Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Correcting 3 Lies about the Port Deal (Vanity)
Febuary 23, 2006

Posted on 02/22/2006 4:34:50 PM PST by johnmecainrino

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-127 next last
To: jampoisie

My My My....just WHAT will the ARABS being DOING on our ports? Get back to me on that would ya!?


21 posted on 02/22/2006 4:59:35 PM PST by goodnesswins (Too many idiots....so little time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: jampoisie
We don't want Arabs doing our ports! NoWAY!!

You signed up today to post a silly rah-rah like that?

22 posted on 02/22/2006 4:59:43 PM PST by arasina (So there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Darlan
You may start your research here:

http://www.treasury.gov/offices/international-affairs/exon-florio/

Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States (CFIUS)

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY

OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT

EXON-FLORIO PROVISION

23 posted on 02/22/2006 5:00:08 PM PST by Lecie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Crim; DumpsterDiver

Code of Federal Regulations Citation. Office of International Investment, Department of Treasury -- Regulations pertaining to mergers, acquisitions, and takeovers by foreign persons, 31 CFR Part 800.

A good article to start with:
http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Story.aspx?guid=%7B0317AEEE%2D47AF%2D42BD%2DBEFF%2D260274800569%7D&siteid=google&keyword=

http://www.treasury.gov/offices/international-affairs/exon-florio/


24 posted on 02/22/2006 5:01:20 PM PST by mrsmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: johnmecainrino
You may be correct in your assertions, I still have a fundamental problem giving ANY Arab government that kind of temptation.

FWIW Bush's energy in this can only mean one thing to me - he made some kind of deal. Who for or what I don't know yet but we will find out someday.

25 posted on 02/22/2006 5:01:44 PM PST by mad_as_he$$ (Never corner anything meaner than you. NSDQ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend

Yea didn't he represent the district with two major harbors in it?


26 posted on 02/22/2006 5:02:22 PM PST by mad_as_he$$ (Never corner anything meaner than you. NSDQ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Hound of the Baskervilles

Thank God I am convinced the voice of reason comes out here on FR at night. Another Thing

YEs I know the UAE Doesn't recognize Israel. True. buttttt
How come when China has about 40,000 missiles aimed at Tawain and gets into a hissy fit when we say boo to Tawain that we can trade with them have them operate business etc. I am just curious about that factoid. Where is all the outrage. LOrd they kept our servicemen basically hostage for a few days in Bush's first year. This company even does business with the joooos and the Good ole Emir knows about it and doesnt have a problem.


27 posted on 02/22/2006 5:05:35 PM PST by bayourant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: mrsmith

Thank you for those links.


28 posted on 02/22/2006 5:06:46 PM PST by DumpsterDiver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: bad company

Lying is still lying.


29 posted on 02/22/2006 5:06:51 PM PST by cripplecreek (Never a minigun handy when you need one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: goodnesswins

Oh yes the scary arabs of UAE. LEt me give you a clue. Making money thats what.


30 posted on 02/22/2006 5:07:12 PM PST by bayourant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: johnmecainrino

>>>Congress didn't know because it is a federal crime to talk about the specifics of the deal. Again congress mandated it be secret and now they are screaming how bush didn't inform them.

>>>Based on the law congress passed in 1988 Bush couldn't have reversed the deal after it was approved by this committee.

Does this mean Clinton had nothing to do with the Chinese ports?


31 posted on 02/22/2006 5:08:47 PM PST by Calpernia (Breederville.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johnmecainrino
I agree. I've yet to see the Administration apply and follow an understandable KISS rule for this story. Keep It Simple, Stupid. That's why its on the defensive here.

(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")

32 posted on 02/22/2006 5:08:53 PM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johnmecainrino

I have to admit, the more I learn about this, the less I oppose it. Whether I oppose it or not, though, I just can't imagine the problems we'd have if we back out now. Like it or not, I think we must go through with it.


33 posted on 02/22/2006 5:11:36 PM PST by MizSterious (Anonymous sources often means "the voices in my head told me.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mad_as_he$$
"FWIW Bush's energy in this can only mean one thing to me - he made some kind of deal. Who for or what I don't know yet but we will find out someday."

Oh God, spare us please!! Paranoia, puffery and panic are running amuck here.

Calm youself.

THINK.

Hillary is pandering to your foolish panic right now on TV.

THINK!

34 posted on 02/22/2006 5:13:22 PM PST by Hound of the Baskervilles (Liberals are unfit for citizenship in a country that values freedom and courage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: bayourant

Free trade is good. Make business not war.


35 posted on 02/22/2006 5:15:07 PM PST by Hound of the Baskervilles (Liberals are unfit for citizenship in a country that values freedom and courage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: arasina
You signed up today to post a silly rah-rah like that?

Oh, no; there's much more; take a look at its posts!

36 posted on 02/22/2006 5:18:40 PM PST by Howlin ("Quick, he's bleeding! Is there a <strike>doctor</strike> reporter in the house?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: johnmecainrino
It's a done deal.Best we can do now is learn more about it.Posts like yours are helpful.Thanks.
37 posted on 02/22/2006 5:19:43 PM PST by smoothsailing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lecie; Darlan; johnmecainrino
To add to your post:

From an October article about the Senate hearings on CFIUS The Hill News

Bruce Josten, the Chamber’s top lobbyist, objected to the many suggested alterations, including the removal of CFIUS from Treasury’s purview and a proposed amendment by Shelby and Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) that would allow Congress to reject CFIUS approvals. “It would be a politicization of the process by individual members of Congress who are not going to look at the entirety of the impacts on U.S. capital markets,” Josten said.

Can't find any reference stating that the amendment was passed.

This paper provides insight into the CFIUS process:

PDF File Page 8

CFIUS is an interagency body staffed by midlevel officials and chaired by the Treasury Department. The Departments of Defense, State, Justice, and Commerce are among the agencies that participate in the CFIUS process. Representatives from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) and the intelligence community are also involved, sometimes in an advisory capacity. President Bush made the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) a member of CFIUS in February 2003.

Further down on the same page:

Most foreign purchasers are not required to file with CFIUS, but if they do not and CFIUS later decides that it objects to the purchase, the United States can force the new foreign owner to divest itself of the acquisition. Many companies decide it is safer to notify theTreasury Department.

38 posted on 02/22/2006 5:20:12 PM PST by Freedom is eternally right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: MizSterious
For crying out loud, the only thing these people are going to do about the port operations is push paper and collect money the ports will still be under US control.Everyone thats working there now will stay working there
39 posted on 02/22/2006 5:20:20 PM PST by snowman1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Hound of the Baskervilles
Oh God, spare us please!! Paranoia, puffery and panic are running amuck here.

I actually saw somebody say that Bush has lost his mind -- and mean it.

40 posted on 02/22/2006 5:21:36 PM PST by Howlin ("Quick, he's bleeding! Is there a <strike>doctor</strike> reporter in the house?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-127 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson