Reply #10: important info left out of both the post and the first story

[mkultra]

Both actually lead back to only one article with the important details such as the following. brentspeak only spins anti-obama MSM

(snip)
The provision..... would weaken a ban ... by saying the ban will not apply if it is inconsistent with U.S. obligations under an international agreement.
(snip)

So it only applies, much like the WH said, when it conflicts with our treaties.


(snip)
The ban’s supporters include Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas), who have introduced a tax reform bill aimed at companies sheltering revenue from taxes in offshore accounts. Supporters also include Sens. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine), ...
(snip)

(snip)
Though Durbin helped draft the bill with the proposed change to the ban included in it, he took a closer look at the language after hearing from the ban’s supporters and the administration, the aide said.
(snip)

(snip)

The Obama administration proposed the language providing exceptions to the ban because of its concern that the prohibition will conflict with trade agreements.

“The administration recognizes the important tax policy underlying the inverted corporation provision and is working with Congress to find a way to implement the prohibition in a manner that is consistent with our international trade obligations,” said Tom Gavin, a spokesman for the White House Office of Management and Budget.
(snip)

(snip)

The dispute between lawmakers and the administration over the language mirrors a clash earlier this year over “Buy American” provisions in the $787 billion stimulus.
(snip)