A speech as deliberate and unambiguous as you will ever hear

Necessary too.

This is the brief story that comes with the corroborating video above: A Powerful Message – President Trump Delivers Remarks in Beijing’s Great Hall…. PDT commences at the ten minute mark and he does not mince words.

President Trump and President Xi delivered remarks to the international audience in The Great Hall in Beijing China, and suddenly the word “remarks” seems inappropriate.

President Xi Jinping delivered the customary speech, albeit with nuance specific to the guest and audience, with a carefully worded assembly familiar to almost anyone who has read speeches and messaging approved by Beijing. As customary within the cunning assembly of those words; the state media apparatus then tells the consuming audience what they mean. Or at least that’s the familiar pattern.

However, then came Trump…

President Trump followed President Xi’s remarks with a speech as deliberate and unambiguous as the internal audience would ever fathom hearing. President Trump respectfully pulled no punches in his direct and emphatic style; stating that China needed to engage in, well, to use China’s familiar wording, “correct thinking” on a variety of issues – including trade and their necessary responsibility toward North Korea.

No-one else could pull this off, except Trump. Not that way. The best part is always the emphatic part at the end. President Trump gives the look saying: well, that’s that then; that’s all I’ve got to say about that… smiles bigly, and the diplomatic opponent tries not to look smaller than they were ten minutes earlier.

Not that we should neglect any of this either:

TRUMP DELIVERS: 37 major deals US firms signed with Chinese entities during visit…

Declares New World-Trade Order…

And then this, the President’s granddaughter singing in Mandarin 特朗普外孙女唱中文歌

Neither the first bit nor the second would have been brought to you aside from here at the far corner of the web. They see no version of sense other than their own and when their designated enemies help make the world a better and safer place, they have no response other than to shut their ears and bay at the moon.

This entry was posted in American politics, International. Bookmark the permalink.

47 Responses to A speech as deliberate and unambiguous as you will ever hear

  1. C.L.

    Easily the most flawless and substantive presidential visit to China in history.

  2. Infidel Tiger

    He’s very good at charming the orientals.

    Property developers usually are.

    Well played, Donny.

  3. C.L.

    Trump’s granddaughter’s proficiency has astounded the Chinese themselves.

    Remember when local leftists proudly boasted about Kevin Rudd’s Chinese language skills?

    Here he is trying to read a a few simple remarks in that language:

  4. OneWorldGovernment

    Steve,

    It absolutely staggers me that the f*ckhead politicians of Australia and the Western World in general cannot see what this President is actually doing.

  5. Mark A

    OneWorldGovernment
    #2549416, posted on November 11, 2017 at 2:25 am

    Steve,

    It absolutely staggers me that the f*ckhead politicians of Australia and the Western World in general cannot see what this President is actually doing.

    Oh they see it alright, that’s why they don’t like him.

  6. OneWorldGovernment

    Mark A

    Did you get a chance to watch or read the transcript of Trump’s speech at the APEC conference in Vietnam?

    That was definitely opening the world up.

  7. Crossie

    I thought during last year’s presidential campaign that he would be good for the US if he won. Once in office his ego would not permit him to fail, he would want the US to succeed and improve as an ultimate proof of his success.

    That’s why I don’t think Obama had any sort of plan for his time in office. His main goal was to be elected, to be the president, he expected everyone else to do the rest. To me this says Obama was a far greater egotist than Trump.

  8. cohenite

    I must say I was moved by Trump’s grand daughter. This is a magnificent family and Trump is astounding.

    The real lesson is the msm, the academics and the entrenched elites who have sold out the West. I’m not sure if we can deal with them in Australia.

  9. meher baba

    Sorry not to share the love, but I listed to Trump’s speech to APEC on ABC News Radio last night and it put me in a very down mood. Trump seemed to be promising to walk away from the USA’s longstanding support for global free trade and replace it with a sort of schoolyard tit for tat approach to trade deals across Asia and Pacific.

    No doubt we will now see bilateral trade deals where the likes of China and Japan will have to agree to buy overpriced, low quality US automobilies in order to preserve a handful of jobs for overpaid, unproductive factory workers in Pendulous Boil, Ohio or Beaver’s Hole, Wisconsin or some such.

    As I was listening to the speech, I was sensing a certain commonality in the world views of Trump and Sally McManus.

  10. OneWorldGovernment

    meher baba
    #2549495, posted on November 11, 2017 at 8:23 am

    Well how about actually reading the transcript and then come back.

    As it stands you are just another Trump baba basher.

  11. DJT conducts a Master Class in forthright, honest Presidential behaviour.
    The corrupt and disgusting Left cannot stand it.

  12. entropy

    I was wondering if we could negotiate fair trade for Australian sugar into the US using Trump’s arguments. How do you reckon it would go?

    Then I remembered it would be DFAT, Bishop and Martin Trumble doing the negotiating.

  13. meher baba

    “As it stands you are just another Trump baba basher.”

    I’m not a Trump basher at all, I’m just an old-fashioned economic dry. And Trump is an even more old-fashioned protectionist.

  14. NB

    I cannot wait to see the miserly and faint acknowledgements when Nth Korea denuclearises. Can you imagine the trumpet fanfares if Obama or Clinton had done it? Will it be page 3? Will we ever hear about Nth Korea again?
    Break out the popcorn and watch as the msm blows itself up.
    Ohhhhh, and the ABC. How it will hurt them! I am delightfully reminded of Major Kong at the end of Dr Strangelove.

  15. cohenite

    As I was listening to the speech, I was sensing a certain commonality in the world views of Trump and Sally McManus.

    That’s ridiculous; for a start Trump is much better looking than Mr McManus.

  16. struth

    The left see anything but capitulation to socialism as protectionist.
    Not bending over and taking it anymore, and requiring a fair game is not protectionist.

    Understanding global trade has nothing to do with opening your borders to invasion, is not protectionist.

    Trump has not done one thing that is protectionist.

    He’s just straightening up the U.S. and pulling it’s pants back up.
    It is not protectionist to demand better from the protected.

  17. bobby b

    ” . . . overpaid, unproductive factory workers in Pendulous Boil, Ohio or Beaver’s Hole, Wisconsin or some such.”

    Damn, you’re a pretentious ass. I bet you know all about fine wines, though.

  18. marcus classis

    No doubt we will now see bilateral trade deals where the likes of China and Japan will have to agree to buy overpriced, low quality US automobilies in order to preserve a handful of jobs for overpaid, unproductive factory workers in Pendulous Boil, Ohio or Beaver’s Hole, Wisconsin or some such

    Nope. Not patronising at all.

  19. meher baba

    “The left see anything but capitulation to socialism as protectionist.
    Not bending over and taking it anymore, and requiring a fair game is not protectionist.”

    The left in the western world, allied with rent-seeking businessmen, have long argued for trade barriers to protect uncompetitive industries. Their excuse has always been that free trade doesn’t work because the other side doesn’t play fair.

    Obviously many countries play dirty pool in this regard including the US (as any Australian business that has ever tried to sell something to the US Government will tell you). But the answer is certainly not to tear up the rule book. If the US now moves to block imports, the world economy in general will suffer and the US economy will not be exempt from this.

  20. meher baba

    “Damn, you’re a pretentious ass. I bet you know all about fine wines, though.”

    Sure do. And fine dining. I strive to have lots of money and live well: that’s why I’m on the political right.

  21. meher baba

    PS: re North American place names. These ones are real.

    Embarrass Minnesota
    Hell Michigan
    Intercourse Pennsylvania
    Kickapoo Kansas
    Pee Pee Ohio

    and there are many more. Oh, and a Canadian one for Justin Trudeau: Dildo, Newfoundland

  22. Rafe Champion

    My Chinese friend showed me the poetry reading when it was hot off the press, I suspect it got more circulation in the Chinese media than in the west.
    I forget the words but some of it was probably the poetry that my friend had to sing in school every day during the Cultural Revolution:)

  23. egg_

    No doubt we will now see bilateral trade deals where the likes of China and Japan will have to agree to buy overpriced, low quality US automobilies in order to preserve a handful of jobs for overpaid, unproductive factory workers in Pendulous Boil, Ohio or Beaver’s Hole, Wisconsin or some such

    You won’t find better performance cars globally for the dollar than the current Camaro* and Mustang.
    Sure, if you want a “white goods” car, Asia does it best – volume; VW going downmarket to meet the Asians’ volume now has quality issues.

    *Based on the Australian Monaro Global Zeta platform.

  24. meher baba
    #2549495, posted on November 11, 2017 at 8:23 am

    Sorry not to share the love, but I listed to Trump’s speech to APEC on ABC News Radio last night and it put me in a very down mood. Trump seemed to be promising to walk away from the USA’s longstanding support for global free trade and replace it with a sort of schoolyard tit for tat approach to trade deals across Asia and Pacific.

    No doubt we will now see bilateral trade deals where the likes of China and Japan will have to agree to buy overpriced, low quality US automobilies in order to preserve a handful of jobs for overpaid, unproductive factory workers in Pendulous Boil, Ohio or Beaver’s Hole, Wisconsin or some such.

    Trump is not and has not been a protectionist. He has articulated his position on trade for over 25 years, there are youtube videos aplenty for you to watch.
    Trump is one of the very few politicians who understand that what we’ve been sold as free trade is not free at all.
    All…but all of these deals such as NAFTA come with hundreds if not thousands of pages of rules and regulations. THOUSANDS OF PAGES.
    These deals are designed to protect global entities and bar local competitors. Trump understands this and is calling for FAIR TRADE. (e.g don’t artificially keep your currency low to make your goods cheap by comparison)

    Furthermore, your claim that China and Japan will buy overpriced goods from the US is nonsensical. It is the Chinese and Japanese CONSUMERS who do the buying. Do you buy overpriced crap just because it has been allowed into the market? No, neither do they.

  25. max

    Let’s put trade deficits into historical perspective. If trade deficits were something for a president to fret about, every U.S. president from 1790 to today ought to have been fretting. For most of our history, we have had current account deficits (http://tinyurl.com/jczqrhu). I should say every president except Herbert Hoover and Franklin D. Roosevelt, whose administrations ushered in the Great Depression. Nine out of the 10 years of the economic downturn of the 1930s, our nation had a current account trade surplus. Should we reproduce the economic policies of that era and re-create the “wonderful” trade surplus?

    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2017/05/walter-e-williams/the-us-is-protectionist/

  26. Kneel

    “…is calling for FAIR TRADE.”

    Yep, that’s all most people want.

    If I and my employer have no choice but to provide me with workers compensation insurance, sick leave, holidays, appropriate safety gear and a safe work environment, unfair dismissal laws, environmental regulations etc etc – things I cannot negotiate away even if I want to, yet my competitor in another country can arrange not to be burdened with the exact same things, then I am at a competitive disadvantage from the get-go.
    If you believe that the sort of things listed above should remain as compulsory, then any entity wishing to sell goods made overseas should be required to show they also meet comparable standards and if they cannot do so, pay the estimated cost as an additional tax. This would not be a distortion of the market, it would be “leveling the playing field” – the distortion is actually the stuff you want to keep compulsory for me, but not for others.

  27. mh

    Malcolm links to the ABC.

    * groan *

  28. MPH

    I’d call Trump a trade equalist – and note that there haven’t been any changes to US import rules without prior warning and opportunity to negotiate given to the counter-party. If you don’t negotiate a mutually beneficial deal then you lose. Shows you how much of a paper tiger the US has been under every president since I don’t know when, that people are surprised to experience consequences for their selfish actions.

  29. max

    I am not unsympathetic to the Trump Movement as I too am a populist.  That said, Trump is wrong about trade.  Trump is the latest and loudest to tap into a nearly ineradicable strain of economic fallacy known as protectionism.  Protectionism is, as Albert Jay Nock accurately stated, “the robbery of the domestic consumer by the domestic manufacturer.”  The protectionist wants to use state violence to prevent people from making deals with manufacturers and retailers from outside the United States who sell products that are cheaper and/or better than those produced domestically.

    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/08/james-ostrowski/trump-wrong-trade/

  30. max

    Now the absurd and counterproductive China bashing and raw protectionism of Trump, Navarro and some others on the Trump team should be roundly condemned. However, there are two good things about old-fashioned protectionists. First, their naïve fallacies are easy to refute and, second — and maybe more important — they tend to be anti-globalists who reject phony multilateral “free trade” deals. These deals are opaquely crafted by design, run to thousands of pages, and mainly benefit US politicians and bureaucrats and their allied bankers and crony capitalists. And, indeed, Navarro and Trump passionately oppose the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement, NAFTA, CAFTA, and the South Korean Free Trade Agreement.
    Now, simple unilateral free trade — legally guaranteeing the right of domestic residents to freely trade with a resident of any foreign nation regardless of its trade regime — is always the ideal policy for a nation from the point of view of justice and prosperity.
    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/09/joseph-salerno/grading-trumps-economic-policy/

  31. DM OF WA

    Reminder to all you so-called free traders droning on about Trump’s protectionist trade policies and moaning about how inefficient Western workers being subsidized at your expense: the most significant barriers to international trade are non-tariff trade barriers. These barriers include outright exclusion of foreigners entering protected industries, which in the PRC includes most industries; laws which effectively force foreigners to hand over their intellectual property; state use of fear and coersion as well as more subtle social pressure to force purchase of local instead of foreign goods and services. These difficulties are most severe in China but exist to some degree in all the big Asian states and the EU. It is a travesty that the PRC is allowed to be a member of the WTO.

  32. Irreversible

    Can I merely mention that the Trump-lovers here do not seem to twig to the fact that Trump has adopted the China position. The US has been for decades an advocate of open trade. Of course that mostly has been because the US has been a major beneficiary. Trump rhetoric is purely about promoting the idea that jobs lost can be recovered. Much like the idea that buggy whip makers will be in vogue again.
    Very many US jobs are tied to supply lines that take in foreign suppliers. By telling China he’d do what they have done and by stepping back from free trade and negotiated reduction in trade barriers Trump gifts an authoritarian Chinese leadership with a perfect baton.
    The man is a hazard and a fake.

  33. DM OF WA

    I meant coercion but wrote “coersion”!

    Also, there is no such thing as international free trade. It simply does not exist and it cannot exist in a world of competing nation states. Put simply: politics trumps economics.

    It is absurd to give freely huge economic advantages to China, and others, without a quid pro quo.
    China’s access to Western economies must be denied until they reform.

  34. dangermouse

    Sing song diplomacy

  35. Kneel

    “By telling China he’d do what they have done and by stepping back from free trade and negotiated reduction in trade barriers Trump gifts an authoritarian Chinese leadership with a perfect baton.”

    Does this – from Trump’s APEC speech – sound like protectionism to you?

    “…we will, from now on, expect that our partners will faithfully follow the rules just like we do. We expect that markets will be open to an equal degree on both sides, and that private industry, not government planners, will direct investment.

    Unfortunately, for too long and in too many places, the opposite has happened. For many years, the United States systematically opened our economy with few conditions. We lowered or ended tariffs, reduced trade barriers, and allowed foreign goods to flow freely into our country.

    But while we lowered market barriers, other countries didn’t open their markets to us.”

    If “protectionism” is ensuring that both sides play by the same, negotiated, rules, I say “bring it on!” Start small, let both sides see the benefits, and they’ll move towards full free trade in an orderly, fair and negotiated process – or not – of their own free will.

  36. meher baba

    “Unfortunately, for too long and in too many places, the opposite has happened. For many years, the United States systematically opened our economy with few conditions. We lowered or ended tariffs, reduced trade barriers, and allowed foreign goods to flow freely into our country.”

    This is a complete overstatement of the extent to which the US has embraced free trade: for example, as I posted earlier, it has long been (and remains) all but impossible for a foreign company to sell goods or services to the US Government.

    However, in recent decades the US has been better than many other nations. No longer, it would seem.

  37. Zatara

    it has long been (and remains) all but impossible for a foreign company to sell goods or services to the US Government

    McDonnell Douglas / British Aerospace T-45 ‘Goshawk’

    McDonnell Douglas / British Aerospace, Boeing / BAE Systems Harrier

    Austal designed and built US Navy Independence class littoral combat ship

    I’m up against the link limit but you get the idea. The US government also buys a massive amount of goods and services to support their bases overseas and their naval forces afloat.

  38. egg_

    Reminder to all you so-called free traders droning on about Trump’s protectionist trade policies and moaning about how inefficient Western workers being subsidized at your expense*: the most significant barriers to international trade are non-tariff trade barriers. These barriers include outright exclusion of foreigners entering protected industries, which in the PRC** includes most industries; laws which effectively force foreigners to hand over their intellectual property;

    *Oh, of course, the self-interest angle – too bad that car makers actually do trickle down internally (the Camry gifted the Celica engine back the 80s) or you’d all be driving cars indifferent to Ladas.

    **The tards also omit the fact that China has flooded its internal markets with clones of Western products from smart phones to Industrial/mining machinery, due to stolen Western IP.

  39. michaelc58

    Free Trade,
    Clean Energy,
    Social Justice,
    Marriage Equality.
    They all sound so nice.
    But mean the opposite.
    George Orwell would be proud.

  40. max

    Kneel
    #2549770, posted on November 11, 2017 at 12:57 pm

    “…is calling for FAIR TRADE.”

    Yep, that’s all most people want.
    “leveling the playing field”

    Interesting, you understand who is screwing us and your solution is to screw us more to protect your job/business in the name of fairness. fairness for yourself not us.

    Free trade is fair trade.

  41. max

    One of the unappreciated benefits of international trade is that it helps reveal the cost of domestic policy. For example, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration can impose high costs on American companies, but it has no jurisdiction elsewhere. Our Environmental Protection Agency can impose costly regulations on American companies, but it has no power to impose costly regulations on companies in other countries. Congress can impose costly tax burdens on American companies, but it has no power to do so abroad. Restrictions on international trade conceal these costs.

    By the way, all trade is fair in the eyes of the parties trading, or else they would not trade. It’s third parties who seek to interfere.

    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2017/01/walter-e-williams/free-trade-3/

  42. max

    Since “fair” is one of those words that can mean virtually anything to anybody, what this amounts to is that politicians can pile on whatever restrictions they want, in the name of fairness, and still claim to be for “free trade.” Clever.
    We will all have to pay a cost for political restrictions and political cleverness, since there is no free lunch. In fact, free lunches are a big part of the reason for once-prosperous regions declining into rust belts.
    When the American automobile industry was the world’s leader in its field, many people seemed to think that labor unions could transfer a bigger chunk of that prosperity to its members without causing economic repercussions.

    Toyota, Honda, and others who took away more and more of the Big Three automakers’ market share, leading to huge job losses in Detroit, proved once again the old trite saying that there is no free lunch.
    Like the United Automobile Workers union in its heyday, unions in the steel industry and other industries piled on costs, not only in wage rates having little relationship to supply and demand, but in all sorts of red tape work rules that added costs.
    State and local governments in what later became the rust belt also thought that they too could treat the industries under their jurisdiction as prey rather than assets, and siphon off more of the wealth created by those industries into state and local treasuries with ever higher taxes — again, without considering repercussions.
    In the short run, you can get away with all sorts of things. But, in the long run, the chickens come home to roost. The rust belt is where those rising costs have come home to roost.
    While American auto makers are laying off workers by the thousands, Japanese auto makers like Toyota and Honda are hiring thousands of American workers. But they are not hiring them in the rust belts.

    By Thomas Sowell

  43. max

    What about the argument that American producers are undercut by cheap goods imported from low-wage countries like China? Whose fault is this? The answer is easy.

    If American consumers refused to buy goods produced in China, there would be no Chinese-made goods on store shelves. American consumers who prefer lower prices to higher prices are the true enemy of American companies and their unions whining about “free but fair trade.”
    They should show up in front of Walmart and other sellers of foreign products and denounce American consumers who buy foreign-made products. That would be honest.
    The “free trade but fair trade” lobby finds it more effective to pursue their agenda by stealth — namely intimidate and bribe congressmen into enacting tariffs and quotas
    by Walter Williams

  44. Malcolm

    The speech was accidentally and ambiguous

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *