• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Liberal Minority Government 2021 - 2025

Status
Not open for further replies.
Who says they were "yesterdays" concerns besides you? I know Liberals wish these things would go away, but you can wish in one hand and crap in another.
Besides me? I neither said nor implied anything like those concepts no longer being important.

What I did was make a tongue in cheek reference to how prevalent they were in yesterday's conversation, and point out that the very next day we're faced with dishonestly framed information.
 
IMHO Carney, as PM of a country in an economic war with the USA, has not asked or met with Trump as the LPC is deathly afraid he will be ambushed publicly as Zelensky was.
 
Who says they were "yesterdays" concerns besides you? I know Liberals wish these things would go away, but you can wish in one hand and crap in another. No, I did not imply your a liberal.

These are more than just phrases, these two concerns were a big part of why Canada (and the Liberal Party) got fed up with Trudeau. Carney reign will be far, far shorter if he just ignores conflicts of interest and transparency.
There is a difference however between an actual conflict of interest, and precised or assumed one. The big thing making the rounds on social media is Carney has a conflict of interest with his investments now in a blind trust. All of that is now with the ethics commissioner but that's not good enough for people to wait for the commissioner to make a report. Not to mention one year from now said blind trust could have completely different investments. All it takes is some disinformation and people are gobbling it up, mostly because people dont know how our disclosure rules work, dont know what a blind trust is, etc etc
 
There is a difference however between an actual conflict of interest, and precised or assumed one. The big thing making the rounds on social media is Carney has a conflict of interest with his investments now in a blind trust. All of that is now with the ethics commissioner but that's not good enough for people to wait for the commissioner to make a report. Not to mention one year from now said blind trust could have completely different investments. All it takes is some disinformation and people are gobbling it up, mostly because people dont know how our disclosure rules work, dont know what a blind trust is, etc etc
The Conservatives asked him to get a head of the rules and on his own, show us his cards. Nope nope, he is complying with the rules (minimum standard, or lowest bar). Liberals want this to all just "go away". It won't. And after publicly shitting on Rosemary Barton, this wound will fester. Whether you want it to or not. Carney is very pro green energy tech and he wants to take Canada further down that abyss, whats to say he doesn't benefit from his assets?

One of the Conservative pledges (Liberals ignore or hide from) is that they will raise the bar on what MPs can have/control within their portfolio.

The bigger problem is this. There are very legit and real concerns about Carney and Liberals want to dismiss them, wave them off or deny they are not an issue. Lets get the writ dropped and see what Canada says.

I am glad many are excited that the LPC is up in the polls again. So were Prime Ministers Turner and Campbell in their elections.
 
And Carney's coziness with China after said country executed 4 Canadians for narcotics, mmmm. This will go ever well. Yeah, the same China that is dumping Fentanyl precursor chemicals into Canada.
 
How so? Elaborate please.
Dan McTeague has a negative opinion on Mark Carney. Right, wrong, or in between, whatever. It's his opinion to have.

It is factually correct that Dan McTeague served as a Liberal MP for a number of years.

It is also factually correct that Dan Mcteague is currently employed as the head of an O&G advocacy organization, and in the time (more than a decade) since his tenure as an MP has become an unabashed Conservative partisan, big time Poilievre (going back pre 2022 leadership) and Smith supporter.

Which fact set do you emphasize to define his opinion if you want it to have credibility to centrists/ undecided voters?
 
Last edited:
Which fact set do you emphasize to define his opinion if you want it to have credibility to centrists/ undecided voters?
Yes he is an O & G advocate. Hell, thats a popular thing again in Canada since "orange man bad" starting his shit talking. Even Liberals want O & G to grow again.

Dan was elected as an MP in 6 different federal elections (he did something right), and I would suspect his way of talking would sway many undecided voters over to his side.

His message is ringing through louder and louder (many others have similar views). Whether you believe CO2 is climate control knob or not, carbon tax/price/tariff (or clean energy charges) is NOT lowering carbon emissions in Canada (according to the PBO) and is only taking money away from Canadians (again according to the PBO, but that one is obvious).

The public just ain't accepting that clap trap anymore.
 
IMHO Carney, as PM of a country in an economic war with the USA, has not asked or met with Trump as the LPC is deathly afraid he will be ambushed publicly as Zelensky was.
That’s a good reason not to go. Who wants to go into a room filled with people who are basically screaming at you? The session with Zelenskyy was either planned ahead of time (most likely) or quickly spiralled out of control. Regardless, Carney should never accept being treated the way Zelenskyy was. If or when that happens I wouldn’t blame Carney one bit for stopping the meeting and immediate walking out. Trump treats Putin, a man truly deserving of the title of war criminal, with far more dignity than he did Trudeau (with all his faults).

Going back in time, I wonder how Trump would have treated Hitler, say, in 1939-41, when all of Europe was ablaze and Britain, Canada, Australia, N.Z., Russia and several other nations stood against the might of the German war machine.
 
The Conservatives asked him to get a head of the rules and on his own, show us his cards. Nope nope, he is complying with the rules (minimum standard, or lowest bar). Liberals want this to all just "go away". It won't. And after publicly shitting on Rosemary Barton, this wound will fester. Whether you want it to or not. Carney is very pro green energy tech and he wants to take Canada further down that abyss, whats to say he doesn't benefit from his assets?

One of the Conservative pledges (Liberals ignore or hide from) is that they will raise the bar on what MPs can have/control within their portfolio.

The bigger problem is this. There are very legit and real concerns about Carney and Liberals want to dismiss them, wave them off or deny they are not an issue. Lets get the writ dropped and see what Canada says.

I am glad many are excited that the LPC is up in the polls again. So were Prime Ministers Turner and Campbell in their elections.
Yes, that's exactly what the CPC wants, the release of the information without an expert opinion attached to it so it can spin it however they like. Lets face it there is two outcomes here, The ethics commissioner says there is a Conflict of interest and the CPC can hell "ah ha, see!!" or none found and they will claim that of course a liberal appointed commissioner found no conflict. Either way they will try and smear Carney. that is their play book, because thats Pierre's default setting, attack dog, not statesman.
 
There is a difference however between an actual conflict of interest, and precised or assumed one. The big thing making the rounds on social media is Carney has a conflict of interest with his investments now in a blind trust. All of that is now with the ethics commissioner but that's not good enough for people to wait for the commissioner to make a report. Not to mention one year from now said blind trust could have completely different investments. All it takes is some disinformation and people are gobbling it up, mostly because people dont know how our disclosure rules work, dont know what a blind trust is, etc etc
Just because it's in a blind trust doesn't mean he's instantly forgotten what he's invested in. So there is still the possibility of a conflict of interest.
 
Just because it's in a blind trust doesn't mean he's instantly forgotten what he's invested in. So there is still the possibility of a conflict of interest.
except the caretaker has full power to buy and sell, and by this time next week any stocks etc that could be conflict could be sold. A lot of assumptions are being made without evidence
 
The whole point of putting it in a blind trust is because there is or there is perceived conflict of interest. This isn’t new. If the CPC wanted stronger rules maybe they should have done that when THEY wrote the rules.
 
Yes, that's exactly what the CPC wants, the release of the information without an expert opinion attached to it so it can spin it however they like.

"Experts say"

Why not release the information then let "experts" weigh in on the information and Canadians can pick and choose who and what they believe?
 
"Experts say"

Why not release the information then let "experts" weigh in on the information and Canadians can pick and choose who and what they believe?
examining information takes time, and thats what the commissioner is doing, so why not let him do his job? Demanding the release because you are impatient at following the rules is just asking for ammunition to put your own spin on it. it's a ploy, thats it, Pierre tried to do the same thing with his responses to getting a security clearance, he used the fact Canadians dont know how the system works as a weapon to control the information space.
 
oh no. It’s an indictment of the CPC writing shitty rules and then crying foul about them.
I don't think they're even particularly shitty rules. There's just been a gap exposed by a pretty particular set of circumstances 19 years after they came into effect.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top