacific nations, covering about 40 percent of the global economy. Supporters of the treaty argue that it would boost economic growth in participating countries by reducing tariffs, increasing investments and bringing the member nations closer together.

Critics aren’t buying it, arguing TPP would take jobs out of the U.S., increase income inequality, allow multinational corporations to sidestep U.S. regulations and reward countries with poor human rights records.

“I think it’s obvious for anyone who has taken a look at this issue that the TPP is just a new, easy way for corporations to shut down in America to send jobs abroad,” Sanders said.

Sanders likened TPP to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), thepoor-performing trade pact signed in 1994, which led to a loss of jobs and the deterioration of labor conditions in the U.S. and other partner nations.

“Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is sometimes called insanity.” “If we think that a new trade agreement based on the same principles of the old trade agreements are going to bring different results, I think we are very, very wrong.”

Adding to the skepticism of TPP is that talks about the deal have been done in secret, so the exact implications are largely unknown, save for what has been revealed in leaks. Democrats have been joined by labor and environmental groups in calling foul on the deal and Obama’s request for “fast-track” authority — the ability to make trade agreements with less interference from Congress. Most Republicans have signaled they would grant Obama fast-track authority.

A petition from Sanders aiming to stop TPP said, “If TPP was such a good deal for America, the administration should have the courage to show the American people exactly what is in this deal, instead of keeping the content of the TPP a secret.”

This entry was posted in Financial/economic information, Illuminati/Terrorism/Corruption, Political and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

22 Responses to Bernie Sanders Calls Out Media For Not Covering Obama’s Trade Deal

  1. Christie Hakim says:

    Jean –
    Thank you for posting Bernie Sanders video. He’s absolutely ‘our friend’ on this issue as is Elizabeth Warren (see below). The TPP is being negotiated in secret …and that’s just how the globalists want it. This is also why Obama wants Congress to give the treaty an ‘up’ or ‘down’ vote RIGHT AWAY without allowing them to read or debate the contents. Only corporations are allowed in on the secret negotiations lead by U.S. trade rep Michael Froman; organizations representing labor and the public are not welcome. What little is known about the TPP is via a few documents leaked to Lori Wallach of Public Citizen, and a few others obtained by Wikileaks.
    Aside from warfare, the two major ‘levers’ for enforcing 1% corporate/bankster authority globally are: 1) the IMF, World Bank and other international lending institutions; and 2) international trade agreements. Trade agreements override national sovereignty and are specifically designed to hasten corporate takeover of local economies (banking, energy, agriculture, etc.) and to protect patents and copyrights, while also shredding labor standards as well as public health, safety and environmental regulations. Under the TPP, corporations disputing particular local laws or regulations (e.g., minimum wage standards) will have the right to sue participant countries — and collect damages — via corporate-run, international courts. Elizabeth Warren spells out the risks to U.S. sovereignty in this article (you might consider posting it):

    The TPP clause everyone should oppose
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/kill-the-dispute-settlement-langu

    I encourage readers of this blog to contact their Congress people on this issue asap. NAFTA, signed by Bill Clinton, has been a disaster from the get go. Not only did NAFTA help push US factories across the border, it also allowed US corporate farmers to dump their subsidized (and Monsanto-modified) surplus corn on Mexico, effectively destroying local peasant agriculture (and priceless heirloom seeds) — and forcing millions of destitute villagers to illegally cross the border seeking work. NAFTA served as model for CAFTA (Central American Free Trade Agreement) signed by Bush II, with similar ill effects. As local economies declined, the narco-terror industry took hold, leading even more millions to flee. Aside from the TPP, similar treaties are pending internationally, including the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), the Trans-Atlantic Free Trade Agreement (TAFTA) and an India-EU Trade Agreement. No doubt something is in the works with China. The idea is to have a network of these ‘control’ treaties spanning the globe. They must be stopped!

  2. BG says:

    in this video go to….1:02

    (just coincidence….)

  3. Hi and thanks Jean.

    Time is short. I posted the following at the Bernie Sanders’ video above.

    The CAFR Swindle – The Biggest Game In Town http://youtu.be/1pRPBKJQnyU

    By Jim Hightower: The Trans-Pacific Partnership is not about free trade. It’s a corporate coup d’etat–against us! http://www.opednews.com/articles/The-Trans-Pacific-Partners-by-Jim-Hightower-130814-411.html

  4. Pete says:

    TTP is troubling to me for the following reasons.

    I do believe that if I were to become totally disenchanted I could drop out and become self sufficient. Or could I? It doesn’t take a whole lot of land to raise enough food for two people to live a healthy life. For most of us with a little creativity, that much is within our grasp. The tiny home movement is redefining our housing expectations. Knowledge of sustainable agricultural practice is everywhere. Solar and wind power is, through technological advances in that field, becoming practical if one were to scale down their needs only a little. Telephones and computers are dc powered devices, with a little adapting they can exist in a dc only environment making them off grid compatible. Four to ten acres in a rural setting, a tiny house, throw up a couple cheap high tunnels for extended growing, and the infrastructure is set.

    So I’m happy, healthy, reading and learning on the Internet, passing on all the Wallmart crap, not missing a new Tahoe every year, and peddling enough of what I grow at the local farmers market to be able to afford the Internet and a Hulu movie every week.

    What does the corporate world think?

    Before TTP there was Gatt/WTO and Tripps

    Re: Trips as an adjunct of the WTO/Gatt. The United States strategy of linking trade policy to intellectual property standards can be traced back to the entrepreneurship of senior management at Pfizer in the early 1980s, who mobilized corporations in the United States and made maximizing intellectual property privileges the number one priority of trade policy in the United States (Braithwaite and Drahos, 2000, Chapter 7).

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commerce_Clause

    Dispute exists within the courts as to the range of powers granted to Congress by the Commerce Clause. As noted below, the clause is often paired with the Necessary and Proper Clause, the combination used to take a broad, expansive perspective of these powers. However, the effect of the Commerce Clause has varied significantly depending on the Supreme Court’s interpretation. During the Marshall Court era, Commerce Clause interpretation empowered Congress to gain jurisdiction over numerous aspects of intrastate and interstate commerce as well as non-commerce. During the post-1937 era, the use of the Commerce Clause by Congress to authorize federal control of economic matters became effectively unlimited. Since the latter half of the Rehnquist Court era, Congressional use of the Commerce Clause has become slightly restricted again, being limited only to matters of trade or any other form of restricted area (whether interstate or not) and production (whether commercial or not).

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn

    Filburn argued that since the excess wheat he produced was intended solely for home consumption, his wheat production could not be regulated through the Interstate Commerce Clause. The Supreme Court rejected this argument, reasoning that if Filburn had not used home-grown wheat, he would have had to buy wheat on the open market. This effect on interstate commerce, the Court reasoned, may not be substantial from the actions of Filburn alone but, through the cumulative actions of thousands of other farmers just like Filburn, its effect would certainly become substantial. Therefore Congress could regulate wholly intrastate, non-commercial activity if such activity, viewed in the aggregate, would have a substantial effect on interstate commerce, even if the individual effects are trivial.

    Breeders rights and intellectual property.

    http://seedquest.com/forum/v/VanEttekovenKees/default.htm

    DNA and Morphology, the best of two worlds

    In Naktuinbouw Variety Tracer, we have combined the available techniques in such a manner that watertight cases can be presented. Not only do we combine morphology with DNA techniques, but we also add the sampling as an important element. If you can convince the court but fail to prove the relationship between your results and the material on the market, the court will still rule against you.
    Therefore, Variety Tracer is for us a combination of elements, starting with an intensive investigation of the problem: what is the problem? is Plant Breeders Rights valid in the country where the infringement takes place? what legal system are we dealing with? is the other party hostile or can we expect co-operation? can samples be taken? etc.
    Once all these elements have been established, the sampling can take place, the material can be included in field trials, and the DNA test can be done. Finally a full report is produced with sufficient content to convince the opponent and, if necessary, the court of law.

    Percy Schmeiser.

    “After Percy Schmeiser’s Examination of Discovery, where he denies that he ever obtained and planted Monsanto’s Roundup Ready certified canola seeds, Monsanto drops its claim that Schmeiser “obtained canola seeds which are resistant to glyphosate from one or more persons licensed by… Monsanto Canada Inc.” Monsanto’s amended statement of claim alleges only that Schmeiser planted seed from his 1997 canola crop containing Monsanto’s patented Roundup-resistant genes and cells, and that in doing so, he infringed on the company’s patent. Therefore, the question of how Monsanto’s gene came to be present in Schmeiser’s fields is no longer of any concern to the company. Whether Schmeiser’s possession of the gene was a result of deliberate action or uninvited contamination has no bearing on the question of infringement, according to Monsanto”

    http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=seeds_tmln&seeds_legal_actions=seeds_legalMonsantoVSchmeiser

    Ray Mowling, a vice president for Monsanto Canada in Mississauga, concedes to the Washington Post that some cross-pollination does occur between Monsanto’s genetically modified plants and other plants. Referring to Monsanto’s lawsuit against Percy Schmeiser, a canola farmer accused of illegally growing Monsanto’s Roundup Ready Canola, Mowling “acknowledges the awkwardness of prosecuting farmers who may be inadvertently growing Monsanto seed through cross-pollination or via innocent trades with patent-violating neighbors,” but explains that Monsanto believes that Schmeiser’s case is “critical” to win in order to protect its patent rights against the use of its seed by farmers who have not paid Monsanto’s technology use fees. [WASHINGTON POST, 2/3/1999]

    Aaron Mitchell, Monsanto’s lead investigator in the Percy Schmeiser case, obtains a back-up sample set of the canola pods that were collected from Schmeiser’s property the previous summer (see August 12, 1998) from James Vancha who has been storing the pods in his freezer. Mitchell takes the seeds to Leon Perehudoff of Prairie Plant Systems who assists him with the grow-out test. Perehudoff will later testify in court that the seeds he receives are clean, though the original sample set of canola pods contained debris. Mitchell claims that he cleaned the seeds by hand even though there would have been no reason to do so in order to grow the seeds. When he is later asked in court to explain how he did this, he will respond that he did it by hand and that it took him about an hour. Another witness, Lyle Friesen, a plant biologist at the University, will testify that the task should have taken “days” to do by hand. All of the seeds included in Mitchell’s grow-out test germinate despite the fact that neither Monsanto’s St. Louis lab nor Friesen (see (August 26, 1999)) are able to so because the seeds were improperly stored and/or moldy. After the plants have grown, Mitchell takes them away to spray them and then later returns with them so he and Perehudoff can count the survivors. For one of the samples, he records an impossible survivor rate of 106 percent—there are apparently more plants in the sample after the spraying than there were before. He then averages this percentage rate with results from the other samples to come up with an average survival rate of 92-96 percent, which Monsanto will later cite as the percentage of Roundup Ready Canola plants in Schmeiser’s 1998 fields. As Schmeiser’s lawyer will later note in court, the samples were not collected using a methodology that would have ensured that the composition of the samples were representative of the composition of the fields. [FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA, 6/22/2000, PP. 23-25 Canadian Federal Judge Andrew MacKay rules in favor of Monsanto in its case against Canadian canola farmer Percy Schmeiser (see June 5, 2000-June 21, 2000).
    tent to Monsanto.” [MONSANTO CANADA INC. V. PERCY SCHMEISER, 3/29/2001, PP. 40
    That Monsanto’s patent rights on its Roundup-resistant gene persist even after it has inserted itself into a plant owned by someone else.
    Thus,” writes Judge MacKay, “a farmer whose field contains seed or plants originating from seed spilled into them, or blown as seed, in swaths from a neighbor’s land or even growing from germination by pollen carried into his field from elsewhere by insects, birds, or by the wind, may own the seed or plants on his land even if he did not set about to plant them. He does not, however, own the right to the use of the patented gene, or of the seed or plant containing the patented gene or cell.

    An Australian study published in the Journal Science finds that wind or insects can carry canola pollen up to three kilometers (1.87 miles). In Canada, where the contamination of non-transgenic canola with genetically modified (GM) genes has become a serious problem, the present isolation distance of GM canola is a mere 100 meters. “The study underlines a clear risk,” the report says. “Once transgenes are introduced they can’t be completely controlled.” [NATIONAL POST, 6/28/2002; RIEGER ET AL., 7/4/2002; MANITOBA CO-OPERATOR, 7/4/2002]

    Schmeiser spent 400k defending himself. Monsanto got case law. In other words if they want to squash you they can and will. It makes no difference if it is a field of canola or two tomato plants. Allowing global corporations to write the laws regarding breeders rights and intellectual property in secret is insane.

  5. JBC says:

    I haven’t seen anyone broach the topic, but this ‘global economic’ crash that everyone—and some very credible people say is inevitable, I don’t believe is the case. They can keep stringing this thing along forever so long as everyone just keeps going along with it. Look around you, how many people that you encounter in everyday life are convinced the dollar and the economy has never been stronger? The Zionist/Jesuit/Jewry order that is controlling these things, aren’t going to go down easy—if at all. TPP is the obviously the counter to the BRICS alliance. If you can control 40% of the global economy through trade using “Petro” dollar, without the petrol, your currency is still in the game. Just a gut feeling, once the global trade agreement is in place, then out comes the suppressed energy technologies—miraculously still controlled by the UN-Zio corporations and again neutralize the BRICS-“Oil” nations. There are so many things to piece together, but we always need to keep in mind, when you control the whole game—there is nothing that happens by chance.

    • Jean says:

      Just take a look at the recent headlines on Zerohedge, and you will see how bad things are. People aren’t watching, have given up their responsibilities as citizens, probably because every time they turn around there is a new fear, a new drama, and they are totally – and rightfully – lost. Add in everything else being done to us, and most people haven’t got a chance! Hugs, ~Jean

      • Ri-chard says:

        Jean,
        I couldn’t agree with you more. Too many have given up their responsibilities as citizens. And too many I believe, is because they don’t even know of their responsibility as a citizen. Yes, and maybe it is because when they start to pay attention they take it seems like a barrage bad news to fear. Therefore, rather than plan to protect themselves, family and friends they will do nothing hoping it will just go away. They remind me of the French pacifist of the 30s and 40s. Yes, and then you add in everything else being done to us, and most people haven’t got a chance!

        Or they have fixed beliefs and are close to any other possibility suffering from Cognitive Desistance.

  6. Sacredpeaks says:

    Jean, You and your other contributors are so right that very important information is being revealed right now. I hope you are able to share this new (also very important) revelation with your readers.

    This relates to some other recent posts I’ve made about what we are dealing with now….

    DHS and CenturyLink – How They Are Connected and What’s Transpiring:

    DHS controls the Internet in the US and they are already in Phase3!

    DHS Cyber Program Repels Threats in Real Time
    “CenturyLink becomes the first company to go live with intrusion prevention”

    What is E3A?

    “Einstein 3 (E3A) is designed to quarantine emails and block malicious Web domains that “spoof” legitimate sites, according to CenturyLink. The service defends the perimeter of federal civilian networks. It senses aberrant activity using threat “signatures,” or tell-tale signs of a hacker derived from U.S. intelligence and private research. These indicators can include certain email headers or IP addresses, according to a DHS privacy assessment of Einstein”.

    For more information please see the link below:
    http://touch.nextgov.com/nextgov/#!/entry/dhs-cyber-program-repels-threats-in-real-time,548b4b5ad669861ce90792f0/2

  7. BG says:

    Here are the 46 senators who voted to give your rights to the U.N. Baldwin (D-WI) Baucus (D-MT) Bennett (D-CO) Blumenthal (D-CT) Boxer (D-CA) Brown (D-OH) Cantwell (D-WA) Cardin (D-MD) Carper (D-DE) Casey (D-PA) Coons (D-DE) Cowan (D-MA) Durbin (D-IL) Feinstein (D-CA) Franken (D-MN) Gillibrand (D-NY) Harkin (D-IA) Hirono (D-HI) Johnson (D-SD) Kaine (D-VA) King (I-ME) Klobuchar (D-MN) Landrieu (D-LA) Leahy (D-VT) Levin (D-MI) McCaskill (D-MO) Menendez (D-NJ) Merkley (D-OR) Mikulski (D-MD) Murphy (D-CT) Murray (D-WA) Nelson (D-FL) Reed (D-RI) Reid (D-NV) Rockefeller (D-WV) “””””Sanders (I-VT)””””” Schatz (D-HI) Schumer (D-NY) Shaheen (D-NH) Stabenow (D-MI) Udall (D-CO) Udall (D-NM) Warner (D-VA) Warren (D-MA) Whitehouse (D-RI) Wyden (D-OR)

    • Jean says:

      Thanks! No Republicans? Interesting!thanks and hugs, ~Jean

      • Sacredpeaks says:

        This is unbelievable! I’d like to know more (if true) why no Republicans supported this. Is it because the Dems can give them the perfect Hegelian-Divide-and-Conquer cover? I know for a fact that many Repubs secretly support this. Come out of the closet you trolls!

  8. Mike says:

    Keep in mind that Bernie Sanders has also asked Obama to raise taxes by executive order, which is tyranny at it’s finest. He suggested the president should raise $100 billion simply by skirting congress and using an executive order aimed at the IRS. Bernie is not your friend.

  9. anon says:

    the word here is, ‘like nafta on steroids’…..

  10. Ri-chard says:

    Also, WikiLeaks Publishes Secret Trade Text to Rewrite Copyright Laws, Limit Internet Freedom https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6OZyRQbQ2k

  11. Ri-chard says:

    Damn shame only YouTube watchers may know of this in any numbers. So far only 36,502 since Feb. 26

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s