Discussion: US, Mexico Statements Differ On Public Statements About Wall

TPM Article Topics
#21

Cheeto Benito is already overseeing the construction:

7 Likes
#22

Not even close.

1 Like
#23

“The presidents also agreed at this point not to speak publicly about this controversial issue.”

Supreme irony.

Peña Nieto roped Trump into a non-disclosure agreement.

35 Likes
#24

Good to see the word “snafu” here.

Unpack it to its original elements, and it works for pretty much everything he does.

Situation Normal – All Fucked Up.

11 Likes
#25

Whether or not to make public statements about payment probably was very important to Mexico, because every time Trump does one of his “who’s going to pay for the wall?” pleas for applause it is a slap in Mexico’s face. It’s disrespectful, particularly given Mexico’s public statements that it will not pay. But the Trumpers know that whatever Trump promised to Pena Nieto, Trump wont be able to keep from going back to his old applause lines.

In diplomacy or business, if you issue a joint statement, you had better be damn sure all parties have signed off on it.

9 Likes
#26

MSNBC keeps running a clip of Paul Ryan, when Greta asked him about paying for Trump’s boondoggle, saying he wants to shift the taxes we pay on exports to taxing imports.

We don’t tax exports.

21 Likes
#27

“Trump diplomacy” is an oxymoron.

8 Likes
#28

I think we can all agree that regardless of what any president says, the wall, should one be built, will be funded by American taxpayers.

4 Likes
#29

It’s hard to tell from the first tweet because the marchers congregate at the Washington monument not on the mall. You can see the crowd towards the monument but it’s very far away. That said, it’s not a very big March. Their permit is for 50,000 people. And metro said ridership was normal for Friday.

6 Likes
#30

Which he violated five seconds later.

13 Likes
#31

It’s not the content, it’s the “joint statement” label on something that isn’t a joint statement. Like:

old_curmudgeon and I agree that the difference between the statements doesn’t sound very important, but it demonstrates a serious breach of diplomacy.

2 Likes
#32

Hilarious


Just needed to photoshop in some sombreros


4 Likes
#33

Per Article 1 Section 9 of the constitution

No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.
6 Likes
#34
2 Likes
#35

TPM published the following, 7th paragraph, 2nd line, “Walters also declined to comment when asked to confirmed that the statement issued by the White House was in fact a joint statement from the two countries.”

Should it read, "Walters also declined to comment when asked to confirm that the statement issued by the White House was in fact a joint statement from the two countries.

#36

Still no tax returns


8 Likes
#37

They keep rolling the clip of him telling Greta that and she’s like “Oh, that’s smart!”

Total nonsense unless he’s talking about taxing repatriated profits in which case it’s also total nonsense.

7 Likes
#38

Who doesn’t?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/01/27/president-trump-says-of-obama-whose-legitimacy-he-questioned-for-years-i-think-he-likes-me/?utm_term=.49752a2c8088

8 Likes
#39

This has been driving me crazy since Spicer first said it. Another idiotic line that sounds so clever to their cult of a base – “Why would we do something so stupid as tax our own exports? Stupid Obama!” – that’s complete bs. O, for a better-informed “mainstream media”


7 Likes
#40

Luv me some TPM, but you’ll wear yourself out if you comment on every typo, editorial error, and lack of proofreading here.

I wince or scream and keep on reading

6 Likes
Comments are now Members-Only
Join the discussion Free options available