William Weld: NAFTA "is the supreme law of the land"

William Tell

William Tell

Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Messages
12,146


BLACKWELL: Are you investing any of your money?

WELD: Yeah. That's not going to -- that's not going to move the needle, believe me. But if necessary, fine.

BLACKWELL: You were nominated soon after you -- I guess, before you resigned as governor of Massachusetts to be ambassador to Mexico by President Clinton. What is your relationship with the Clintons?

WELD: It's good. I worked with Mrs. Clinton back in the '70s. We were still in our 20s. That was on the Nixon impeachment. A fascinating time. Bill Clinton I got along with very well as fellow governors, and I was generally supportive of him as president, as well.

BLACKWELL: And you ran for New York governor. Do you have any relationship with Donald Trump?

WELD: I knew Donald socially in New York. That's all. But, yeah, we did see him and Melania around town a little bit.

BLACKWELL: What is your opinion of him?

WELD: Well, you know, there's the Donald Trump you meet socially, and

he is a warm person, not an ungenerous person. Some of the stuff that he's running on I think is absolutely chaotic. I'm going to do this to Mexico. OK, that's a violation of the North American Free Trade agreement, which is the supreme law of the land. It is a treaty. We signed it. I'll do this to China. No questions asked. OK, that's a violation of the World Trade Organization rules, exposing us, the United States, to sanctions. And we would be the rogue nation. I don't think we want to be the rogue nation. You know? Let's let North Korea be the rogue nation, not us
Click to expand...

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1605/27/wolf.02.html
 
As Jack Black once said "a Cutlass Supreme, a Chicken Supreme, and a Burrito Supreme.."
 
They would have nominated Lindsey Graham if he wanted to run as a Libertarian. For "credibility". Bill Kristol could bring big donors too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rad
Who cares? He's never going to be in a position of power. Nobody evenly remotely thinks this LP ticket will win. His credibility as a former governor and his fundraising will advance what might become a third option in US politics. I'm voting for them.

I think your energy dissing Weld is misplaced. Hate Trump and Clinton instead.
 
What does libertarian even mean anymore? Glenn Beck has claimed to be libertarian. Mary Matalin is claiming to be a libertarian now. People in the alt-right movement claim to be libertarian. You could assemble a bunch of rocks on a table and call them "libertarian" and it would mean as much, it seems. So, a CFR member is the VP candidate of the LP party (a party who previously nominated Bob Barr for the POTUS position.) What difference does it make since no one really knows what the word "libertarian" even means? I sure don't anymore.
 
cajuncocoa said:
What does libertarian even mean anymore? Glenn Beck has claimed to be libertarian. Mary Matalin is claiming to be a libertarian now. People in the alt-right movement claim to be libertarian. You could assemble a bunch of rocks on a table and call them "libertarian" and it would mean as much, it seems. So, a CFR member is the VP candidate of the LP party (a party who previously nominated Bob Barr for the POTUS position.) What difference does it make since no one really knows what the word "libertarian" even means? I sure don't anymore.
Click to expand...


Quitcher bichin. We're movin on up, becoming mainstream doncha know.
 
According to the Constitution, he's right. Isn't he?

From Article VI:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Meh, it's not like he passed NAFTA. And the CFR task force he was on was 10 years after NAFTA was passed. It's the law of the land as far as our government is concerned. Meanwhile, GJ is anti-NAFTA these days (whether he was in the past or not).

Weld isn't very compelling but there's got to be more damning stuff than his argument here, in essence, "we should stick with rule of law for laws that are on the books." He's a diplomat type who thinks there are better ways to fix these things than unilaterally breaking agreements between the US government and other nation states.
 
anaconda said:
Yet, there are many internet references to it as a "treaty:"

http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1868997,00.html

http://www.inc.com/encyclopedia/north-american-free-trade-agreement-nafta.html

Can someone help me here? Thanks.
Click to expand...

The internet is drunk and should go home.

From the Constitution:

Article II

Section 2.

The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States; he may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices, and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.


He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law: but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments.
Click to expand...

NAFTA was never ratified by two thirds of the Senate, therefor it is not a Treaty.
 
undergroundrr said:
Meh, it's not like he passed NAFTA. And the CFR task force he was on was 10 years after NAFTA was passed. It's the law of the land as far as our government is concerned. Meanwhile, GJ is anti-NAFTA these days (whether he was in the past or not).

Weld isn't very compelling but there's got to be more damning stuff than his argument here, in essence, "we should stick with rule of law for laws that are on the books." He's a diplomat type who thinks there are better ways to fix these things than unilaterally breaking agreements between the US government and other nation states.
Click to expand...

One of the most damning things I've ever heard about him was in this interview. When he said he was generally supportive of Bill Clinton as president. As far as NAFTA goes, the guy is literally saying these phony trade agreements are above the Constitution. That is the definition of a globalist.
 
William Tell said:
The internet is drunk and should go home.

From the Constitution:



NAFTA was never ratified by two thirds of the Senate, therefor it is not a Treaty.
Click to expand...

Same condition for going to war but Congress has not done that since WWII. Not supporting NAFTA- just saying that we live in interesting times.
 
William Tell said:
One of the most damning things I've ever heard about him was in this interview. When he said he was generally supportive of Bill Clinton as president. As far as NAFTA goes, the guy is literally saying these phony trade agreements are above the Constitution. That is the definition of a globalist.
Click to expand...

You're right of course. He's very go-along-to-get-along. I also hear it as not being beholden to the right wing narrative. GJ and WW are going out of their way to distinguish themselves from right wing Cruzesque tea partyism. I'm more and more convinced they're going to steal more Clinton than trump voters.
 
cajuncocoa said:
What does libertarian even mean anymore? Glenn Beck has claimed to be libertarian. Mary Matalin is claiming to be a libertarian now. People in the alt-right movement claim to be libertarian. You could assemble a bunch of rocks on a table and call them "libertarian" and it would mean as much, it seems. So, a CFR member is the VP candidate of the LP party (a party who previously nominated Bob Barr for the POTUS position.) What difference does it make since no one really knows what the word "libertarian" even means? I sure don't anymore.
Click to expand...
I'm not a libertarian! I'm a classical liberal for this very reason. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

PAF
“Personnel Is Policy” Means the Rule of Law Is Dying
Replies
0
Views
2K
PAF
PAF
Brian4Liberty
Three Cheers For Rep. Thomas Massie!
Replies
5
Views
255
TheTexan
TheTexan
jmdrake
Debunking the claim that Trump had to appoint William Barr to avoid impeachment
Replies
14
Views
1K
dannno
dannno
Swordsmyth
Johnson Fires Pro-Ukraine Intel Committee Chairman
Replies
0
Views
149
Swordsmyth
Swordsmyth
PAF
L’État, C’est Moi (“I Am the State”).Trumpian Version
Replies
0
Views
49
PAF
PAF
Back
Top