world

Clinton rejects Mexico invitation after Trump's diplomatic ruckus

27 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2016.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

27 Comments
Login to comment

I heard that Pena Nieto got Trump to pay for lunch.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

“He came out saying one thing and the Mexican president contradicted him almost immediately,” Clinton, a former U.S. secretary of state, said in the ABC interview.

And, of course, the media is not challenging Clinton's statement, are they? Even though the Mexican president didn't actually contradict Trump.

-8 ( +1 / -9 )

Turbostat, left the meeting saying that payment for the wall was not discussed, while the Mexican president wrote immediately afterward that he had specifically stated that Mexico would not pay for it. These two statements contradict each other. The only room for discussion here is whether the issue was discussed and, therefore, who is being dishonest. (Actually, there are two others: how in hell would America compel Mexico to pay for a wall that it neither wants nor needs, and how could an American presidential candidate make a mess of such a simple meeting.)

A hint at the latter might be Trump's retort at Obama's rude China "welcome":

If that were me, I’d say, ‘You know what folks, I respect you a lot, let’s close the doors, let’s get out of here.'

Very presidential. This is a G20 meeting, not something bilateral with China. But that's the Donald; he'd likely have flown out immediately in a huff and tweeted something racially insensitive.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

And, of course, the media is not challenging Clinton's statement, are they? Even though the Mexican president didn't actually contradict Trump.

More parsing. Great.

The media is are not challenging the president's word given that Trumph is a known liar. Or, should I just call him expedient.

Smart move by Clinton. She had nothing to gain. Of course, she is a professional diplomat, so she wouldn't walk out of the meeting without the Mexican president contradicting her after the meeting.

She probably doesn't have much to speak to Mexico at this point, after all, she isn't slandering Mexican's in front of white crowds and praising them when having to face them. Plus, any visit would end up with unnecessary comparisons and issues fabricated by the Trumph camp.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Class versus lack of class.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

@Laguna y viking68:

Already parsed all that out in the other 'Trump went to Mexico' thread(s), thank you.

If one side states something and the other side doesn't pick up on that point, they haven't discussed it. And neither Pres. Peña Nieto nor his handlers were the persons who said 'contradict'. That was spin brought in by media after the fact. Don't expect them to challenge Hillary on it.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

He didn’t know how to even communicate effectively with a head of state.. -- article

And snubbing a world leader after being invited to visit is a better way to "communicate effectively"?

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

Clinton doesn't need cheap gimmicks like Trump the moron. He's already lost, he's just grasping around like a fool now. What a shame the low level Yanks have plunged to where they are being outclassed by Mexicans

5 ( +6 / -1 )

dcog9065: What a shame the low level Yanks have plunged to where they are being outclassed by Mexicans

Tell us more about what Democrats really think.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Clinton rejects Mexico invitation

Translation: The Foundation never got the wire transfer from President Nieto. . . .

-8 ( +2 / -10 )

If one side states something and the other side doesn't pick up on that point, they haven't discussed it.

turbo, I mentioned that in my post - one of the two is being dishonest. Either the subject was not brought up (somewhat hard to believe), or Nieto said something like "There is no way in hell we're going to pay for that wall" while Trump said, "Let's leave that for future negotiations."

If it were the latter case, though, turbo, you're simply playing with semantics. Nieto clearly expressed what is the obvious will of the vast majority of the Mexican people: they are against the wall, and they sure as hell are not going to pay for it. What room for discussion is there? And why would Hillary visit Mexico at a time like this, given the stark differences in mutual relations dependent on the election outcome? - I mean, clearly, it's not like Trump's visit did anything but further roil the waters. Please, let's use a little logic here.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

It was comical and plain pathetic how Trump pledges to get Mexico to pay for a great wall and calls Mexicans rapists and killers, but when meeting the Mexican President he clams up as if he were a child who just soiled himself and can't even muster the courage to rebuke the President when he himself contradicts Trump's position on the wall. He's very brave when he's not face-to-face with anyone he's insulted, but then again neither are any Repubs

3 ( +3 / -0 )

And neither Pres. Peña Nieto nor his handlers were the persons who said 'contradict'. That was spin brought in by media after the fact. Don't expect them to challenge Hillary on it.

In the absence of context, your first statement is true. However, the president's tweet was after Trumph's statement, so it is fair to say the tweet contradicted Trumph's statements. It is a more rational conclusion than parsing the meaning of "discussed" to find that there is no contradiction.

The last statement sounds so childish. The media is against Trumph and not Clinton, it is so unfair.

They have rightly been after Clinton for all the email scandals and now the foundation emails. Still, I don't think there is enough there to warrant an Inquisition. I suppose it is time to bring up Benghazi again and the media not covering it even though the Republican's own investigations found she was not at fault.

Trumph is the nail sticking out, so the media is hitting him repeatedly. He does it to himself. I can only think it is on purpose to keep getting free advertising.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Class versus lack of class.

More like press vs lack of press. Hillary! Come out....come out wherever you are!

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Astute decision by Team Clinton.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

"what she called a “diplomatic incident”

Har! Even the Young Turks, who support Hillary since Sanders capitulated admit Trump's Mexico visit was a bg win for him. Hillary must be bouncing off the walls, lol.

"Astute decision by Team Clinton"

Har! So true, as she would look like a total incompetent after Trump's "open and constructive discussion" with Nieto..

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

I think President Nieto doesn't care about Hillary Clinton. She is very easy to control and has no policy towards Mexico. He is more interested in the unpredictable Donald Trump and his policies.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Wonder no more how Trump is ahead in all major polls after Labor Day... and he hasn’t even crested!

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/294438-giuliani-trump-wasnt-supposed-to-be-discuss-wall-with

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R) said Sunday that Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump did not plan to discuss his proposal to build a wall along the southern border during a meeting with Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto.

“We had ground rules for this meeting,” Giuliani, a Trump adviser, said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “One of the ground rules was we were not going to discuss paying for the wall, because that’s not something we’re going to agree about.” Giuliani said the Trump team wanted to find “areas of common agreement” with Peña Nieto.

“Maybe the president’s staff didn’t brief him on it, maybe the president forgot it, but, I mean, he brought it up. It wasn’t right at the very beginning — it was sort of in the middle of a sentence. And I just briefly said, ‘That’s not on the table.’ And the reality is they have a disagreement on that,” Giuliani said.

Peña Nieto told Trump last week that Mexico would not pay for the wall.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Hee hee. You're funny, Lizz. About the only thing Trump is consistent about is that a wall will be built. The Wall Street Journal today quotes him as saying in answer to a question about what will happen to undocumented immigrants who do not desire citizenship:

I’m going to make a decision, or somebody will. Whether it’s me or somebody else, because by that time we’ll have a secure border, we’ll have a wall.

Okay, someday, someone will decide whether the U.S. will offer a path to legal status, and that person may or may not be President Trump, but it may not be because it will not happen until after the wall is built, the border is impregnable, and illegal immigration has been reduces to zero. In other words, never. The wall will never be built - never - and frankly, it would not put much of a dent on illegal immigration even if it were. Illegal immigration will never be completely halted - never. Those who believe what Trump says - insofar that he says anything coherent (will he deport these illegals or wait until the wall is finished to make that decision? Hard to say! What's your guess, Lizz?) live in a complete fantasyland.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Class versus lack of class.

It was classy and classic for Trump to surprise everyone, be presidential and catch the entire Washington establishment as well as Mexico flat-footed. Not only classic, but pure genius!

About the only thing Trump is consistent about is that a wall will be built. The Wall Street Journal today quotes him as saying in answer to a question about what will happen to undocumented immigrants who do not desire citizenship:

Send them back.

Illegal immigration will never be completely halted - never.

Of course not, but you can make it extremely difficult to even want to waste the effort, I mean, even people in North Korea slip through the cracks every now and then, but you need a strong border that's the start.

Those who believe what Trump says - insofar that he says anything coherent (will he deport these illegals or wait until the wall is finished to make that decision? Hard to say! What's your guess, Lizz?) live in a complete fantasyland.

He won't deport millions of people, but he can make it harder and hinder people from wanting to come over and that's more than good.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

If a person doesn't an ID or passport, will we give free tickets to Spain, paid for by Trump?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Quite obviously these policy positions are merely starting points for a negotiation. No president can wave a magic wand and just remove anyone, even all the criminal aliens; they still have to go through the process. The most effective way to increase deportations would be to crack down on laws already on the books while increasing the number of immigration judges which is what he has indicated are two of the points in any plan.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Ah, I see. So basically he will continue following what Obama is doing. Thanks, Lizz.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Hillary is clearly too sick to go anywhere. Coughing fits during a rally and later on her plane!? Twice in a row in one day!

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Who cares? Seriously, is anyone really undecided at this point?

Maybe the Washington Press Corpse should focus on HRC's actual campaign, instead of pretending anyone is interested in the daily serving of horse-race.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Laguna: turbo, I mentioned that in my post - one of the two is being dishonest. Either the subject was not brought up (somewhat hard to believe), or Nieto said something like "There is no way in hell we're going to pay for that wall" while Trump said, "Let's leave that for future negotiations." ... What room for discussion is there? ...

And there you have it. How do you get from a description of how it might be true that they DIDN'T discuss it to such clear, definitive statements that "one of the two is being dishonest" and that 'the President contradicted Trump'? Only by assuming they had a discussion. The President didn't say they discussed it. He said he TOLD Trump. Without a 2-way conversation it's clearly not a discussion. If you yell at your TV, are you having a discussion with it?

You're imagining that "Nieto said something like" and "while Trump said" (and you should have appended 'something like' here, too, because you don't KNOW, you're making it up).

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

I don't think even Trump fans will believe that Mexico will hand over money for us to build a wall.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites