Former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich injected “realism” into his debate with CNN’s Jeffrey Lord over the implications of Trump’s “America First” policy, even as the conservative contributor used a bizarre story about women’s garments to illustrate his problem with trade agreements.
On Monday, Trump delivered on a much-hyped campaign promise to withdraw from the Trans Pacific Partnership, a trade deal designed to deepen economic ties among nations bordering the Pacific Ocean. Discussing the decision on CNN’s Anderson Cooper 360, Reich said his issue with Trump’s withdrawal extends beyond the president’s isolationist tendencies.
“It’s not just isolationism,” Reich told Cooper and Lord. “It’s Donald Trump’s assumption that the world is basically a zero sum game, in which we win only to the extent that someone else loses.”
Arguing this is emblematic of “Donald Trump’s approach to life in general,” Reich said, “that’s not the way the world economy functions—it’s not the way that world politics functions.”
Reich argued Trump’s “America First” platform “assumes that we do not depend on the prosperity of other nations in the world;” he called that “a very, very dangerous proposition.”
Lord countered that Reich was “misrepresenting” Trump’s “America First” policy, and insisted since some of Trump’s former rivals—including Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Hillary Clinton—are “on the same page” as the president with regards to the TPP, “that’s Kumbaya.”
Reich explained that political alliances and agreements are largely a “win-win situation” for everybody, again charging that Trump’s “American First” slogan is dangerous. The former labor secretary said he’s spoken to European officials who are “confused, rattled and upset” by Trump’s rhetoric.
Reich argued if Trump was “really serious” about supporting workers, he would “come out slugging in favor of labor unions” and back pro-worker legislation including former President Barack Obama’s overtime rule and minimum wage increases.
Lord then launched into a “local example” about the impact of trade agreements. He said his “dry cleaner complains” to him “at length about NAFTA” and the minimum wage, arguing such policies work “great in academia, they are great in theory, but at the local level, in fact, they’re just not working.”
Lord said his dry cleaner complains to him about being “asked to clean ladies garments.”
“They bleed, which costs him money because he has to pay for the garment,” Lord said. “The reason they bleed is because they don’t come into this country with the same standards, because of NAFTA. That’s part of the problem here.”
Reich jumped in, returning the conversation to its original theme.
“Can I just add a note of realism here,” Reich asked. “We’re really talking about … the real disconnect here, is that corporate profits continue to rise, they’ve been rising now for 15 years overall, CEO pay is now 300 times the pay of the average worker. That’s the real disconnect. Most people in this country have not had a raise in 30 years.”
Reich said the problem is multifaceted, and includes major components like globalization, poor access to education and a “silly” healthcare system
“There’s a fundamental problem with regard to the allocation of power in this society,” Reich said, suggesting Trump’s TPP withdrawal could serve as a “smokescreen” for what the GOP really hopes to achieve.
Still, Reich insisted, if Trump manages to create more better jobs, he will “absolutely” give credit to the president.
Watch the video below, via CNN:
(Correction: A previous version of this story incorrectly stated that Jeffrey Lord blamed NAFTA for women menstruating.)
Donald Trump sounds like a complete lunatic because he’s isolated himself in a far-right media bubble
Welcome to another edition of What Fresh Hell?, Raw Story’s roundup of news items that might have become controversies under another regime, but got buried – or were at least under-appreciated – due to the daily firehose of political pratfalls, unhinged tweet storms and other sundry embarrassments coming out of the current White House.
If you have an older relative who spends way too much time stewing in the conservative media, you may have experienced a moment when you not only disagreed with him, but you realized that you had no earthly clue what he was going on about. Perhaps it was when he started talking about the UN plot to eliminate golf courses and replace paved roads with bicycle paths. Maybe he stopped you in your tracks with a discourse on why flies were attracted to Barack Obama, or complained about the government insisting on referring to Christians as "Easter-worshippers" or expressed outrage over 9/11 hijackers being given leniency by Muslim jurists.
Trump’s claim impeachment ‘nullifies’ 2016 election blown up in new House Judiciary Committee report
On Saturday, the House Judiciary Committee released their report outlining the offenses committed by President Donald Trump, and the legal framework for impeachment — which clears the way for Congress to write and approve articles of impeachment against him.
One of the key issues examined by the report is the claim, repeatedly made by the president and his supporters, that impeachment would "nullify" the 2016 presidential election and the popular will — which is already a weak claim given that Trump never won the popular vote, and that impeaching Trump would still install Mike Pence as president. But the report more broadly rejects the entire claim that an election result immunizes a president from punishment for official misconduct.
READ IT: House Judiciary Committee releases report defining Trump impeachable offenses
On Saturday, the House Judiciary Committee released a report outlining the impeachable acts committed by President Donald Trump.
"Our President holds the ultimate public trust," said the report, titled "Constitutional Grounds for Presidential Impeachment," in its introduction. "A President faithful only to himself—who will sell out democracy and national security for his own personal advantage—is a danger to every American. Indeed, he threatens America itself."
The report clarifies the procedures for impeachment, analyzes whether president can be "impeached for abuse of executive powers," and "whether it is preferable to await the next election when a President has sought to corrupt that very same election."