Derek 2.0

Source?

I have no idea, he appointed hundreds that served through Harper's mandate......that Harper didn't muscle out.

Who cares.....he made hundreds of appointments when he thought he would be getting the boot. Again, who cares...the fact is he didn't do it. What "future appointments"? And how are they not legitimate? Is it because Trudeau didn't get to put his own guys in place? Sure, the very same reason Martin did it....but Harper didn't attempt to shame them into resigning.

He had no more, or no less business making them than Paul Martin......and its done, and now Trudeau is bullying them out.

Not in the dwindling months of office. Yet didn't stuff the Senate prior to leaving. As I clearly said, in the remaining months in office......and this is about Trudeau and his attempt to bully lawfully made appointments.....so he can get his own guys in. You mean extending contracts of several appointments?

Who cares? The majority of his appointments were renewing existing appointments........none the less, PM Harper didn't attempt to strong-arm PM Martin's appointments, as this current Government is doing, on the direction of the Trudeau PMO.

No, Martin appointed hundreds of patronage positions......and stacked the Senate months prior to his Government being brought down with scandal....Harper didn't stack the Senate (his biggest mistake in my opinion) and only a appointed a fraction of the appointments as PM PM.

I have no idea, I would assume most of Martin's appointments lasted years into the Harper Government .....none the less, the Harper Government didn't ask them to leave.

No, very relevant to the discussion, as it offers a historic contrast to this very topic, from the last Government.......the previous Liberal Government filled countless appointments that served through the following Government, and on forming Government, the previous Government didn't call for said appointments to resign. This is the exact opposite of which this Government is doing......they want their own appointments and they don't want to wait for natural attrition, and this is being directed from the Trudeau PMO.

No, they were appointed before a sitting Government was set to fall due to scandal. Of course it does, as Harper's Government didn't attempt to bully the previous Government's appointments into resigning.

Are the hundreds of appointments made by PM PM relevant, likewise the fact that on taking power, the Harper Tories didn't attempt to bully said appointments into resigning?

What "blew up"? Your ability to justify the Liberals wanting their own patronage appointments?

The Gomery report was released in 2005, weeks later followed by the vote of no confidence.......the stacking of Senators was done months prior.....in addition, in early 2005 when it looked as if the Martin Government was about to fall due to testimony from the Gomery commission, PM PM made hundreds of appointments.......and the Tories didn't call for a blood letting of the public service after they became Government. How is talking about patronage appointments, including Senators, "moving the goal posts"?

Sure, they stuffed the Senate months before the release of the Gomery report and the ensuing vote of no confidence.

Did the Harper Tories attempt to muscle out Liberal appointments in 2006?

Exactly, though the Soviets limited failures on the battlefield can be attributed to the porous Pakistani border (much like today), and likewise the CIA supplying Stingers forcing the Soviets to alter their own air mobility doctrine, these didn't loose the war for the Soviets. What lost it for them was they ran out of both political and financial capital with the demise of the Soviet Union itself....Glasnost lost the war for them at home, and their failed economy lost the war for them in Afghanistan.

Continuance of Government........if Harper had of been out to sandbag the new Trudeau Government in his remaining days, he would have filled the Senate as a parting gift......which would have far more effect on a Trudeau Government then a handful of patronage posts, that they want to now fill with their own.

In my opinion, Rubio checks all the boxes. He's young, scandal/controversy free, could help bring back Hispanics to the GOP fold (lost since GWB left office), a fiscal conservative, and though a religious man (by Canadian standards), comes across more subdued and comes from modest means...and is not as divisive as most of the others..... I read/watched over the last couple of days a good point made by a talking head.....Rubio has the most endorsements from sitting lawmakers, Cruz has none....This could indicate that Rubio has the chops to be the establishment candidate of course, but could also indicate that he is generally likable among his peers. I would take a young Rubio versus a Clinton baggage train in the general election any day of the week and twice on Sunday....

When the Harper Tories first came to power, did they attempt a blood letting of already filled positions.......or did they just wait for natural attrition to make their own appointments?

Where is the need to fill already staffed positions. As to the Tories going to the Ethics Commissioner, I have no idea.......perhaps they haven't complied all the relevant material/evidence to make a worthwhile case?

Yes, because its clearly a case of the Liberals just wanting to appoint their own patronage appointments.

Well there you go: And I would assume they won't release their findings because they are building their own court case and are waiting on: Odd that the Feds have let Cox be released on bail......but not her phone. If the private autopsy confirms Finicum was shot on his lower left side, and his movements were a reaction to a gunshot he received well his hands were up, I'll fully expect legal proceedings against the officer(s) and then a huge civil suit......make no mistake, though many of the refuge protesters are of modest means, Finicum's estate owns a 90k acre ranch, and has the resources for a protracted legal fight.

Without a doubt you can, but its effects are limited by the size of the device and the height in which it was detonated....theoretically, several large hydrogen bombs detonated over North America would have the results as discussed in the OP. And yes again, there are non-nuclear based weapons in development, at great cost, by several nations, but then they too are very limited in their scope, and better categorized as tactical battlefield munitions and a furtherance of modern electronic warfare.......not a threat that will send North America back into the 19th century.

And yet, you can't answer several simple questions?

No, because spending a fortune on addressing a remote problem is a waste of money, money that would be better spent on far more likely threats.