Friends, President Trump loves to threaten other countries with tariffs, and usually these threats have something to do with opening access to their markets to American exporters and/or protecting American jobs. Well, today DJT declared that he would levy a 50% tariff on Brazil, and his reasons had nothing to do with U.S. economic interests. His purpose is to defend U.S. social media companies from Brazilian laws and court decisions that effectively force them to practice censorship, AND to protest against the kangaroo court that is now holding former Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro in judgement. Trump and Bolsonaro were close allies before the latter lost his reelection bid and was promptly railroaded by the very aggressive and very leftist courts in Brazil. Trump is right that what Brazil is doing is outrageous, but are tariffs the best response to what amounts to an overseas version of lawfare? Wouldn't sanctions make more sense? It's starting to seem like tariffs, or the threat of tariffs, are Trump's "go to" solution to every international problem. He's also in some danger of becoming known as the Boy Who Cried Tariffs... Don't get me wrong: I would love to see Brazil's socialist oppressors held to account, but I'm not sure that tariffs are the best lever to pull, in this particular case. What are your thoughts?
Dr. Waddy from Jack: I think your concerns about his use of tariffs are well taken. I had thought they were productive; now I have some doubts.
ReplyDeleteThe BBC articles state that though President Trump is playing hardball with tariffs that many other countries are doing the same in return. Our stock markets have surged since he paused some tariff enforcement but I would think the market would be expecting that he would resume some of them, due to lack of deals or stubbornness from "infuriated" countries like Japan. Perhaps the market is "making hay while the sun shines"?
Brazil's oppression by its far left regime is yet another confirmation of the assured tyranny states always invite upon themselves when they give the far left power. Using the threat of punishing tariffs to get them to loosen up might work but sanctions may have been as effective in the past as to commend them as the first resort. We'll see if the threat alone has any purchase.
Should we get involved in the politics of another nation which is not an overt threat (yet) to our well being ? Its a legitimate question. Is a far left regime , especially in a big country in the Americas, which sits athwart the South Atlantic, by definition a threat to us? One can make a good argument that it is. Is another Venezuela in the works? Can China's strategic interests be served by a far left Brazil which might seek to actively oppose the Yanqui?
RAY TO DR. WADDY
ReplyDeleteWhat Brazil needs now is a replay of what they had from 1964 to 1985.
Dr. Waddy from Jack: I understood the process for "certifying" a class action suit so that it can proceed is a prolonged and complex matter. But gee, apparently not so with the class action suit on the birthright citizenship issue launched immediately after the Scotus decision ending the misuse of Federal District Court authority to dictate to the President. And gosh, that wasn't very long ago was it!
ReplyDeleteWell, looks like the opponents of President Trump's efforts to end the use of this right to game our immigration system, found yet another far left compliant Federal Court to aid their case. No doubt they will urge this as "precedent".I mean , the recent Scotus reduction of Federal District Court judges to only their geographical jurisdiction did not directly address creative establishment of far reaching precedent by subordinate Federal Judges. Stare decisis is a custom and a tradition though it does pack a defacto legal punch .
Actually, I think changing the Constitutional guarantee of birthright citizenship may require a Constitutional Amendment. No doubt it will get to Scotus so we'll see what they think about that. But we may also see them put the quietus to this newly presumed expedition of the process of certifying a class action suit . At what point might continuous toying with our judicial system fulfill the definition of "frivolity" and be subjected to the decided disadvantages which can accrue from such humbug?
Dr. Waddy from Jack: Yeah, and a Federal District Court Judge just slapped a nationwide injunction on the Administration's efforts to stop "birthright citizenship" from being exploited by far leftists to gum up our Immigration Laws. Funny isn't it? When it comes to 2nd Amendment rights these radicals are all for a "living Constitution" which can be molded to their "up to date"desires but let President Trump seek to correct the understandably unanticipated in the 1800s misuse of a post Civil War Constitutional Amendment to correct post Civil War injustice, WELL! "Why, the Constitution means what it says", they bleat. So now in addition to granting a conveniently eased , usually , ehhh, prolonged, "certification" of class action status to this earnest plea, a District Court Judge has presumed far beyond the Judge's geographical jurisdiction to present the President with a roadblock which that Judge should expect, flies in the face of the very recent Scotus decision shortening the leash on venturesome far left subordinate Federal Judges. I expect Scotus will express its displeasure at this, no matter how they MIGHT rule on the lawfulness of "infringing" on that much abused right.
ReplyDelete"By any means necessary" is the ever far leftist credo and they never recoil from reminding us of it. Marx and Lenin would highly approve. Like the criminals they so exalt far leftists delight in "probing" to find weak spots in those democratically enacted strictures they wish to corrupt. If they meet resistance they retreat and unctuously protest "no unjust purpose".
Of course this situation will end up in front of our lawful Scotus and its common sense majority will render a lawful decision.
Dr. Waddy from Jack: Well, its a preliminary injunction presumably based upon the granting of "class action" status and if the effected class is nation wide , then perhaps it is in itself proper. But the granting of "class action" probably was enabled by a certification process which was granted with apparent great and uncustomary haste. If it smells like a fish it may well be fishy.
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, a Federal Judge may have ruled within his or her
geographical jurisdiction to halt some ICE actions in several S. Kalifornia counties. But there is another way for the far left to use cooperative Federal District Court judges. Pick a very much watched area, get your guaranteed quickee injunction there and then protest it as "precedent" in other Courts, such as Federal Circuit Appeals Courts, which cover much larger geographic jurisdictions. Why, if an area has 20 illegals, then file baby, file, make a stink about it in the MSM and get that "class action" game going !
Dr. Waddy from Jack I think this time we are living in in the U.S. will end up being as fascinating to historians as are the 1850s.
ReplyDeleteLike that time we are seeing a confrontation between views terribly contrary to each other and with both sides driven by completely dismissive hostility to the other. That these views are irreconcilable may well be proven to be true; one side or the other may well triumph and its convictions will inform the law of a continued democratic (not dem party) country or one cursed by a totalitarian doctrine the country could have prevented, had it taken full recognizance of the now close to open far leftist convictions embraced by radical advocates such as the oh so honest NYC "Socialist" Mayoral candidate. He is lighting alot of fires along the far leftist Potomac shore tonight.
At this time, the democratic view has driven the totalitarian view close to despair and if it keeps the heat turned up, could send it to "history's ash heap". This President is, I think, fully aware of the critical nature of this political combat and is resolved to fight it through. SCOTUS and the present Congressional Majority cleave to the American side now but their makeup could change before the redemptive task is done,
Lincoln wisely observed that a "House divided against itself" cannot survive. A possibly final reckoning IS NOW joined!!! If we do not take full advantage of our current strength, by keeping the heat up through 2026 and 2028 ,we may always rue our indolence, while we sojourne in the neo Gulag.
Jack, one thing we don't know is: would Trump really burn our trading relationship with Brazil to the ground in order to protest the Bolsonaro trial? If the answer is no, then what are the chances that the threat alone will force Brazil to change course? My guess is this game of chicken will go on until at least August 1st, and then we'll see who means business.
ReplyDeleteRay, good point that a military coup in Brazil could set a lot of things right (and maybe a few things badly wrong). But I suspect the opportunity is gone, since the military will have been purged by now. Bolsonaro got played by the Brazilian establishment, if we're to be honest, in much the same way that Trump did in 2020. The difference is that the U.S. establishment didn't close the deal and drive a stake through the GOP's heart. The Brazilian Left, by contrast, seems to be going in for the kill.
Indeed, Jack, it may be "once more into the breach" for our valiant SCOTUS. One wonders whether SCOTUS might ever take it upon itself to cull the judicial herd... If it doesn't, it better get used to a heavy workload.