• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trudeau is in serious political trouble

Shows hypocrisy and really took away from the credibility of her statements.

I wish she had told what'shisname that the call was being recorded, yeah, but still, given a choice between her and Trudeau, she get's my vote every time. I won't vote Liberal again (which means I won't vote again) until both Trudeau and Morneau are out of the cabinet. Bastards. Give a company a break on corruption because of jobs in Quebec? Pressure the Justice Minister/Attorney-General to give them that break? I haven't ever seen this level of corruption in a Canadian federal government.
 
I wish she had told what'shisname that the call was being recorded, yeah, but still, given a choice between her and Trudeau, she get's my vote every time. I won't vote Liberal again (which means I won't vote again) until both Trudeau and Morneau are out of the cabinet. Bastards. Give a company a break on corruption because of jobs in Quebec? Pressure the Justice Minister/Attorney-General to give them that break? I haven't ever seen this level of corruption in a Canadian federal government.

She wouldn't get mine. Her actions reek of a schemer to me.
 
She wouldn't get mine. Her actions reek of a schemer to me.

I disagree she repeatedly told people the decision was made and it was innapropriate to continue to bring it up. She clearly felt this was going to end badly and started to make sure she didnt get into trouble. You even here her say in the taped conversation that she has been keeping notes on the matter, a clear sign to anyone of even below average intelligence that this was getting into serious no go zone but they kept on going
 
Nah, then it just becomes about legacy dismantlement and partisanship.

I think it would be great for our government to learn to negotiate again.
If US politics are any indication, we may be entering an era where political differences are so entrenched there's nothing left to negotiate. The parties have their core values, those values are mutually exclusive and incompatible, ...

I'd like to believe Canadian values aren't so disparate that negotiation is unfeasible. I don't think we're as polarized and party locked as the US (which is a particularly good thing since I see them heading inexorably toward secessionist movements and possibly another civil war), but things have changed significantly even in the past five years. We might be headed to the same precipice: where values differ so greatly that no single government is tolerable by sizeable demographics, to say nothing of being approved.

Corruption scandals only muddy the waters. You'd think politicians would mind that we've got our hands full trying to agree on policy and give us a break by keeping their noses clean.
 
Shows hypocrisy and really took away from the credibility of her statements.
Hypocrisy how?

Hypocrisy would be if she's guilty of the same thing she's alleging of the PMO. Namely, that she overstepped her authority to pressure somebody into making an unjust decision. I don't see how this applies.

Hence I assume you're referring to the cloak and dagger in illicitly recording the call. However, couldn't this also be construed as diligence? Making sure it was more than just her word against that of a charismatic Prime Minister and his loyal subordinates?
 
Hypocrisy how?

Hypocrisy would be if she's guilty of the same thing she's alleging of the PMO. Namely, that she overstepped her authority to pressure somebody into making an unjust decision. I don't see how this applies.

Hence I assume you're referring to the cloak and dagger in illicitly recording the call. However, couldn't this also be construed as diligence? Making sure it was more than just her word against that of a charismatic Prime Minister and his loyal subordinates?

She is also guilty of unethical acts. I have no issue with her bringing up the issue and bringing it to the public but how she did so to me and many pothers it seems like the actions of a schemer. Especially with this revelation of her pick for the Supreme Court. Even before the Lavelin affair she, along with Phillpot seemed to not get along well with Trudeau and other Liberals.
 
She is also guilty of unethical acts. I have no issue with her bringing up the issue and bringing it to the public but how she did so to me and many pothers it seems like the actions of a schemer. Especially with this revelation of her pick for the Supreme Court. Even before the Lavelin affair she, along with Phillpot seemed to not get along well with Trudeau and other Liberals.

I don't find anything unethical about her whistleblowing and attempts to achieve surety and proof given how easy it would be to muddy waters and cast doubt otherwise; that Phillpot had disagreements with Trudeau over a judge appointment fundamentally changes nothing and is basically meaningless except to those who would try to vilify her as some kind of enemy within as part of a desperate attempt to justify her dismissal.
 
I don't find anything unethical about her whistleblowing and attempts to achieve surety and proof given how easy it would be to muddy waters and cast doubt otherwise; that Phillpot had disagreements with Trudeau over a judge appointment fundamentally changes nothing and is basically meaningless except to those who would try to vilify her as some kind of enemy within as part of a desperate attempt to justify her dismissal.

They didn't decide to stop at whistleblowing they seem to have had other motives on top of that. She tried to undermine the party and when things didn't go her way she suddenly releases more evidence.
 
They didn't decide to stop at whistleblowing they seem to have had other motives on top of that.

These sophistic attempts at pinning her as an enemy within is a pure non-starter; just drop it man, this is a no sell; it doesn't do you or your party of choice any favours to engage in this kind of straw grasping damage control.

In fact, Trudeau was and is patently idiotic in his handling of this. Were he honest and transparent, laying down the fact that he faced a difficult choice with no good options, and did what he thought would be best for constituents overall, while letting everything come to the fore, it would have remained as a minor scandal at best, but all of these attempts to gag and punish whistleblowers have exploded it into an absolute circus and electoral poison. Aside from the controversy, his judgement alone in relation to this issue has been a proven disaster.
 
She is also guilty of unethical acts. I have no issue with her bringing up the issue and bringing it to the public but how she did so to me and many pothers it seems like the actions of a schemer. Especially with this revelation of her pick for the Supreme Court. Even before the Lavelin affair she, along with Phillpot seemed to not get along well with Trudeau and other Liberals.
Scheming to what end? What was her goal? To entrap P.M. Trudeau after he rejected her recommendation for the SCOC, in a plot for vengeance?

Suppose such a scheme existed. Its existence has no relevance to the conduct of the PMO unless we believe Ms. Wilson-Raybould is flat-out lying about the substance of numerous conversations and that she fabricated emails and voice recordings. Do you believe this?

If not, then scheming or no, evidence is evidence. Her putative scheming may make it inadmissable in a court of law, but it doesn't vitiate it as a record of fact, nor does it justify the misconduct of the PMO.
 
SNC-Lavalin isn't just your ordinary corruption scandal.
Apparently, it is the largest corruption scandal in Canada's 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
Canada now dominates World Bank corruption list, thanks to SNC-Lavalin | Financial Post


This is the hill that Trudeau is fighting for, and willing to die on.
 
If US politics are any indication, we may be entering an era where political differences are so entrenched there's nothing left to negotiate. The parties have their core values, those values are mutually exclusive and incompatible, ...

I'd like to believe Canadian values aren't so disparate that negotiation is unfeasible. I don't think we're as polarized and party locked as the US (which is a particularly good thing since I see them heading inexorably toward secessionist movements and possibly another civil war), but things have changed significantly even in the past five years. We might be headed to the same precipice: where values differ so greatly that no single government is tolerable by sizeable demographics, to say nothing of being approved.

Corruption scandals only muddy the waters. You'd think politicians would mind that we've got our hands full trying to agree on policy and give us a break by keeping their noses clean.

First off, welcome to DP, bud, it's nice to see a Canadian conservative join the discussion that appears to be of the old school Progressive variety...at least judging from the lack of extreme rhetoric and your balanced view. I find myself agreeing with you on most of what you've said here.

The only thing I can say is that while we are facing some of the same challenges as the states, in terms of our conservative parties utilizing populist messaging to drive division (I say this as a lifelong conservative voter...except for the last time), I don't think we've all resigned ourselves to the full scale abandonment of civility that we see in our friends to the south. Oh, sure, there are noisy, obnoxious fringes on both sides, but I still get together for beers with my conservative neighbor, and the political discussions generally involve nothing more heinous than a bit of eye rolling when we hit the spots where we disagree.

I think a minority government would send a strong message that no one is impressed with divisive politics, and that it won't be rewarded with majority support - that would be the message for the CPC, anyway. I think it would also send a message to the LPC, if a different kind: knock it off with the typical Liberal BS. These scandals are unnecessary...they're starting to feel a bit like that drunk uncle that keeps promising next time will be better. And heaven help the NDP if they ever get a majority government...not to mention heaven help us... ;) hehe

I don't think I'm as jaded as you sound...I see the same risks you do, but I don't think we've gone past the point of no return. I think a lot of us want to see good, old fashioned, BORING Canadian politics... :)
 
Last edited:
I think a lot of us want to see good, old fashioned, BORING Canadian politics... :)
A 'like' for your optimism, sir. ;)

Indeed, we mustn't forget we were the ones having tea and crumpets with the British while the Yankees were hijacking tea shipments, revolting in the streets, and such. There are some rather significant cultural differences.
 
Canada now dominates World Bank corruption list, thanks to SNC-Lavalin | Financial Post


:lol: We just saw how Trudeau threw two principled women under the bus....... because of SNC-Lavalin!




JUSTIN TRUDEAU:

CHAMPION OF WOMEN THE MOST CORRUPT!


Good grief, Tos, the formatting though!! Why do I always need sunglasses to read hard right posts?? Simmer down, please! lol ;)

Also, why are you spamming that article? We're all smart enough to read it the first time.

Question: What are you most passionate about? Protecting feminism, in the form of standing behind these women (and all other women), or seeing egg on the PM's face?
 
A 'like' for your optimism, sir. ;)

Indeed, we mustn't forget we were the ones having tea and crumpets with the British while the Yankees were hijacking tea shipments, revolting in the streets, and such. There are some rather significant cultural differences.

Oh, I do like you... At the risk of causing offense, I have to ask...how old are you? I have an assumption...I promise to be honest about that assumption if you answer the question, if you care to know.
 
Good grief, Tos, the formatting though!! Why do I always need sunglasses to read hard right posts?? Simmer down, please! lol ;)

Also, why are you spamming that article? We're all smart enough to read it the first time.

Question: What are you most passionate about? Protecting feminism, in the form of standing behind these women (and all other women), or seeing egg on the PM's face?

I'm just stating it the way I see it.
That's not spamming! Why, does reading that short clip bother you?
You may've read the whole article - but maybe, not everyone did.
So....don't speak for everybody, please!

I take it you have no problems with a leader who is......... corrupt?
Isn't that corruption? Protecting a corrupt company - intervening for it with the prosecutorial justice?
I showed why the prosecution disqualified SNC-Lavalin! Isn't that enough for you?


Anyway, whatever. Just scroll down, or put me on ignore. Don't let my posts upset you.
Mind your own post! You're not the voice of "authority" - certainly, not mine!
 
Last edited:
I'm just stating it the way I see it. That's not spamming! Does reading that short clip bothering you?

I take it you have no problems with a leader who is......... corrupt?
Isn't that corruption? Protecting a corrupt company - intervening for it with the prosecutorial justice?
I showed why the prosecution disqualified SNC-Lavalin! Isn't that enough for you?
You have your own values- I have mine.

Anyway, whatever. Just ignore. Don't let my posts upset you.


Arg, Tos, have a sense of humor, lady, you know I love you. Dang!

And you know how I feel about the SNC / Trudeau, I was very clear, and you participated in the thread.

But you get that conservative sensationalism will be the thing that sweeps this under the carpet, right? Canadians are far more tired of the over the top, Toronto Sun / Rebel-fueled rhetoric than any of the usual nonsense happening in Ottawa. How have you guys not learned from 2015? When you guys get out of control, everyone starts voting strategically. You guys really should avoid the whole cartoon character strategy this time around...we might actually get some decent government in this country.
 
Oh, I do like you... At the risk of causing offense, I have to ask...how old are you? I have an assumption...I promise to be honest about that assumption if you answer the question, if you care to know.
Age 36.

I notice your 'lean' is 'progressive'. I tend to be quite conservative, both socially and economically. I do have progressive friends, but this is because we don't discuss religion or politics. I also qualify as left-leaning or centrist in various respects according to the US standard. For example, I prefer socialized healthcare to the US model, I'm a supporter of progressive taxation, I'm anti-war (especially where it concerns the US's endless misadventures in the Middle East and Northern Africa). I'm an AGW agnostic, a US Second Amendment fence-sitter, an academic observer of conspiracy theories (i.e. I try to keep an open mind), and a supporter of the arts. I'm also incredibly fond of snow leopards (you could probably tell from the avatar).

However, I am, above all things, a fundamentalist. Morally, socially, religiously, economically, philosophically, scientifically.

Suffice it to say that the number of people who identify as 'progressive', who've routinely debated me in weighty issues (e.g. politics), and who've said that they 'like me' afterward is, I'm quite certain, precisely zero. Hence I'll take no offense if you hastily reconsider your prima facie assessment. ;)

I don't identify with any given political party or political movement, mind you.
 
Trump and his supporters are the laughingstock of the world. Anything to say on topic tho?

What the world understands is that the Democratic Party is the greatest enemy the United States has ever had.
 
What the world understands is that the Democratic Party is the greatest enemy the United States has ever had.

Who gives a damn? This is about Trudeau and Canada. Keep your toxic American hyper-partisan crap in the other 90% of the site.
Greatest enemy the US ever had. My gawd you guys are just rotting holes into your own brains and loving it, bragging about how dysfunctional you're making your minds.
 
So. That's why he's so hot on SNC-Lavalin! :lol:
When French Quebec starts spoofin' you......you gotta be in trouble!



 
Last edited:
When French Quebec starts spoofin' you......you gotta be in very, very serious trouble!





That was really well done
 
Back
Top Bottom