WE really need to get rid of this guy

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
23,842
8,404
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Opposition Motions
March 16, 2023 — Mr. Cooper (St. Albert—Edmonton)— That the House reaffirm the position of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs on the necessity and mechanics of a national public inquiry on the matter of foreign election interference, expressed in its 25th report, presented to the House on Wednesday, March 8, 2023, and call upon the government to begin consultations among the recognized parties within 24 hours of the adoption of this motion with a view to launch a national public inquiry before the end of March 2023.
Notice also received from:
Mr. Barrett (Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes), Mr. Chong (Wellington—Halton Hills), Ms. Dancho (Kildonan—St. Paul), Ms. Lantsman (Thornhill), Mr. Poilievre (Carleton), Mr. Scheer (Regina—Qu'Appelle) and Mr. Berthold (Mégantic—L'Érable) — March 16, 2023
To do an apparent end run around the Liberal filibuster blocking one study from going ahead, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre is forcing MPs to debate and then vote on a motion instructing an opposition-dominated House committee to strike its own review.

Monday is a Conservative opposition day in the House of Commons, allowing the Official Opposition to set the agenda, and Poilievre has picked a motion that, if passed, would have the House of Commons Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics Committee embark on a fresh foreign interference study.

The motion also contains clear instructions that the committee—chaired by Conservative MP John Brassard— call Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's chief of staff Katie Telford to testify under oath, followed by numerous other officials and players believed to have insight surrounding allegations of interference by China in last two federal elections.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
23,842
8,404
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Among the other names the Conservatives are pushing to come testify: Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland, authors of the Critical Election Incident Public Protocol reports for the 2019 and 2021 elections James Judd and Morris Rosenberg, respectively, and former Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation officials.

Also on the list: many federal security officials who have already testified and told MPs they are limited in what they can say publicly, current and former ambassadors to China, a panel of past national campaign directors as well as the representatives on the Security and Intelligence Threats to Elections (SITE) task force from each major party.

Trudeau's name is not on the witness list. Guess they’re looking for answers instead of Trudeau-isms…? In order to fit in what would be more than a dozen additional hours of testimony, the motion prescribes that the committee meet at least one extra day each week regardless of whether the House is sitting, and have priority access to House resources.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
23,842
8,404
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
It remains to be seen how the NDP respond to the motion, with signals being sent that the caucus is still considering its options. The Conservatives and the Bloc wouldn't have the votes to see it pass without them, and over the weekend a number of Conservative MPs were posting about today’s debate, putting the pressure on the NDP to vote with them.

"While this motion is a test for this government, it is also a test for the NDP," said Conservative MP and one of the party's leading spokespeople on the story Michael Cooper, kicking off the debate on Monday.

"The NDP has a choice: They can continue to do the bidding for this corrupt Liberal government, propping up this corrupt prime minister. Or, they can work with us to protect the sanctity of the ballot box and the integrity of our elections by working to get the answers that Canadians deserve... We will soon find out what choice they make," Cooper said.

The New Democrats have been in favour of an as-public-as-possible airing of the facts around interference, including hearing from Telford and other top staffers, as they’ve been pushing for at the Procedure and House Affairs Committee (PROC).That effort though, has been stymied by close to 24 hours of Liberal filibustering preventing the proposal from coming to a vote.

If the New Democrats support Poilievre's motion, it'll pass and spark this new committee study.

But, if the Liberals want to shut this effort down, Trudeau could declare it a confidence motion and tie NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh's hands, unless he's ready to end the confidence-and-supply agreement, which is coming up on its one-year anniversary with many outstanding policy moves Singh is committed to seeing come to fruition.

In weighing whether this is confidence vote-worthy, Trudeau would likely be assessing whether risking an election call over an election interference controversy —which could be the result of a failed confidence vote given the Liberals' minority standing—is the right move.

Trudeau wouldn’t say Friday whether he'll be designating the vote a matter of confidence in his government, but went on at length about how the Conservative motion makes it plainly clear to Canadians that Poilievre's party is "more interested in political theatre than they are in actually getting any sort of real answers." ??????
 

Taxslave2

House Member
Aug 13, 2022
2,918
1,773
113
The one from Ontario has stepped down & is sitting as an independent (until he says he's proven innocent). I don't know if he was forced to quit or did it on his own but that's what should be done until this is all cleared up.
Unfortunately, there will likely be no one he can go after for making a false accusation.
 

Taxslave2

House Member
Aug 13, 2022
2,918
1,773
113
It remains to be seen how the NDP respond to the motion, with signals being sent that the caucus is still considering its options. The Conservatives and the Bloc wouldn't have the votes to see it pass without them, and over the weekend a number of Conservative MPs were posting about today’s debate, putting the pressure on the NDP to vote with them.

"While this motion is a test for this government, it is also a test for the NDP," said Conservative MP and one of the party's leading spokespeople on the story Michael Cooper, kicking off the debate on Monday.

"The NDP has a choice: They can continue to do the bidding for this corrupt Liberal government, propping up this corrupt prime minister. Or, they can work with us to protect the sanctity of the ballot box and the integrity of our elections by working to get the answers that Canadians deserve... We will soon find out what choice they make," Cooper said.

The New Democrats have been in favour of an as-public-as-possible airing of the facts around interference, including hearing from Telford and other top staffers, as they’ve been pushing for at the Procedure and House Affairs Committee (PROC).That effort though, has been stymied by close to 24 hours of Liberal filibustering preventing the proposal from coming to a vote.

If the New Democrats support Poilievre's motion, it'll pass and spark this new committee study.

But, if the Liberals want to shut this effort down, Trudeau could declare it a confidence motion and tie NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh's hands, unless he's ready to end the confidence-and-supply agreement, which is coming up on its one-year anniversary with many outstanding policy moves Singh is committed to seeing come to fruition.

In weighing whether this is confidence vote-worthy, Trudeau would likely be assessing whether risking an election call over an election interference controversy —which could be the result of a failed confidence vote given the Liberals' minority standing—is the right move.

Trudeau wouldn’t say Friday whether he'll be designating the vote a matter of confidence in his government, but went on at length about how the Conservative motion makes it plainly clear to Canadians that Poilievre's party is "more interested in political theatre than they are in actually getting any sort of real answers." ??????
I think the solution to all that is the NDP members do not show up to vote. By sticking with TurdOWE, they are putting themselves in a losing situation with many of their supporters. So, if they are not present to vote, they are not breaking the agreement.
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
56,076
7,324
113
Washington DC
Stealing from the poor(working class) and giving to the rich(politically connected to the party in power). make it illegal to disagree with your policies.(carbon scam tax and globull warming).
That's capitalism.

Stealing from the poor is stupid. They don't have much to steal.

How many people have been fined or imprisoned for disagreeing with the carbon tax or climate change? You "disagree" with them daily. Been indicted yet?
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
26,793
7,068
113
B.C.
That's capitalism.

Stealing from the poor is stupid. They don't have much to steal.

How many people have been fined or imprisoned for disagreeing with the carbon tax or climate change? You "disagree" with them daily. Been indicted yet?
No that is not capitalism .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Taxslave2

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
23,842
8,404
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Taken more seriously by whom? The Government that’s in power that China was advocating for? The Non-Opposition Opposition that’s not real opposition in the non-Coalition Coalition that’s propping up the Government that China was advocating for? Combined, they’re the majority NDP/Liberals….
While the NDP and Conservatives obviously don’t agree on much, the parties have typically stayed relatively cordial when sharing the opposition benches against a Liberal government when they are both playing the role of opposition to the government.

It’s typical for Ottawa’s political rhetoric to get heated in the midst of a scandal that could wind up signalling the beginning of the end for the current government, but against the government, and not the other opposition parties that are actually playing the role of opposition parties…
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
23,842
8,404
113
Regina, Saskatchewan

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
23,842
8,404
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
OTTAWA — The Liberals once again deflected calls for a public inquiry into foreign interference in Canada’s elections after MP Han Dong resigned from the Liberal caucus over allegations he told a Chinese diplomat to delay the release of Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor.

Thursday afternoon, newly independent MP Dong joined opposition parties in passing a “non-binding” NDP motion calling on the government to launch an inquiry into “allegations of foreign interference in Canada’s democratic system,” which would include recent reports the China meddled in the 2019 and 2021 federal elections.

Liberal MPs voted against the motion. The Non-binding motion. During question period Thursday, opposition parties “hammered the Liberals on the Dong” allegations and demanded they launch a public inquiry. Hammered the Liberals on the Dong. Just let that sink in.

Trudeau in fact knew how serious the infiltration by China into Canada’s elections and democratic institutions was three years ago, based on a report by a non-partisan committee of MPs and Senators he created in 2017 to advise him on national security issues.

NSICOP gave Trudeau a series of recommendations to combat foreign interference.

Trudeau didn’t even respond to them and he now acknowledges, “We have to do a better job on following up on those recommendations. I fully accept that.”

That’s why an independent public inquiry led by someone approved by Parliament, not appointed by Trudeau, is necessary now.

The NDP motion passed with 172 votes in favour and 149 against.

While non-binding, the vote indicates the will of the majority of voting MPs, raises the pressure on the government and threatens to distract from U.S. President Joe Biden's visit to the capital.

But the Liberals continued to stonewall the request, arguing that they had appointed “special rapporteur” David Johnston to dive into the necessity of an inquiry and report back to Parliament by the end of May.

Singh was asked if he would withdraw his support for the minority Liberals if Trudeau continues to decline to hold a public inquiry? He non-answered that he wants to improve elections and give Canadians confidence, not push Canadians to the polls.

NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, whose party has a Non-Coalition Coalition with Trudeau, said he hoped the Liberals would vote in favour but wouldn't pull support for the minority government. OK then.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Twin_Moose

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
23,842
8,404
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Liberal MPs voted against the motion. The Non-binding motion. During question period Thursday, opposition parties “hammered the Liberals on the Dong” allegations and demanded they launch a public inquiry. Hammered the Liberals on the Dong. Just let that sink in.
Trudeau knew there was a problem with Chinese interference; the Prime Minister’s Office had reports that Chinese money was being funnelled to Liberal candidates in federal elections, national security agencies had warned that Chinese Canadians were being recruited to assist in the distributing illegal donations, and to vote for preferred candidates in nomination races.

But Trudeau’s reaction was to keep silent and keep Canadians in the dark. Why? Maybe Trudeau is a traitorous villain who allowed China to do their worst. But the more obvious explanation from his past actions is that he didn’t think Canadians needed to know. In his arrogance, he almost certainly thought he and his party were not only best to handle it, but that they could learn little from anyone else’s input.

For all Trudeau’s talk about knowing what Canadians want and how Liberals understand what Canadians need, he has shown little appreciation of how Canadians can be trusted.

For Trudeau, Canadians were always first an audience, a kind of sounding board, a mirror to reflect his imagined glory. But Canadians never quite fulfilled that role. The public was always found wanting. The adulation was never enough, and it was never unanimous. At the end of the day, Canadians were never quite good enough for Trudeau.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
23,842
8,404
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Among the other names the Conservatives are pushing to come testify: Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland, authors of the Critical Election Incident Public Protocol reports for the 2019 and 2021 elections James Judd and Morris Rosenberg, respectively, and former Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation officials.

Also on the list: many federal security officials who have already testified and told MPs they are limited in what they can say publicly, current and former ambassadors to China, a panel of past national campaign directors as well as the representatives on the Security and Intelligence Threats to Elections (SITE) task force from each major party.

Trudeau's name is not on the witness list. Guess they’re looking for answers instead of Trudeau-isms…? In order to fit in what would be more than a dozen additional hours of testimony, the motion prescribes that the committee meet at least one extra day each week regardless of whether the House is sitting, and have priority access to House resources.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
23,842
8,404
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Another racist, Nazi, misogynistic video?
Must be. Interesting though.
1679751996022.jpeg
In December of 2016, interim Conservative leader Rona Ambrose wrote to the conflict of interest and ethics commissioner and to the lobbying commissioner, asking them to investigate Liberal fundraising practices — and in particular, whether people might be using donations to the charitable Trudeau Foundation to gain influence with the government.
1679752586763.jpeg
(…& from Bardish Chagger, the former Minister of Excuses)
And another example of where Mr Trudeau was found innocent of ethical wrongdoing unlike the Aga Kahn & SNC Lavalin fiascos:
Then more than half a decade after the fact, the Trudeau Foundation is in the news for this droplet in it’s financial bathtub.
Etc…
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
26,793
7,068
113
B.C.
Must be. Interesting though.
View attachment 17730
In December of 2016, interim Conservative leader Rona Ambrose wrote to the conflict of interest and ethics commissioner and to the lobbying commissioner, asking them to investigate Liberal fundraising practices — and in particular, whether people might be using donations to the charitable Trudeau Foundation to gain influence with the government.
View attachment 17732
(…& from Bardish Chagger, the former Minister of Excuses)
And another example of where Mr Trudeau was found innocent of ethical wrongdoing unlike the Aga Kahn & SNC Lavalin fiascos:
Then more than half a decade after the fact, the Trudeau Foundation is in the news for this droplet in it’s financial bathtub.
Etc…
Let’s fix that . We can not keep any donation from a foreign government once it becomes public .
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
23,842
8,404
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Let’s fix that . We can not keep any donation from a foreign government once it becomes public .
You’ve already presented a loophole with the “once it becomes public” qualifier….

Governments do donate money to charities, sometimes with their citizens knowledge even.
It’s when the donations to the charity are in exchange for access to &/or favours from Government Officials up to & including National Leaders….or even just the appearance of this graft/bribery…that it becomes a political/ethical/Trudeau-ish situation like we’re currently seeing in Canada with the ‘appearance’ of foreign gov’t’s offering remuneration for access to a national leader leading to ‘donations’ to a chosen charity/trust with the fringe benefit of a reciprocal enticement for that foreign government.

Outside of certain entitled circles, that is somehow seen as a bad thing for some reason??? I know it sounds crazy, but it’s true though…I mean Trudeau.