slouch towards Bethlehem...(with apologies to WB Yeats)

because "it did not meet her high standards".

Does anyone know what those standards are? How would she change it to make it acceptable? Which of its corporate empowerments would she accept ... and which would she reject? What are her criteria for an acceptable trade agreement? Is the TPP an actual trade agreement to begin with (because most of it seems to be about empowering large corporations over governments)? And if it was unacceptable, why did she support it so vigorously? She can't blame Obama for her participation in this anymore ... after all, she is now slamming anyone who objects to anything the man did. (I think it more likely the she convinced Obama about this thing than he convinced her ...)

Think of all the Congress folk who have endorsed her ... has she called any of them up and begged them not to saddle her administration with this turkey? Has she publicly called on them to reject it? If not, then in what sense does she oppose it?

I can't support this thing. I can't support anyone who does not oppose it.

Trav

that she makes the most money from it.

So many years of this baloney. Just another way to screw the rest of us.

The solutions would seem to be to go back to the pre-FDR days when every country resolved trade disputes in its own favor or restructuring the the dispute resolution process to include labor, human rights and environmental standards and the arbitration panels so that they enforce these standards fairly.

Trump and many, many others prefer the 'every-country-for-itself', stick it to the Mexicans, the Muslims, the Chinese, etc., protect "us" from "them". I am not sure that FDR and Truman would be in that back-to-the-future camp.