She loves it.

I dont swallow assertions that she led in votes. In any case, I wouldn't vote for her ever. The skeletons in her closet guarantee that the country would be left wide open to blackmail.

wife when in reality she didn't care if her husband was doing things with that woman.

Are you really saying that doesnt matter? Even in the light of the effect of that episode on the country. especially black people. Do it now. Or face the consequences.

Do you understand why GATS may have created a strong incentive to have the Democratic agenda nullified for other reasons than We signed away our right to regulate in a trade agreement.

Certainly, arent Democrats desperate to figure out ways to not succeed at anything and not look too obvious about it. For example, they even ran and then excluded a candidate to falsely create the mistaken, false impression that the President could still (if they were successful) make changes like a single payer healthcare system, when in fact we had literally formally promised not to, internationally in a formal, binding way which actually creates huge penalties in the WTO if we do. Having promised away the millions of jobs to other countries, if they could do them cheaper. (Thats what we did) So fake "green New deal" was a similar act of deception, and cover up, under the circumstances, aimed at hiding whatsgoing on from young people. they have still gotten away with this, thanks to our gullible democrats failure to wake up. If journalists seem as if they might tell the truth they get threats which makes them think they will lose their jobs.

We are increasingly flirting with totalitarianism. Its easy to prove that the real misinformation is coming from whoever is trying to hide this betrayal of our young people with lies and press intimidation.

Also hasn't Bill's behavior since the Clinton Administration strongly suggest, if not prove that indeed I am right, and that his involvement wit people like Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, has relevance, given what they did. I think that Hillary and Bill's behavior back in the 90s was consistent with a deception of the country over what actually happeed. IMHO, they committed a crime by deceiving whomever investigated these events if they failed to make it clear that Bill was not "cheating on" HRC as they defined it.

This is important because with GATS they were stealing our rights to democracy as we Americans define it. Nobody know this better than I because I have had countless discussions about GATS with people who did not know about it, going back ten years of more. Countless. Not a single person has thought it was anything other than a huge wrong on the country. Nobody wants it. They really screwed us, and they know it. Who else would they be going to ALL THIS TROUBLE to hide it. Like encouraging daughter's best friends father to run, remember that. All this was reported by ABC News. I am not making this up. How could I ever beat all this.

Unrelated story.

My friend, L, grew up on a commune in Colorado, She has a friend whose father is really her father, while HER father is really her friends father. Genetically.

Other than that, she and her (female) friend are unrelated, Genetically. Needless to say she is still very close friends with her "sister". They both grew up in this weird situation where their parents had had a fing resulting in both of their births. And the parents found it convenient to not tell anybody except them, fairly late in life (both at the same time!) No she was never abused and in fact her parents treated her very well, she's also very smart and now she has an advanced degree in physics of all things. She is a rocket scientist. A real one. Her main interest is space and getting us there. Thats her job. She just has this bizarre family secret.

Read up on GATS, people, would you, or you're going to lose your minds when you find out whats been done. But by then it will be even more impossible than it is today to do anything.

By the way, be aware that this is such a big international thing that the rest of the world will never believe us when we tell them we have been conned. They just wont believe that anybody could be so ignorant and stupid about such a major thing, which to some countries is one of the major thing thats happened in the world to them. They also wont beleive that our leadershipwas so dishonest as to do this to us. Or that so many people have died because of our dysfunctional healthcare system being thrust upon us the way it has been. (A lot, a real lot, and for the worst possible reason.)

that they dont agree with it which is too big of a risk for them. The scheme they have been cooking up for 30 years. Its SO SORDID.

And nomatter who wins its going to be SO bad for the people of this country, and the rich will end up kicking millions outon their asses and taking all their money and kicking them out of theirhome and jobs. Just wait and see, you all really have no fucking idea. Not even remotely.

Its "just business" they say.

No limits are allowed to our greed and pillage..

Like mass economic sodomy of the country. And planet. People will be freezing and trying to survive in their wet moldy frozen cardboard boxes. And they will probably be blaming everything thats happened on you. (and its justified by the facts, too) on all of us because nobody could ever have possibly been that stupidly evil :o unless it was intentional. We The people will be so angry they wontbe able to speak. ThePTB want to steal everything by tearing this country apart. First.

Read up on how the British Empire did it. They were and are the real pros. They probably killed as many as Hitler, but unlike him almost nobody knows it. And they got away with it, and hid all that money for more than hundreds of years.

Indigenous (native born) Americans of all races will learn first hand, by experience, what we do to poor, powerless, *indigenous people*.

NO MERCY, that would violate the GATS rules, now, wouldnt it.

Take everything from them and leave them with nothing. Not even a moldy wet cardboard box to live in.

Pray!

-----------------------------------------------------
Read between the lines.

https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-world-economic-forum

42nd President of the United States: 1993 ‐ 2001
Remarks to the World Economic Forum
January 26, 1995
Good evening, and thank you, Professor Schwab, for that introduction. I'm pleased to join all of you, especially Secretary-General Boutros-Ghali, Councillor Cotti of Switzerland, and Prime Minister Carlsson of Sweden. And I'm delighted to have this opportunity to speak to the World Economic Forum.

Let me begin by saying I've very much enjoyed listening to the questions you asked the Secretary-General and to his answers. I was profoundly moved by the wisdom of his answer about the media. I wrote it down, and now I will use it in the next press conference. I noted you also talked about the academic wisdom and the media power represented in your group. I hope also there is academic power and media wisdom in your group.

The thoughts that you shared and the projects that grow out of your meetings clearly are going to play a vital role in determining the issues that dominate all of our international agenda. Your opinions will play a key part in shaping the debate on some of the most important issues of our time.

Two years ago, I took office with the strong conviction that the American people, as all the people of the world, were facing a new and rapidly changing global economy. I believed then, and I believe more strongly now, that the incomes and living standards of Americans are tied directly to what happens outside our borders. It is now impossible to separate international and domestic economic concerns. As soon as our administration began its work, we devised a detailed strategy to set a new direction. And during the last 2 years, we have devoted ourselves to preparing our country and our people for this global economy and to creating an international system of free and expanding trade that benefits not just the American people but all the world's people.

We've made good strides. The essential first step for us was to put our own house in order. Let's not forget that, 2 years ago, it was a very open question whether the United States could summon the political will to cut our deficit significantly. But as many of you who specialize in global economics had urged for years, we changed that dynamic. We did the hard work. We cut the deficit dramatically, more than $600 billion, or about $10,000 for every family in our country.

This year, the deficit will shrink for the third year in a row, for the first time since Harry Truman was the President of the United States. Cutting the deficit has helped us to create almost 6 million new jobs in the last 2 years, to keep the inflation to 2.7 percent and to boost our exports by 11 percent. The combined measure of unemployment and inflation is at its lowest point since 1968. In fact, a survey of your own members last year concluded that the United States is now the most competitive economy on Earth, and we appreciate that, and we're going to do our best to keep it that way.

To ensure that, we know we must continue to invest in our own people, to empower individuals to take advantage of the opportunities of the global economy and to make the most of their own lives. Today, when exports account for so many of our high-skill, high-wage jobs and when what we earn depends so directly on what we know and what we are capable of learning, education is more important than ever before.

That's why I proposed as part of my middle class bill of rights, that we make education and training more accessible than ever before in the United States, through a range of tax cuts for students of all ages and through a system of cash vouchers for people who have been laid off and must be retrained. Another part of our strategy has been to lay the foundation for a new era of global growth and open markets in the century to come.

Already, after 7 years, we've made some real progress by adopting the GATT treaty. Those negotiations were begun here in the United States under Presidents Reagan and Bush. They were completed, they were approved by Congress, and I was proud to sign them into law last year. That's the most ambitious trade agreement ever.

We also brought the NAFTA treaty into force with support from both Democrats and Republicans, and since then, trade with our NAFTA partners have accounted for 100,000 new American jobs. On the basis of the agreement forged at the Summit of the Americas last month, we've begun to create a free trade zone for our own hemisphere. And finally, we've extended our efforts to the booming economies of the Asia-Pacific region. At the APEC summit in Jakarta, we forged an agreement to create a vastly more open trade area there by 2020. All told, these 2 years in the United States have been one of the most intense and productive periods of economic innovation, both domestically and internationally, in recent times.

But while the promise of these new arrangements is clearly enormous, their benefits will not simply fall into our lap. Indeed, with the completion of this array of trade agreements, we're entering a new and difficult phase of the global economy. Now, we face the challenge of turning visions into concrete realities, a time for painstaking efforts, for dismantling the old barriers and creating the new arrangements, brick by brick, for implementing these new trade pacts and completing the architecture of the international economy.

It's also a time for careful reform. We must reexamine the international institutions that have played such an important role in the post-war era and consider how they are adapting to the new realities. These institutions have served us well for nearly half a century. In many respects, they still do. They have evolved with the changing world economy, discarding old missions and assuming new ones.

But as all of you know, change in the world economy has taken on astonishing dimensions. Globalization has met the growth in interdependence on a scale that would have been inconceivable a decade ago, that richly rewards good decisions and good policies. But we've also seen that 24-hour markets can respond with blinding speed and sometimes ruthlessness that the statesmen of the Bretton Woods era never would have imagined.

And for that reason, at last year's summit in Naples, my G-7 colleagues and I saw the need to review our international economic institutions, identifying new needs and evaluating how best to adapt the institutions to meet the tremendous challenges of the 21st century. This review will be a central part of our discussions at the Halifax summit in June.

In just the last few weeks, the crisis in Mexico has reminded us that the road ahead will have its difficult stretches. Mexico today has an economy with strong fundamentals and a capacity to grow and to meet its obligations. But partly because Mexico relied on too many short-term foreign loans, a fallen market confidence turned into a dangerously self-fulfilling prophecy.

I am confident that the guarantee program we are putting together to put Mexico back on track will win approval in our Congress and will make a difference in the world economy. The combined leadership of the U.S. Congress, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, and the Secretaries of Treasury and State are constructing a creative and unprecedented package. Some have said it's just foreign aid and a bailout. Well, they're not right. It's the kind of response to address a problem before it spreads that the new world economy demands.

Failure to act could have grave consequences for Mexico, for Latin America, for the entire developing world. More important, our approach will safeguard hundreds of thousands of Americans whose livelihoods are now tied to Mexico's well-being. So it's the right thing to do for the rest of the world, but it's also the right thing to do for America.

The crisis in Mexico has helped to show us again just how much smaller our world has become and how our stake in what happens in other countries has dramatically increased. This is not just true for economic affairs but also for a whole range of other problems, like attacking the capital movements by drug cartels and organized crime, dealing seriously with the interconnection of global terrorisms or environmental policies that have regional impact or social policies that bear on the global population issue.

The challenge before us is to adapt our international institutions, to deepen the cooperation between nations so that we can confront a new generation of problems that know no national borders. Indeed, the job of constructing a new international economic architecture through our trade agreements and the revitalization of our institutions is, for our generation, as pressing and important as building the postwar system was to the generation of the Marshall plan and Bretton Woods, the heroic generation of Dean Acheson and Jean Monnet. Then, they had the immense job of proving that democracy and capitalism could provide for fulfilling and meaningful lives in the aftermath of war and in the face of the rival system of communism. Today, our job again is to persuade people that democracy and free markets can give all people the opportunity to live out their dreams, but we must do so without the prod of a rival political system to contend with or the fresh memory of war to spur us on.

Today, as never before, we can see the extraordinary possibilities that lie before us in the 21st century. It promises to be an era in which free people, working across open borders, will have a chance to create growing prosperity, economic security, to fulfill their God-given potential and their dreams as never before in human history. But it won't happen without hard work, real dedication, and clear vision.

I am glad to be speaking to this group at Davos because you are exactly the kind of people who must help make certain that the international system we build works fairly and safely. We must rise to the example of our predecessors. We must forge a system that will benefit the people of all walks of life and all parts of the globe, not just those for whom the global economy now holds the very richest opportunities.

We must do it because it's the right thing to do, because it's the fair thing to do, and because, ultimately, it is clearly in all of our best interests.

Thank you very much.

NOTE: The President spoke by satellite at 12:47 p.m. from Room 459 of the Old Executive Office Building to the meeting in Davos, Switzerland. In his remarks, he referred to Klaus Schwab, World Economic Forum founder; United Nations Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali; Falvio Cotti, Chief, Department of Foreign Affairs, Switzerland; and Prime Minister Ingvar Carlsson of Sweden.

William J. Clinton, Remarks to the World Economic Forum Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/node/222043

would expect them to do were promised to others.

Suppose a candidatewon who in order to win had promised peoples lives would get better in a way that reduced the profits of some corporations, thereby violating our promises -violating WTO rules. This could then be rolled back in a simple procedure. For example, what if a case was brought in the WTO accusing us of having created new financial services regulations after the standstil dte in 1998. Then a disput could be brought to determine the date of a piece of legislation. If the legislation was existing on February 26, 1998, then no problem, but if it was not it would be non-conforming and would have to be rolled back.

No matter how much people wanted it, its forbidden. Otherwise voters would be able to override the rules based system, say millkions of people were dying, it would be easy to get people to vote against it. What about the corporate rights, they would become meaningless.

Doi you understand what I mean. The US is all about giving corporations and investors CERTAINTY, Meaning forever rights and alsomaking policy into property. People here keep taking about votingas if iot does something, thats forbidden.

The creation of the WTO and a plethora of new laws in "agreements" like GATS that were voted on by countries, one country one vote, are hard to change.

which means the rules must be kept. If a President can just violate the rules at will because voters vote this and vote that, all the new corporate rights and property is endangered. Call it whatever you want thats over.

Otherwise the WTO would lose credibility and decades of hard work changing the world would have gone for naught.

would expect them to do were promised to others.

Suppose a candidate won who in order to win had promised peoples lives would get better in a way that reduced the profits of some corporations, thereby violating our promises -violating WTO rules. This could then be rolled back in a simple procedure. For example, what if a case was brought in the WTO accusing us of having created new financial services regulations after the standstil date in 1998. Then a disput could be brought to determine the date of a piece of FS legislation. If the legislation was existing on February 26, 1998, then no problem, it could exist, but if it was not it would be non-conforming and would have to be rolled back.

No matter how much people wanted it, its forbidden. Otherwise voters would be able to override the rules based system, say millions of poor people were dying because they could not get modern healthcare, , it would be easy to get people to vote against it. So what would happen, it would be violated by voters. What about the corporate rights, they would become meaningless! What about profits, they might shrink, or worse, vanish. Turn iinto losses. Never forget, in the USA, profit is job number one. Corporations are not eleemosynary iinstitutions! Charity is the job of philantropism or government, but GATS forbids that if it competes with any business. People are on their own.

Doi you understand what I mean. The US is all about giving corporations and investors CERTAINTY, Meaning forever rights and also making policy into property. People here keep taking about voting as if it does things it cannot unless the treaty allows, and it would require 163 countries votes to change the General Rules of GATS.

The creation of the WTO and a plethora of new laws in "agreements" like GATS that were voted on by countries, one country one vote, are hard to change.

which means the rules must be kept. If a President can just violate the rules at will because voters vote this and vote that, all the new corporate rights and property is endangered. Call it whatever you want thats over.

Otherwise the WTO would lose credibility and decades of hard work changing the world would have gone for naught.