Hillary Clinton is coming under fire, yet again, for changing her stance on the Trans-Pacific Partnership. In November of 2012, Clinton made a statement on the deal where she affirmed all the prospective changes that would come out of the deal:
“The so-called TPP will lower barriers, raise standards, and drive long-term growth across the region. It will cover 40 percent of the world’s total trade and establish strong protections for workers and the environment. Better jobs with higher wages and safer working conditions, including for women, migrant workers and others too often in the past excluded from the formal economy will help build Asia’s middle class and rebalance the global economy.”
These declarations were made a year before WikiLeaks, a not-for-profit media organization, leaked documents and information pertaining to the trade agreement. The contention was generated from the clandestine policies and negotiations that surround the deal. Per the Intellectual Property Rights Chapter, the clauses pave the way for restrictions on intellectual property that:
“Would have extensive negative ramifications for users’ freedoms of expression, right to privacy and due process, and hinder peoples’ abilities to innovate,” according to Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit organization that advocates for civil liberties.
Clinton remarked that:
“As of today, I am not in favor of what I have learned about it.”
But do her words hold any value? She spent years bolstering the trade agreement and now it’s a problem that she:
“doesn’t yet have all the details?”
Clinton’s elusive nature doesn’t just come in the form of circumventing contentious positions, but attacking GOP candidates for not being able to name an appropriate woman for the $10 bill, yet simultaneously not being able to name a single woman.
“I’m amazed that the republicans couldn’t think of one American woman to be on the $10 bill. And I, you know, could give them a long list if they’re interested.”
Then she doesn’t name a single woman for the bill.
The problem with Clinton is that Clinton isn’t really Clinton. She fashions her character to fit whatever will garner more popularity among voters. Scrutiny is surrounding the Trans-Pacific Partnership, so Clinton jumps ship and comes out opposing the deal. Ridicule is surrounding the Republicans, so Hillary mocks the Republicans for their considerations but cannot name a single one. Perhaps she doesn’t want to deal with the adversity that can come with her naming, but one thing is for certain, her credibility is diminishing by the day. I just wonder how much more disingenuous she will become if she is elected to be 2016 POTUS?
Featured Image is a Screen Grab from the video.