Trudeau more unpopular than popular for the first time since election: survey

[Rob_Zepp]

Could this guy be any slimier?    Trudeau is such a scar on Canadian history.   He is such a disingenuous tool.   His only saving grace is that he is sharing North America with the orange headed disaster to the South.  

 

https://globalnews.ca/news/5283968/justin-trudeau-mark-norman-case/

 

Roy Green: Sorry does seem to be the hardest word

By Roy GreenHost, Corus Radio Network  Global News

•  
• more

 

Conservative MP Erin O'Toole pushed for the Defence Committee to take on examining the handling of the Vice Adm. Mark Norman case, stating there was "so much to examine.

- A A +

Justin Trudeau, holding court at one of his meandering and increasingly purpose-challenged town halls in February of last year, assessed as inevitable that the future for Canadian Vice-Admiral Mark Norman, second-in-command of the nation’s military, would unfold in a courtroom.

It was a deeply disturbing declaration by the nation’s prime minister, considering no criminal or other charge had been laid against the vice-admiral.

 

Fast forward to last week as Canadians witnessed both Trudeau’s “inevitable” pronouncement and the charge itself succumbing to a courtroom version of the historic boxing ring “no mas” of multiple world champion Roberto Duran.

 

READ MORE: Slimy Liberals vote down attempt to launch probe into Mark Norman case

Last week the criminal charge against Norman was judged unsustainable. The likelihood of a conviction? Just about zero. Just as Duran self-assessed his chance of defeating Sugar Ray Leonard at, well, zero. No mas. No more.

Norman must have experienced palpable relief, though now denied the opportunity to identify the criminal charge as the result of an ill-tempered and pettily vindictive man’s anger.

 

Then there is the shameful manner in which Norman had been relieved of his duties by his erstwhile and perhaps soon to again be his boss, Canada’s military Chief of Staff General Jonathan Vance.

 

For almost a week after his dismissal, Norman’s supposed crime went unannounced. Speculation ran rife. Was the vice-admiral a foreign agent? Was there a sexual misconduct issue? It was viciously cruel to the vice-admiral and his family.

 

WATCH BELOW: The political debate in the wake of Vice-Admiral Mark Norman’s vindication

 

Then, no, the federal government would not be paying Norman’s legal expenses. Vance, with the admitted support of Minister of National Defence Harjit Sajjan, would allow a respected almost 40-year veteran of Canada’s military twist slowly toward the knife-edge of personal insolvency. This, while others in government, including Trudeau and his key advisers, busily engaged outside legal representation — billings to be covered by taxpayers, in the event an RCMP investigation might require their testimony.

Ever so slowly the criminal case against Norman wobbled forward. Accused of sharing cabinet confidentiality concerning the contracting of outfitting an existing vessel as a Canadian Navy supply ship, Norman began to gain support nationally. Leaking cabinet chatter, even decisions, was common practice, when convenient. When was the last time cabinet refused to deliver early details concerning a federal budget? Exactly.

 

READ MORE: GoFundMe campaign for Vice-Admiral Mark Norman will remain active for now

 

Nationally, we became aware Norman’s defence was stonewalled by the Trudeau government. Documentation requested by his lawyer, the remarkable and determined Marie Henein, was denied or delayed and infamously, in one well-reported case, a 60-page document arrived entirely redacted.

The fearless defence lawyer let it be known the Norman’s chief tormentors would be facing her in an open court of law, something millions of Canadians would have booked their vacations around. “No mas,” but this time in tears.

Then, last week Henein, who had interviewed former Conservative government cabinet ministers Peter MacKay, Erin O’Toole and Jason Kenney, presented new information to the crown — something the RCMP in its investigation of the vice-admiral had largely omitted as MacKay shared with me on air. No mas.

 

And this week in Canada’s parliament, an all-party apology to Norman for the manner in which he had been mistreated was agreed to.

Missing from the reading of the apology motion were Trudeau and Sajjan. And the Liberal caucus? Mirroring their leader, they refused to either stand or applaud.

 

READ MORE: House of Commons offers all-party apology to Vice Adm. Mark Norman over failed prosecution

 

Contrast this behaviour with Trudeau’s words upon the death of Fidel Castro:

 

“Fidel Castro was a larger than life leader who served his people for almost half a century. While a controversial figure, both Mr. Castro’s supporters and detractors recognized his tremendous dedication and love for the Cuban people who had a deep and lasting affection for ‘el Comandante.'”

 

Those words rightfully resulted in challenge and scorn as el Comandante was particularly known for his brutal treatment of Cubans who fell into disfavour. Thousands were executed and many thousands more braved shark-infested waters as they set to sea, hoping to reach freedom and Miami on little more than sheets of plywood motivated by make-shift sails.

 

Trudeau concluded his tribute to Castro with the words “remarkable leader.”

 

Vice-Admiral Mark Norman is a remarkable leader, one with a history of personal dedication to Canada.

 

Canadians closed ranks with the vice-admiral. A Go-Fund-Me page has resulted in almost $440,000 in contributions toward his legal defence.

 

WATCH BELOW: Trudeau faces questions for first time since charges dropped in Mark Norman case

Mr. Trudeau, for you and Mr. Sajjan to duck the reading of the approved by all parties parliamentary apology to Vice-Admiral Norman supports Elton John’s thesis, “Sorry seems to be the hardest word.”

And how is Paris in May? More comfortable than Ottawa likely.

[189lb enforcers?]

Canada voted in a dopey, drama teacher, playboy trust fund kid as their leader. 

 

What will it be next time? 

 

Shame on us. 

[Guest]

Just now, 189lb enforcers? said:

Canada voted in a dopey, drama teacher, playboy trust fund kid as their leader. 

 

What will it be next time? 

 

Shame on us. 

Better than the self proclaimed anti-choice feminist. 

[JM_]

4 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Could this guy be any slimier?    Trudeau is such a scar on Canadian history.   He is such a disingenuous tool.   His only saving grace is that he is sharing North America with the orange headed disaster to the South.  

 

https://globalnews.ca/news/5283968/justin-trudeau-mark-norman-case/

 

Roy Green: Sorry does seem to be the hardest word

 

 

If this were true, why would the top military commander in Canada say there was no interference?

 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/vance-norman-decision-mine-1.5140897

 

Why would the justice department also say there was no interference? 

 

There's nothing whatsoever to back up the idea that Trudeau directed anyone to do anything on this. 

 

--

 

What I'm interested in is why the CPC cabinet members let Norman swing in the wind for nearly 3 years? 

Edited May 18, 2019 by Jimmy McGill

[Rob_Zepp]

11 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

 

If this were true, why would the top military commander in Canada say there was no interference?

 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/vance-norman-decision-mine-1.5140897

 

Why would the justice department also say there was no interference? 

 

There's nothing whatsoever to back up the idea that Trudeau directed anyone to do anything on this. 

 

--

 

What I'm interested in is why the CPC cabinet members let Norman swing in the wind for nearly 3 years? 

Jimmy, I think you are defending a guy who is re-arranging deck chairs.....and the ship is taking on water faster, and faster, and......

[JM_]

37 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Jimmy, I think you are defending a guy who is re-arranging deck chairs.....and the ship is taking on water faster, and faster, and......

I'm not defending him per se, I'm point out the red herring of the article. There's lots of reasons to be pissed at JT, but this just isn't one of them based on the events and facts. 

[RUPERTKBD]

13 hours ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Canada voted in a dopey, drama teacher, playboy trust fund kid as their leader. 

 

What will it be next time? 

 

Shame on us. 

Serious question: What background do you feel a PM should come from? Doctor? Lawyer? Indian Chief?

 

I get that some people believe someone with a financial background should run things, (see the USA) or someone who has argued cases in court, but the reality is, people with those sorts of qualifications generally get appointed to administer those departments. The party leader, doesn't really need practical experience in those areas, along as he or she appoints someone who does.

 

I see the PM as someone who is the international face of the country and although JT certainly has his flaws, I preferred him to Harper and Angry Tom. I also prefer him to Scheer and Singh.

 

When the best you can do is "Nice hair", or "Drama Teacher", you haven't got much, IMHO.

[Tortorella's Rant]

13 hours ago, Jack_T said:

Better than the self proclaimed anti-choice feminist. 

Barely scraping by that lowly bar set down south. Pathetic.. 

[The Lock]

8 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said:

Serious question: What background do you feel a PM should come from? Doctor? Lawyer? Indian Chief?

 

I get that some people believe someone with a financial background should run things, (see the USA) or someone who has argued cases in court, but the reality is, people with those sorts of qualifications generally get appointed to administer those departments. The party leader, doesn't really need practical experience in those areas, along as he or she appoints someone who does.

 

I see the PM as someone who is the international face of the country and although JT certainly has his flaws, I preferred him to Harper and Angry Tom. I also prefer him to Scheer and Singh.

 

When the best you can do is "Nice hair", or "Drama Teacher", you haven't got much, IMHO.

Shouldn't matter the background of someone. It should matter what he plans to do. If a homeless guy proves to better than JT (wouldn't be hard) then elect him instead.

 

Actually, I'd even argue that there are a lot of homeless guys out there that probably have a better idea on the situation of things than Trudeau does.

[The Lock]

13 hours ago, Jack_T said:

Better than the self proclaimed anti-choice feminist. 

Yet, when JT made the cabinet half male and half female, he discriminated against how many males?

 

We have the anti-choice feminist as our leader. He's just in the form of a man.

 

EDIT: I get people trying to make a difference by the way, but JT kind of does the opposite of equality, which as far I as know, is supposed to be about equal opportunity. This is not equal opportunity. We went the opposite direction.

Edited May 18, 2019 by The Lock

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, The Lock said:

Yet, when JT made the cabinet half male and half female, he discriminated against how many males?

 

We have the anti-choice feminist as our leader. He's just in the form of a man.

 

EDIT: I get people trying to make a difference by the way, but JT kind of does the opposite of equality, which as far I as know, is supposed to be about equal opportunity. This is not equal opportunity. We went the opposite direction.

That is all noise for me. I will never vote for a leader who has stated they are “pro life”. I don’t care about assurances to not reopen the debate etc - political landscapes change, and politicians aren’t known for keeping their promises. 

 

I am no fan of JT, but he gets my vote so long as the Conservatives continue to choose socially regressive leaders and the NDP and Greens stand to only split the vote.

Edited May 18, 2019 by Guest

[The Lock]

2 minutes ago, Jack_T said:

That is all noise for me. I will never vote for a leader who has stated they are “pro life”. I don’t care about assurances to not reopen the debate etc - political landscapes change, and politicians aren’t known for keeping their promises. 

 

I am no fan of JT, but he gets my vote so long as the Conservatives continue to choose socially regressive leaders.

I would have agreed with you a couple of years ago (and I even helped vote JT in), but JT's stooped lowers than the Conservatives in my book. I'd vote NDP before Trudeau even at this point, and I'm scared of the NDP. lol

Edited May 18, 2019 by The Lock

[JM_]

10 minutes ago, The Lock said:

Yet, when JT made the cabinet half male and half female, he discriminated against how many males?

 

We have the anti-choice feminist as our leader. He's just in the form of a man.

 

EDIT: I get people trying to make a difference by the way, but JT kind of does the opposite of equality, which as far I as know, is supposed to be about equal opportunity. This is not equal opportunity. We went the opposite direction.

I would love to hear the explanation of how balance between men and women in cabinet discriminates against either group. 

[The Lock]

2 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

I would love to hear the explanation of how balance between men and women in cabinet discriminates against either group. 

Well, if you apply for a job and there are 25 men and 5 females that apply, and there's 10 people hired, males then have a 25% chance of being hired while females have 100% chance of being hired. Is that fair?

[JM_]

Just now, The Lock said:

Well, if you apply for a job and there are 25 men and 5 females that apply, and there's 10 people hired, males then have a 25% chance of being hired while females have 100% chance of being hired. Is that fair?

but you're just making up numbers. I can say the exact opposite and it proves nothing. 

 

On the logic of it, how is a balanced cabinet discrmintaory to either group? we have 50% men and 50% women in our society so it creates an equal opportunity for both. 

[NewbieCanuckFan]

On 3/25/2019 at 1:57 PM, Rob_Zepp said:

You just revealed how old you are Zepp.

 

"Hipsters" like Trudeau Jr. would 'ask' Siri on his Iphone rather than old farts googling it.

Edited May 18, 2019 by NewbieCanuckFan

[aliboy]

1 hour ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Jimmy, I think you are defending a guy who is re-arranging deck chairs.....and the ship is taking on water faster, and faster, and......

Been thinking the same thing, been waiting for that moment when they start to turn things around. Now it looks like the new NAFTA will happen, which will be something, but I am really starting to think that the Libs feel they will come back as Canadians start thinking about the alternatives. Scheer isn't all that appealing, the NDP are a train wreck, the Greens have moved so far to the left. If the Libs even get a bit of momentum going, they might just make a comeback here. The biggest movement is going to come as we get very close to the election.

[The Lock]

6 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

but you're just making up numbers. I can say the exact opposite and it proves nothing. 

 

On the logic of it, how is a balanced cabinet discrmintaory to either group? we have 50% men and 50% women in our society so it creates an equal opportunity for both. 

Because less females are in politics than males. Here's an article showing that....

https://www.cbc.ca/news2/interactives/women-politics/

 

These numbers are even close to my numbers, so the exact same thing that I described to you happens in politics if you have a 50/50 cabinet split. These numbers aren't made up when you consider them to be an example of what is actually happening.

Edited May 18, 2019 by The Lock

[JM_]

2 minutes ago, The Lock said:

Because less females are in politics than males. Here's an article showing that....

https://www.cbc.ca/news2/interactives/women-politics/

 

These numbers are even close to my numbers, so the exact same thing that I described to you happens in politics if you have a 50/50 cabinet split. These number aren't made up.

yes there currently are fewer women in politics but they make up 1/2 our society. Why should 50% of our country be under-represented in cabinet? 

 

If we're ever going to raise the number of women running, we can make sure the opportunities are equal to encourage that. 

Edited May 18, 2019 by Jimmy McGill

[The Lock]

Just now, Jimmy McGill said:

yes there currently are fewer women in politics but they make up 1/2 our society. Why should 50% of our country be under-represented in cabinet? 

Because they are not who we elected. We shouldn't care if they are male or female, we should be caring about whether they are representing our interests or not and if those interests are strictly based on whether someone's male or female, then we might as well forget about our best interests outside of that such as issues that actually affect the country.