🧵on U.S. dispute w/ Canada: It seems there are several under radar conflicts w/ Canada public is unaware of, i.e., fentanyl, limits U.S. banks, or issue I'm currently digging into, Boundary Waters Treaty, which governs how U.S. & Canada share waters along its 5,500 border. 1/
2/ That is both longest border shared by two countries in world, but 45% of border is water. The BWT created International Joint Commission which is charged w/ resolving or preventing conflict b/w U.S. & Canada re shared water.
3/ One huge success since adoption of BWT is vast imp. in water quality of Great Lakes. But in areas w/ shared borders, where water flows into CA, U.S. taxpayers pay cost. But where CA water flows to U.S., CA won't abide by BWT or pay $ to protect U.S. from population from CA.
4/ Here in MI, for instance, Enbridge’s Pipeline #5, crosses under Mackinac Straits. Pipeline carries heavy crude oil from Canada’s western provinces through MI & back, where processed into saleable products. So MI takes risk of leak, but CA gets majority of economic benefit.
5/ Similar issues in Southeast Alaska and British Columbia boundary where salmon rivers flow from Canadian Rockies into Alaska. Canada approving new mines in Canadian rivers, but risk from mining flows to U.S.
6/6 In short, many issues are "under the surface," literally between U.S. and Canada "fight." Still educating myself on other issues, but the more I learn the more I realize this isn't just a love of tariffs.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
THREADETTE: Today's @SpecialReport w/ @BretBaier included interview of Canada's UN Ambassador Bob Rae. While Rae claimed tariff was only harmful, Bret countered administration saw "movement today with Mexico and Canada promising a lot that they weren't promising before.” 1/
2/ "Not true," Rae responded claiming Trudeau had already committed to those expenditures. Now, it wouldn't surprise me if Trump had already gotten some of those same commitments, I did some searching and couldn't find the supposed announcements Rae noted.
3/ So crowd-sourcing: What had Trudeau already committed to versus what was announced? Either way, Rae was unwise to contradict Trudeau & Trump's message of working together to solve problem, since there is still much to resolve.
🚨🚨🚨BREAKING: D.C. District Court issues TRO barring freeze of grants, again with crazy reasoning that OMB Directive in effect, remains in effect. 1/
2/ WHILE judge is correct voluntary cessation is an exception to mootness, the problem here is that there is no basis to say Trump will enact same broad policy and in fact, freeze is based on EO--so those should have been the issue for Court.
3/ The Court ignores it was the EO's which prompted freezes and that no challenge was made in complaint to EO.
3/ This introductory paragraph exposes the Court's activism: A Court doesn't issue a TRO based on undefined "pauses" where complaint was specific--it challenged OMB Directive which is no more.
🚨🚨🚨BREAKING: Trump Administration files Motion to Dismiss lawsuit filed in D.C. District Court seeking a TRO of spending freezes. 1/
2/ This earlier 🧵provides background to this lawsuit (brought by various associations of non-profits) and the one brought in Rhode Island by Blue States.
🚨🚨🚨THREAD on why two lawsuits against Trump Administration re spending freezes are "moot." Late yesterday federal judge in D.C. (Biden appointee) entered an administrative stay of OMB-25-13. That lawsuit was brought by multiple associations that represent non-profits. 1/
2/ Also yesterday, gaggle of blue State's filed lawsuit in a Rhode Island federal court before an Obama appointee, likewise challenging OMB-25-13 and seeking a TRO (temporary restraining order). But today, OMB rescinded 25-13 & Trump Adm. filed notice of rescission saying moot.
3/ During today's hearing, Judge McConnell reportedly suggested he was inclined to grant the TRO given that Press Secretary's comments that freeze remains on. IF Judge McConnell enters TRO it would be outrageously wrong--but a TRO cannot (typically) be appealed!