After the completion of TPP in the Pacific Rim, Brazil see talks with Russia to join the EEU

With the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) finalized a week ago, and simply waiting approval from Congress and other member state legislatures, countries within Central and South America are now finding themselves on the outside looking in when it comes to localized trade and exports.  And while the country of Brazil is already a member of the BRICS coalition, the hemorrhaging economy is now seeking a way to join in Russian led European Economic Union (EEU) to counter the fact that neighboring Peru and Chile are now part of the U.S. led trade consortium.

Global trade coalitions appear to be the wave of the future, with differing levels of free trade being the differentiating factor between those coming from Asia and Eurasia, and those coming from the United States, the Pacific Rim, and potentially Europe.

Brazil is ready to negotiate a free trade agreement with the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU). The deal is on the agenda of Mercosur, says the Brazilian Deputy Agriculture Minister Tatiana Palermo.
Mercosur is the South American trade bloc that unites Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay and Venezuela.
“We are the main advocate in the Mercosur bloc with regard of establishing a free trade agreement. We are studying, we are looking at the numbers,” she told Sputnik news agency.
“It is on the list of agreements that we are discussing within Mercosur. So it is already there and when we are talking to our colleagues from the Agriculture Ministry of Russia, we also mention our goal is to start negotiations,” Palermo added.
The EEU is a Russia-led trade bloc established in 2015 on the basis of the Customs Union of Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus. It currently has five members: Russia, Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, while Tajikistan is a prospective member.
The EEU ensures free movement of goods and services, capital and labor, as well as a coordinated, coherent and unified economic policy for its members. – Russia Today

The two biggest differences at the moment between the TPP trade coalition and the EEU/Asean ones is that in the West, what they are calling ‘free trade’ is really more about giving multi-national corporations sovereign power in addition to keeping TPP members in a dollar based trade system.  In the East however, their concept of free trade is much more open and is seeking to facilitate direct bi-lateral trade in member nation’s own currencies while at the same time aiding in protecting trade nations from the destruction of dollar hegemony.

The-TPP-Is-Not-Free-Trade-Its-Managed-Trade

Just as military coalitions are forming between nation’s in the midst of NGO groups seeking to overthrow sovereign governments, so too are large groups of countries binding together to form trade pacts in opposition to the trend of emerging markets vying to break down the long standing dollar based global economy.  And for Brazil, and a large number of Central and South American economies long placed under the thumb of the United States, their move towards the EEU will put this geo-political trade war on America’s doorstep, just as the TPP is attempting to do the same with China.

Kenneth Schortgen Jr is a writer for Secretsofthefed.comExaminer.com, Roguemoney.net, and To the Death Media, and hosts the popular web blog, The Daily Economist. Ken can also be heard Wednesday afternoons giving an weekly economic report on the Angel Clark radio show.

HERE IS A LIST OF EVERY SINGLE TIME OBAMA COMMITTED AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE THAT DEMS & MEDIA COVERED UP “Impeach!” It’s been more than eight years since Democrats uttered that word – long enough for anyone to wonder if it was still in their vocabulary, considering the deafening silence through the dozens of serious scandals during President Obama’s administration – but now that President Trump is the man in the White House, it’s back with a vengeance. . . Democrats everywhere are wildly slinging the “I” word, hoping to nail Trump for high crimes and misdemeanors after the New York Times claimed a memo written by former FBI Director James Comey said the president urged him to end the federal investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn. . . Some members of Congress are getting in on the action. They include Reps. Maxine Water, D-Calif., and Al Green, D-Texas. Even a Republican, Rep. Justin Amash, claimed Wednesday there are grounds to impeach President Trump. House Oversign Committee Chair Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, asked for the alleged Comey memo and other documents. Chaffetz tweeted that he is prepared to subpoena the information. And Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., invoked “Watergate.” . . Now the Democratic Party is reportedly poll testing impeachment as a 2018 election issue. More than 1 million people signed a petition calling on Congress to impeach Trump. . . Wasting no time Wednesday, the mainstream media sprang into action, enthusiastically echoing the left’s impeachment calls. MSNBC launched a Watergate ad implying Trump is America’s new Richard Nixon. . . “Watergate. We know its name because there were reporters who never stopped asking questions,” says MSNBC host Chris Hayes, who hinted that Trump is next on the impeachment chopping block. “Now, who knows where the questions will take us. But I know this: I’m not going to stop asking them.” . . Meanwhile, some overzealous members of the left plastered fliers around Washington, D.C., demanding all White House staffers resign Wednesday. . . The posters read: “If you work for this White House you are complicit in hate-mongering, lies, corrupt taking of Americans’ tax money via self-dealing and emoluments, and quite possibly federal crimes and treason. Also, any wars will be on your soul. … Resign now.” . . But constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley, who voted for President Obama, warned “impeachment” enthusiasts not to get ahead of themselves with President Trump. Why? . . At this time, there’s no evidence Trump actually committed a crime. . . “The criminal code demands more than what Comey reportedly describes in his memo,” Turley wrote in a May 17 opinion piece posted at the Hill. Turley explained: . . For the first time, the Comey memo pushes the litany of controversies surrounding Trump into the scope of the United States criminal code. . . However, if this is food for obstruction of justice, it is still an awfully thin soup. Some commentators seem to be alleging criminal conduct in office or calling for impeachment before Trump completed the words of his inaugural oath of office. Not surprising, within minutes of the New York Times report, the response was a chorus of breathless “gotcha” announcements. But this memo is neither the Pentagon Papers nor the Watergate tapes. Indeed, it raises as many questions for Comey as it does Trump in terms of the alleged underlying conduct. . . A good place to start would be with the federal law, specifically 18 U.S.C. 1503. The criminal code demands more than what Comey reportedly describes in his memo. There are dozens of different variations of obstruction charges ranging from threatening witnesses to influencing jurors. None would fit this case. That leaves the omnibus provision on attempts to interfere with the “due administration of justice.” . . However, that still leaves the need to show that the effort was to influence “corruptly” when Trump could say that he did little but express concern for a longtime associate. The term “corruptly” is actually defined differently under the various obstruction provisions, but it often involves a showing that someone acted “with the intent to secure an unlawful benefit for oneself or another.” Encouraging leniency or advocating for an associate is improper but not necessarily seeking an unlawful benefit for him. . . -Obama’s Iran nuke deal -Obama knew about Hillary’s private email server -Obama IRS targets conservatives -Obama’s DOJ spies on AP reporters -Obamacare & Obama’s false promises -Illegal-alien amnesty by executive order -Benghazi-gate -Operation Fast & Furious -5 Taliban leaders for Bergdahl -Extortion 17 -‘Recess ‘ appointments – when Senate was in session -Appointment of ‘czars’ without Senate approval -Suing Arizona for enforcing federal law -Refusal to defend Defense of Marriage Act -Illegally conducting war against Libya -NSA: Spying on Americans -Muslim Brotherhood ties -Miriam Carey -Birth certificate -Executive orders -Solyndra and the lost $535 million -Egypt -Cap & Trade: When in doubt, bypass Congress -Refusal to prosecute New Black Panthers -Obama’s U.S. citizen ‘hit list’