Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by betsy

  1. 16 hours ago, Ell said:

    Well it is clear that the only reason POT was legalised was to capitalise on Taxes.  Trudeau said it was to remove the unsafe illegal market.  That is obviously not working.  It seems to me it was just a ploy by Trudeau and the Liberals to legalise it.  What a shame!!!!

    Lol.  Illegal pot is far more cheaper - so, it's very much preferable! 

      I kinda imagine the whole PMO having a toke session every time they have their meeting. 

  2. I can't help but notice - for all of Trudeau's gab about more women in politics, here is something glaring:



    lol.  They're all gone with the wind!  Most, if not all of them, got only one term!




    Political observers may have believed those interpretations were a thing of the past when surveying the list of Canada's first ministers in 2013, which included Christy Clark in B.C., Alison Redford in Alberta, Kathleen Wynne in Ontario, Pauline Marois in Quebec, Kathy Dunderdale of Newfoundland and Labrador, and Eva Aariak in Nunavut.

    One by one, however, those women found themselves out of office and sometimes out of politics altogether.

    The reasons behind their defeats, Thomas said, shed light on the paradoxes at play among Canadian voters.

    Geneviève Tellier, a political studies professor at the University of Ottawa, said many of the other women may have fallen victim to a phenomenon known as the "glass cliff," in which leaders are propelled to positions of authority at a time of crisis within their organizations only to lose the helm when the outlook improves.

    Tellier said that while some won an initial election and most vied for re-election, not one succeeded in being returned to office.



    Who voted them out?  Just shows you - it isn't about gender, Justin.  It shouldn't be.

  3. On 4/16/2019 at 9:05 AM, Robert Greene said:

    Ah come on. We've had worse politicians before. What's all the fuss about?


    Lol.  Looks like Jason Kenny wasn't kidding at all.




    Kenney noted that Trudeau served as opposition critic while he was immigration minister — a tenure where the Liberal MP came under fire for saying comments "off the top of [his] head."

    "I know Justin. He doesn't have a clue what he's doing. This guy is an empty trust-fund millionaire who has the political depth of a finger bowl," Kenney told Bell.

    "He can't read a briefing note longer than a cocktail napkin, O.K."



    We've seen the proof!  The proof is in the pudding!

    We can't have someone like Trudeau  continue wrecking the country!  If Liberals love him for his looks and his drama - get the liberals produce his film, or something.   Give him a sitcom!

  4. 13 hours ago, Ell said:

    I just learned a few weeks ago that Canada is warming up twice as fast as the rest of the world, and that the Arctic is now warmer than it was going back as far as 10000 years ago.  Wow.   This is Media reporting.  I have also heard that other countries medias are claiming them to have the fastest warming rates.  I am not a climate change denier, but really???  All of this nonsense has just got me laughing so hard.  It's like I have a bigger one than you do, or I am faster than you, or I am better than you.  Come on!  Really????  We are living in a world that seems to have come off of its mooring.  The world has seen many climate changes during the course of its history.  Politics!  Politics!  Politics!  When will it end?  The answer is Never!!!!!!

    It's a contest!

       They want to know which country's population is the most dumb! smiley.gif

  5. 11 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

    As disappointed as I am in our political leaders, I'll take all five of them over any others in the world with the exception of Prime Minister Ardern of New Zealand.

    Who's the fifth one?

    I have not seen the prowess of Scheer and Singh and May as PM, so I can't really make any comparison.  However, I have seen how Trudeau is! 

    Sorry to say  but....among the whole lot of world leaders, we can say Trudeau belongs somewhere at the bottom of the barrel.   Lol.  

  6. 7 hours ago, BubberMiley said:

    Keywords: "than you".


    Your "keyword" is pathetically "off-key!"   Practically everyone - except him and you  - can analyze and show that he's made such terrible decisions, one after another!

      But then again, like I said, "if YOU THINK......"  Therefore, it's your perspective that's in question! :lol:


    One thing we do know though........your bar for what you think is "smart and superior,"   is too low!

      So.   Between you and Trudeau - who do you say,  is smarter? :)

  7. I was curious about him falling on the stairs, so I double checked on that. 





    Justin Trudeau, tripping on his arse


    After a very good interview with some dude from La Presse (who moonlights as a Franc Tireur), Justin Trudeau channels his inner Pierre and falls down some stairs for fun and giggles.




    At least, we know he can also be a  stuntman......if acting doesn't get him anywhere!   :lol:

  8. 15 hours ago, BubberMiley said:

    They hate him because he's superior to them. Smarter, better looking, richer, more successful... :lol:

    A superior, smart leader wouldn't have made all those successive fiasco with SNC-Lavalin!   What?   Is group-toke all they do at the PMO?  :lol:


    And, a superior, smart leader wouldn't be caught dead performing like a monkey, in exchange for trade!  Lol.   All he needs is an organ-grinder! :lol:




    If you think Trudeau is superior and smarter - boy, what does that say about you? :lol:

    • Like 2

  9. Hate is a strong word.  I don't hate him, but i strongly dislike him!


    Because, he is bringing in corruption in full force!  He's trying to make it like it's just a natural thing in politics!

    He seems too prone to dishonesty!  I don't think his admiration for Fidel Castro, and the way Communist China runs its government......... just mere empty words.  He's obviously attracted to the ways of a despot.




    Federal Court rules Lobbying Commissioner was wrong to let Aga Khan off the hook for Bahamas trip gift to PM Trudeau

    The court agreed with Democracy Watch, calling Commissioner’s Shepherd’s ruling “unreasonable” because it was a narrow, technical, and targeted analysis that is lacking in transparency, justification, and intelligibility when considered in the context the Commissioner’s duties and functions (para. 146). As a result, the court ordered the Commissioner of Lobbying (now Nancy Bélanger) to re-examine the actions of everyone at the Aga Khan Foundation with “a broad view of the circumstances.”  


    Democracy Watch filed its own complaint in December 2018 with the Commissioner of Lobbying about the Aga Khan’s Bahamas trip gifts to Prime Minister Trudeau in 2014 and 2016, and Liberal Cabinet minister Seamus O’Regan in 2016, and now calls on the Commissioner of Lobbying to ensure that complaint is fully, and independently investigated and ruled on publicly.

    Democracy Watch has requested that new Commissioner Nancy Bélanger delegate all investigations to someone who is independent of her and all political parties, given that she was handpicked by Prime Minister Trudeau through a secretive, dishonest process.

    Democracy Watch is currently challenging her appointment in Federal Court.


    “The Federal Court ruling confirms that former federal Lobbying Commissioner Karen Shepherd was a lapdog whose enforcement of the lobbying law and code was negligently weak,” said Duff Conacher, Co-founder of Democracy Watch. “Thankfully, the ruling not only closes secret, unethical lobbying loopholes that Commissioner Shepherd negligently created, it also essentially orders the new Commissioner to enforce the lobbying law and code much more broadly and strongly.”

    “Given the Federal Court ruling, Democracy Watch calls on the Lobbying Commissioner to ensure a full, independent investigation into the Aga Khan’s Bahamas trip gifts to Prime Minister Trudeau and Liberal MP Seamus O’Regan,” said Conacher. “Democracy Watch’s opinion is, based on the facts and the law and the ruling, it is very likely that the senior officer of the Aga Khan Foundation violated the lobbying code by allowing the Aga Khan to give the trip gifts.”

    Given Lobbying Commissioner Karen Shepherd’s overall weak record of enforcement, Democracy Watch has also requested that the Auditor General conduct a performance audit of her time in office.






    • Like 1

  10. On 4/6/2019 at 6:12 PM, mowich said:

    "Wilson-Raybould warned about the potential knock-on effect in cases like Norman's, although she suggested the government's conduct in Norman's case has been above reproach.

    'The cases are not dissimilar'

    "We can stand up in the House of Commons on [the case of Vice-Admiral Mark] Norman on — totally appropriately on Norman — on extradition, and we can talk about the rule of law," she said in the recorded conversation.

    "The cases are not dissimilar. The principle, or the integrity, of how we act and respond to the tools we have available and what we should and shouldn't do, again ... I just don't know."


    She was sitting AG and this file was on her desk. 

    We'll see if her incautious remarks regarding the government's involvement in this affair were simply ill-thought or a symptom of her own presumptions.


    As far as I know (I may be wrong), they are free to talk in the House of Commons (which is what she seems to be telling Weckner) - at least, that's what Liberals are saying, that Raybould is free to talk in the House of Commons, did they not?


    How, "not dissimilar?"   The background may not be dissimilar - but there is a big difference!

    Was there ever a guilty verdict on Norman - unlike SNC-Lavalin?  The difference(s) arise from there. 

    SNC-Lavalin was found guilty of corruption.....Trudeau tries to intervene for SNC, by applying pressure on Raybould to influence the prosecutorial justice (who'd already made the decision that SNC does not qualify for DPA)!  Raybould had also agreed with that verdict, and has already made the decision, that SNC does not qualify for DPA!   That's where we are at, with this SNC-Lavalin!




  11. Btw, why did the Prosecutor disqualified SNC-Lavalin from DPA? 

      Because.....SNC-Lavalin is the biggest corruption scandal in Canadian history! 


    Canada now dominates World Bank corruption list, thanks to SNC-Lavalin

    Out of the more than 250 companies year to date on the World Bank's running list of firms blacklisted from bidding on its global projects under its fraud and corruption policy, 117 are from Canada — with SNC-Lavalin and its affiliates representing 115 of those entries

    The long list of debarments mainly stems from just one large Canadian firm, but it still prompted some headlines around the world to point to Canada as being home to the most corrupt companies in the world.




    Look at the sh***y true color of the LIBERAL PARTY, under Justin Trudeau!

    We just saw Justin threw two principled women under the bus.......for SNC-Lavalin!




    SNC-LAVALIN: this is the hill that Trudeau chooses to viciously fight for........

    ........and, is willing to die on.




  12. 3 hours ago, mowich said:

    Principled.  We will see how that statement holds up once the Vice-Admiral Norman affair takes over the headlines, Betsy.  The former AG was involved in that mess too. 

    That, too, started with information being leaked to the media.  They both involved major corporations in an alleged corruption (that involved some of the same players - Trudeau, Butts and Weckner).

      I don't know how Raybould fits into this - if not for Scott Brison suddenly resigning (who, incidentally is neck-deep involved in the Norman case) -  his resignation being the reason Trudeau cited for having shuffled Cabinet (Raybould).


    The Norman case was mentioned by raybould on the recording:




    JWR: Well then no one is explaining that to him Michael! We can stand up in the House of Commons on [the case of Vice-Admiral Mark] Norman on — totally appropriately on Norman— on extradition and we can talk about the rule of law, um, the cases aren't dissimilar. The principle or the integrity of how we act and respond to the tools that we have available and what we should and shouldn't do, I'm again, I just, I don't know.



    Can you explain how she is involved in that scandal (in the way that you seem to imply)?



  13. 13 hours ago, mowich said:

    Whether it comforts them or not matters not to me, Argus.  This is plain old politics.  You tow the party line and recognize that the PM is your de facto boss and thereby show your loyalty or you are out. 

    I thought it's the constituents that an MP represents - the ones who elected him as an MP?  I thought an MPs loyalty is to his constituents.




    There is not a single political party in Canada that does not recognize and nurture party loyalty.  

    Could it be because we've never had anyone so principled, that she's willing to put her career on the line?  No one like her,  who truly upholds what she's sworn to do?


    ....but what happens if your boss wants you to commit something that clashes with your supposedly independent decision as a Justice Minister?

    If a Justice Minister can be railroaded by her boss - what happens to our rule of law?

    Do we really naively think political interference happens  only with SNC-Lavalin?   We're looking at Canada turning into a banana republic with a sham for a so-called "rule of law."   The Liberal Party is aggressively selling this to make this kind of corrupt climate, only natural.

  14. 4 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

    How can the PM just kick out democratically elected MPs without due process ?

    He gets to approve all MP Liberal party nominations for elections ?

    Is this unique to Canada ?

    WTF ?


    You know, that brings to mind Raybould's response in a casual street interview before she was kicked out.  She said,  "I want to know what the rules are for removing an MP out of caucus."  To me, it sounded more like a challenge (for how can she not know about the rules?). 

    How can she be removed for just doing her job, as she is required by lawThat's basically what she said more than a couple of times.  She also kept saying she wanted to stay in the Liberal party.  All these statements could be useful in the near future?

    I wouldn't be surprised if she challenge her removal in court.  


    Could it be she's still getting legal advice from the former Supreme Court judge?   I don't think she'd have stayed in the caucus (despite the nastiness directed at her, and also, with everyone including pundits saying she should leave, or be booted out)... just because.   She must have Plan B.   Or, the scenario is folding out exactly as she directs it.....she's still the one very much in control.   That, the Liberal Party did what she actually wanted them to do - remove her against her will.

    Think of it.   If this goes to court......we'll most likely hear from all the actors mentioned in that soap opera. I think there are 11 of them that are named.   They won't just be giving their sides of the story.   There will be cross-examinations.


    Lol....could it be all Trudeau had seen so far from Raybould, are simply fireworks......precursors to the shelling and the grenades? :lol:


  15. The Liberal MPs are out in full force, trying to make it so that it's Raybould who's got no principle to stand on (Wayne Easter said that).....for secretly recording that conversation. 

    Did Wayne even stop to ponder why Raybould was driven to that extent?

    One male MP (can't recall his name) said that, "that's normal conversation between them."  

    How conveniently they try to blurry the point:   it's not normal because Raybould was the Justice Minister.   They shouldn't be having that kind of conversation.


    "She shouldn't have recorded that. It's an erosion of trust," they say.  Lol.  And, you trust Trudeau? 

    Did you see she was right - "the shite will hit the fan"- how she got shuffled out?   Man, you Liberal MPs got such a warped perspective!


    You should all lose in the coming election!  I hope Canadians (especially card-carrying Liberals) will uphold what's only right.   Only three women from your party deserve to represent Canadians!

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1

  16. They want Raybould out!

    They're all throwing principles and the rule of law out in the dumpster!    You can be sure, they're willing to embrace, even corruption!  Heck, isn't that's what SNC-Lavalin embroiled in?   Charges of corruption?

    All these MPs care about is......... what's good for the party!  What's in it for me!


    That is soooooo consistent with Trudeau's attitude towards SNC-Lavalin.    I'm the MP for Papineau. We need to win the election!

    • Like 2

  17. 49 minutes ago, scribblet said:

    Not only that, it was leaked to the CBC...    

    Lol.   When the PMO wants to tell a fib to your face - they "leak" it.  That seems to be their new MO.  We've been leaking left and right in the past few days!


    What?   Do we think they - of all people - would keep something so "important"  like that from us?  All they've been doing is sell the carbon tax.....so, why does that have to come out through a so-called "leak?"  You'd think they'd be doing a press conference asap to announce that, if we're on this "crisis" mode! :lol:

  • Create New...