BeaverFever

No he plays you gullible MAGA clowns like a fiddle. You worship an incompetent and corrupt nutjob

Meanwhile back in reality another series of baseless politically motivated prosecutions fell apart when a Grad Jury threw out the ridiculous charges Trump tried to brig against 6 Democrat congressmen for accurately stating that US Military personnel do not have to follow illegal orders.

LMAO They are forbidding people in other countries from playing or watching basketball? That’s what you’re going with? Bats are now using the expression “Trumpshit crazy” PS I notice the NBA recently signed a 5-year deal to play exhibition games in China and basketball itself is mot forbidden to the contrary it’s one of the most popular sports in that country.

Seriously. Completely ignoring for a moment the fact that his tweet about the bridge was full of lies, his claim that if Canada ”does a trade deal” with China the Chinese will somehow ban hockey and the Stanley Cup in Canada is absolute looney tunes. How can any of you clueless cult read that and not understand how batshit crazy that is ???

He probably just wants it named after him like he’s demanding of so many other landmarks. If we do that it would have to be called “The massively corrupt and clinically insane imbecile cult leader bridge” and that’s just too many letters to fit on a sign.

1) The USA will not allow foreign controlled nukes on its border. The second they catch wind of our ambition even a progressive democrat would hit us with punishing sanctions or military action or our leading nuclear scientists would fall out of windows or all of the above, years before we ever actually had a functional nuke. The only nukes they would ever allow would be US military deployed on Canadian soil 2) There is no threat Canadian nukes would deter. In fact it t would be an invitation for America to invade It is not realistic to expect that Canada would respond to a conventional invasion by launching a nuclear first strike against anyone especially because the other nuclear powers have thousands of warheads that will blow Canada off the map. Secondly the only country we realistically have to worry about invading us is USA and even if we somehow prevented a nuclear retaliation from them we’d still be irradiating ourselves as we’d surely experience some of the fallout. Case in point: India and Pakistan both have nukes, India recently bombed sites across Pakistan. Russia has nukes, Ukraine invaded and held Russian territory for over a year without a nuclear response.

I personally don’t support gender reassignment surgery for minors but the fact here is that prominent supporters of youth gender reassignment still supported this lawsuit. It was an accusation of medical malpractice in the case of this one individual not a case against reassignment surgery for minors.

so now you admit that you made those claims and that they’re incorrect? Who other than Republicans were repeating Trump’s lie that Maduro was deliberately trafficking cocaine into USA to “attack” America and that he had to go to “stop” the cocaine? As we can see, Maduro is gone but the cocaine is still flowing as much as it had before. So what did getting rid of Maduro solve?.

LMAO! There’s the story changing in real time! It’s all about the cocaine entering America, until that claim is debunked, then it was never about that all, it was about…..??????? Hey look! Squirrel! LMAO your post says “We never made those claims! Also Everyone made those claims not just us”! Exactly what you said about Iraq Both contradictory claims are false.

A lot of the conspiracies are third party claims including confirmation of who “the big guy” is.

Wait wait wait you mean the claims that the Cocaine was all coming from Maduro and taking him out would stop it, that was all bullshit ??? Who knew! Gosh those Republicans were wrong on Saddam’s WMD and al-Qaeda links now wrong on this, how unlucky! Don’t worry they’ll get it right next time, the cocaine and WMD are prorated all stored in Greenland, America must invade ASAP

Colombian criminal organizations find new ways to move cocaine as U.S. continues boat strikes The United States’ aggressive boat bombing campaign targeting suspected drug traffickers in the Western Hemisphere has begun to reshape Colombia’s drug trade and its long-running armed conflict as criminal organizations find new ways to move cocaine, experts and Indigenous leaders say. But the lethal strikes by U.S. forces on alleged drug vessels in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific, which have killed at least 126 people since Sept. 2, have done little to make a dent in Colombia’s lucrative cocaine trade. … However, rather than halting the cocaine trade, Operation Southern Spear, as the U.S. military effort is known, appears to have simply displaced it. In Colombia’s Pacific region, from which most U.S.-bound cocaine departs, the country’s traffickers are establishing new routes through Ecuador and Peru to reach legal seaports, swapping speedboats for container ships as they adapt toU.S. military threats, said Mr. Florez. The Caribbean operation has also led to the carving of new routes through the Amazon rain forest into Brazil and Venezuela…, https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/article-colombian-criminal-organizations-find-new-ways-to-move-cocaine-as-us/

Great now do all the emails mentioning Hunter Biden or “the big guy”

The problem with the Big 3 is that their cars have a reputation for being crap, unless you shell out doe the very highest trim option and even then they still don’t have the same reputation and endurance as Japanese and some European brands. I don’t know anyone who WANTS a North American car, they SETTLE for one because they are usually cheaper. Trucks are the only exception here. Interestingly there’s an article out today entitled Japanese carmakers retain Canadian footprint as U.S. scales back Ontario operations In summary, Japanese companies don’t cravenly chase short-sighted, short-term profits they way American companies do and not being American means they don’t have to kowtow to the mad king in Washington. But there is a discussion to be had: if Trump is going to make the US inaccessible to Canadian-made cars, what is the compelling argument to make conventional cars in Canada that can be made anywhere in the world? As it is, the Canadian auto industry constantly had its hand out for subsidies and other special treatment BEFORE Trump’s tariffs, it’s like we’re applying all these artificial interventions to keep an Industry that doesn’t naturally belong here anymore. What there IS a natural home for in Canada is EV manufacturing. We have the critical minerals, we have the research expertise in battery tech and no country outside of China has yet emerged as the epicentre for this industry. And we have the leverage to tell car companies they have to build here if they want access. Or better yet start our own EV company. The EV startups are leapfrogging the legacy carmakers in the space anyway. BTW the Big 3 aren’t going to disappear overnight, they’ve invested billions in their non-us facilities, almost all of money borrowed from US investors, they are not just going to walk away from those site especially not while still paying for them. And even if they could they are not going to have billions more to borrow building new US facilities. And even if they did it would take many years, far more than Trump has left. Instead what will likely happen if the pattern continues is that Canadian production will gradually relocate over years maybe a decade or more

Yeah well why are you complaining that we’re running deficits now its the same situation. And since you need a reminder, Carney was advising Harper then. Harper promoted him to Governor of Bank of Canada, named him to the Order of Canada and he was selected to Governor Bank of England as a result of his efforts and now Harper is on of Carney’s advisors. Actually in his final budget, expenses were still higher than revenue but he covered the difference by taking funds from treasury. That’s lie withdrawing w your RRSP to pay your rent and pretending you’re running a balanced budget. No he changed the transfer formula which saw Ontario lose out on hundreds of millions of dollars. He also cut provincial transfers for crime prevention. What exactly did I lie about? You have to stop using that accusation falsely. Like I said, it’s a tell that you have no clue what you’re talking about.

Yes you are gaslighting. The fact is Harper inherited balance budgets and then ran deficits which is THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF WHAT YOU TRIED TO CLAIM

FACT: Kash Patel and Pam Bondi are massively unqualified MAGA nutjobs who believe in 2020 conspiracy lies FACT: They have already tried UNSUCCESSFULLY to persecute Trump’s enemies with baseless and unwarranted investigations and prosecutions. FACT: They haven’t provided any evidence to show this investigation is warranted It’s obvious Trump is on a wild fishing expedition, they don’t even know what they’re searching for, just hoping to find something ANYTHING that they can prosecute those 2 black women who MAGA tried and failed to go after previously and ended up having to pay millions in damages to for their defamation and harrowing.

Only in the Orwellian dictatorship hellscape you people are trying to create do people need to present evidence of innocence when targeted by the state. Where is the evidence of wrongdoing? All of Trump’s 2020 election lies were thoroughly investigated and debunked half a decade ago. This is yet another of his politically motivated abuses of power that has no basis in fact because he is still butthurt after having legitimately lost the election.

The correct title of this thread should be “Trump’s Assault On Democracy Continues With More Baseless Politically Motivated Investigations”. Subtitle: “Still no evidence to support 2020 stolen election lies” Anyone who believes any of Trump’s baseless and completely fabricated 2020 election conspiracy lies is a brainwashed cultist loser, period. It os a waste of time and energy to even debate it, it’s like trying to convince an ISIS member that Islam is jot the one true religion. Their beliefs cannot be dislodged with facts and logic because they were not formed through facts and logic in the first place.

Not true at all. In fact Canada has the lowest debt to gdp ratio in the G7. We are the furthest from the brink of any of our peers.

Gaslight much? The Harper conservatives inherited a balanced budget and then ran consecutive deficits for most of their time in office, the exact opposite of what you claim. Why? Because they admitted that running deficits was necessary during difficult times. One of your tell that when you start accusing others of lying it’s actually you who is telling the lie.

Baloney every company on earth accounts for capital expenses differently than operational expenses. A capital expense is building a factory. An opera expense is the monthly costs to run the factory. The former is an asset that appreciates or depreciates over an extended period of time and is measured against long term liabilities, the latter is basically a measure of your in and out daily cash flow. The PBO doesn’t have a problem with dividing budget into capital and operating. He’s saying some of what carney is calling capital should be operating. I will leave that to the technocrats to debate. As for the balanced business culture, now more than ever we need to invest when we are under threat. Our military, our infrastructure our industries all need major investments and going to grow themselves. Nobody ever won a war by not investing in their military or a trade war by not investing in trade infrastructure. Every world power that has ever existed became one because they spent massively on defence, infrastructure, research, etc.

Mark Carney and Stephen Harper are both ‘the smartest guy in the room’ — and that’s not all they have in common The former Conservative prime minister is now one of the people whose advice the current Liberal prime minister seeks, Tonda MacCharles writes. OTTAWA — At times it is uncanny. It’s not just that Prime Minister Mark Carney’s tight-ship governing style is an abrupt break from that of his Liberal predecessor, Justin Trudeau. It’s that it is remarkably reminiscent of another modern prime minister’s — namely his Conservative predecessor, Stephen Harper. Mark Carney’s Rolodex is a trove of some of the most powerful political, business and media leaders in the world. Among them: Nigel Wright, Harper’s former chief of staff and later Onyx’s top executive in London, whose death last fall Carney marked with a heartfelt respectful tribute; and former interim Conservative leader Rona Ambrose and Harper-era cabinet minister Lisa Raitt, who now both hold in senior roles at Canadian banks. So it should be no surprise Carney’s contacts also include Harper. Harper is the prime minister who not only once named Carney to run Canada’s central bank, but is now one of the people Carney frequently reaches out to as he navigates the challenges of governing Canada at a chaotic time. Sources, whom the Star has agreed not to identify in order to freely discuss the relationship, tell the Star the two have spoken regularly since Carney became prime minister. Harper has publicly referred to one of those conversations. Carney has not. To what extent Harper’s private advice influences Carney is known only to them. The two will appear together next week on Parliament Hill, when an official portrait of the former prime minister is unveiled in a long-standing tradition to celebrate political leadership and peaceful government transitions. Their similarities — in personal and governing styles — are striking. Differences, however, are also coming into view. ‘The smartest guy in the room’ Carney and Harper are each seen by those who deal closely with them as the “smartest guy in the room,” and as acting like it. Neither suffers fools easily. Both have had testy relations with bureaucrats, and high expectations for the civil service to deliver on their political agendas. They have the same habit of quoting themselves — “As I said …” — a verbal tell that also serves to remind others of their prescience: They saw x or y — whatever political event or trend that is unfolding — long before others did. For both, the lure of the job seems to have been the power to make decisions and to act, and an impatience with the formalities is apparent. Each man is a policy wonk, with little apparent love for the performative part of the job. The campaigning, travelling on election buses and planes to pitch their message, kissing babies and dealing with media are all just the price of getting to make those decisions. A difference on caucus management is apparent. Harper formalized a structure for caucus feedback, with ministers required to address backbenchers’ concerns before going to a cabinet committee with a bill for approval, according to Conservative sources. Carney, according to Liberal sources, listens to his MPs’ concerns in weekly caucus meetings — and, unlike Trudeau, does not send out ministers to make regional announcements that come as news to local MPs. Still, just as Harper’s MPs rarely spoke out against him, neither do Carney’s. Both men spent years thinking about what it would be like to be prime minister. In minority Parliaments, neither is afraid of governing as if they had a majority. They welcomed floor-crossers to boost their ranks. Both seek opposition support for legislation on a case-by-case basis instead of trying to form a governing coalition to pass an agenda. Leading minority governments, they invoked winning election mandates as reason enough for the opposition to support them. Neither balked at spending political capital to achieve their goals: Harper made the unexpected move to declare Quebecers a nation within a united Canada, and to issue a formal apology to Indigenous residential school survivors. Carney has turned back Trudeau-era climate policies and swiftly moved to ramp up Canada’s defence spending. Both men have only rarely admitted they were wrong. Carney acknowledged the Donald Trump era has accelerated economic disruptions faster than he had predicted. Harper ultimately walked back his aversion to deficits as the global financial crisis unfolded in the midst of the 2008 election campaign, and later borrowed heavily to manage the economic fallout. Both men wield a sharp sense of humour, a trait that could be a superpower but which neither really uses to his best advantage. Harper — caricatured by comedians as aloof and cold — used to make self-deprecating jokes about coming from a family of accountants and going into politics because he had the most charisma. In private, his humour was more edgy. But while he privately nailed imitations of politicians like Jean Chrétien, he rarely displayed his talent for mimicry in public. Carney’s sense of humour is more playful but also comes with a bite, as Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne can attest. “What kind of shop are you running!” he once said to Champagne in front of reporters. But where Harper had a poker face, Carney’s facial reactions have given rise to numerous Instagram memes. Hot and cold with the media Then there is their all-too-familiar hot and cold relationship with the media. Carney and Harper both adopted a command-and-control style for leaks. Harper tried to ban his advisers and ministers from talking to media, while Carney has, to a lesser extent, clamped down on chatty MPs and ministers. Yet both cultivated good relations with journalists before they got into the Prime Minister’s Office. As a young Reform MP, Harper was a willing interviewee and smooth backroom pundit. When Carney was at Canada’s central bank, he developed relationships with influential (and mostly male) journalists in Ottawa, a trend it appears continued when he was at the Bank of England. Once in the top job, however, Carney and Harper quickly grew impatient with media. “When we have something to announce, we’ll announce it,” Harper would say. Carney frequently bristles at questions, particularly those that focus on his integrity or perceived conflicts of interest, or his conversations with U.S. President Donald Trump; he has snapped at reporters, “It’s not newsworthy,” “It’s a detail,” “Who cares?” and “It’s a boring question.” Harper and Carney use even the same slogans: “Canada’s new government” and “Canada is an energy superpower.” They both love a good “strategy” or “action plan” to brand their governing efforts. The late Jim Flaherty was an important figure in the political careers of both men. As Harper’s finance minister, Flaherty brought a much-needed everyman flourish to Harper’s economic agenda — and is believed to have persuaded Harper to appoint Carney as governor of the Bank of Canada in 2008. Carney and Flaherty had both played hockey at Ivy League schools and they got along well. Flaherty was somewhat leery of his cabinet colleagues, once griping they didn’t read anything, whereas he read everything because he didn’t want to get caught out. Carney reads voraciously, and has scolded his ministers and top officials who don’t. Harper had a temper that was sometimes on display — he once angrily kicked over a chair at a political convention — while Carney’s was well-known in during his term as governor of the Bank of England, where one newspaper headlined his “volcanic” temper. The same and yet different For all their similarities, however, significant differences remain. The two come from similarly modest, middle-class backgrounds, and identify as Westerners. Harper grew up in the Toronto neighbourhood of Leaside but moved to Alberta as a young man and calls Calgary home. Carney, born in Fort Smith in the Northwest Territories, grew up in Edmonton. Yet Carney quickly ascended to the circles of the global elite in a way Harper did not, attending Harvard and Oxford universities, earning a PhD in economics, and working for the investment bank Goldman Sachs in London, Tokyo and Toronto. Harper completed a master’s degree in economics and quickly got into politics — where his critics would later challenge his claim to be an economist. One source who knows both men well believes Carney displays a higher level of self-confidence and tolerance for political risk because he had vastly more experience at a global level before becoming prime minister than Harper ever had. Harper would never have made a speech like Carney’s in Davos without mapping out all the ways it could go wrong, the source said, whereas Carney likely did not expect that some like U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer would publicly differ with him — and, more importantly, likely does not care. But Harper was also more attuned to domestic political sentiment than Carney is, the insider said. Harper would never have given the Plains of Abraham speech that Carney delivered the day after coming back from Davos, which met with widespread disapproval in Quebec. For all their current simpatico, there was a moment of tension in Harper and Carney’s relationship during last spring’s election campaign when, in support of Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre, Harper publicly questioned Carney’s claim to having steered Canada’s response to the global financial crisis of 2008. Harper credited the heavy lifting to their mutual friend, his finance minister Jim Flaherty. Carney’s campaign responded wryly, noting that Harper had once approached Carney — not Poilievre — to be his finance minister. What does it all add up to? Is Carney the most conservative prime minister the Liberal party has ever elected? Some Liberals and some Conservatives think so. But next week, when Carney attends Harper’s portrait unveiling, he will honour the political contributions of Canada’s last Conservative prime minister, the man who certainly set Carney on his own path to power. https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/mark-carney-and-stephen-harper-are-both-the-smartest-guy-in-the-room-and-thats/article_181377d2-5d6d-46c4-b383-02a68e14d8e6.html

USA is worse