Trudeau how can he win the next election

[dumass]

What's so hilarious about JWR's testimony today about the SNC debacle, is that Justin Trudeau is even too incompetent to perform corruption properly.

Trudeau appointed JWR as AG in part to satisfy his 50/50 Gender neutral cabinet, "because it's 2015", when he should have appointed one of his crony pawn MPs from the start (Lametti), who would have acted as his little lapdog to give SNC deferred prosecution.

I'm so happy to see that his gender neutral policy has clearly backfired, and she's spilling the beans about his clear interference. No way he can recover from this.

His house of cards has fallen. Time to lock him up!

 

[sybian]

is that Justin Trudeau is even too incompetent to perform corruption properly.

That line sums it up perfectly!

 

[storm rider]

What's so hilarious about JWR's testimony today about the SNC debacle, is that Justin Trudeau is even too incompetent to perform corruption properly.

Trudeau appointed JWR as AG in part to satisfy his 50/50 Gender neutral cabinet, "because it's 2015", when he should have appointed one of his crony pawn MPs from the start (Lametti), who would have acted as his little lapdog to give SNC deferred prosecution.

I'm so happy to see that his gender neutral policy has clearly backfired, and she's spilling the beans about his clear interference. No way he can recover from this.

His house of cards has fallen. Time to lock him up!

I watched the entire 37 minute video of JWR's opening statement and all I can say is she spit roasted EVERYBODY involved in this corruption of justice.That was just the opening statement and not in consideration of the questions she had to answer.

This is clearly the BIGGEST scandal in Canadian Politics in the history of the country.....no fucking wonder Gerald Butts ran out the door so fast......how many other rats will jump from the sinking ship...."Sunny Ways"....yeah right.....this is outright interference
in the Justice System for Partisan purposes.......and it would have been swept under the rug if a journalist at the Globe&Mail had lacked integrity and kept fawning over Justin Trudeau's socks.

I truly Hope Canadians dont forget this come the next election and he wears it on his neck like a millstone.

SR

 

[storm rider]

Trudeau has of course denied the allegations via his latest quip to the media in Toronto tonight.....when it comes down to it even the fucking leftist media in Canada CANT sweep this under the rug.

Opposition has called for Trudeau to resign.....when it comes down to it this is a watershed moment in Canadian Politics and it is the equivilent to "Watergate" under Nixon....but under the watch of a Lieberal/Democrat.

SR

 

[nightswhisper]

In a system that has, in its history, explicitly not afforded the same opportunity to everyone, and thus has created a "starting point disparity" that its present day citizens have inherited from their ancestors, how would you reset the system to eliminate that unfairly-inherited advantage, so that each person has equal access to opportunities on their own merits rather than their inherited edge?
Analogy: if race car driving was a sport in which you could only inherit your car from your parents, and through unsportsmanlike business practices of their grandparents in the past, some families now have better cars than others (perhaps even the patents to what makes them better), how would you make the sport fair going forward?
The ones who were not "fortunate enough" to inherit the unfair advantage will have to work way harder to achieve the same result. That's not a fair sport.

Who said life was fair? You are one of thousands of sperm cells that impregnated the egg. Your very existence is the product of hundreds of generations of survival of the fittest. It's hypocrisy to critizise survival of the fittest while benefitting from it. It makes you the "people with the grand parents who cheated".

Life was never about equality and always about exploiting. You don't have an equal outcome? Too fucking bad. If you care so much about equality of outcome, share all of your stuff with a homeless guy.

So one solution is to break the patents and share the tech. Another is to preferentially fund the ones without the unfair advantage so that they can catch up.
Do you have a better idea that would fix the sport?
Or would you just say "tough, I'm keeping my advantage"? Would you be ok with others saying that if you were instead one of those that suffered at the hands of the ones who's grandparents, for lack of a better word, cheated?

Telling people they need help is a horrible indignation to inflict on someone. People should earn their keep and not be given it. Discriminating the "privileged" to benefit the underprivileged is still discrimination. And breaking the patent system? Who fuck is going to invent anything if they can't profit? The fundamental desire for most creators is wealth. Breaking society's fundamental value is terribly disingenuous to those that actually work hard to get to their places in life.

If you are dealt a bad hand in life, too bad. Life is a giant lottery. If you don't like it, donate half your crap to a homeless guy.

Bonus round:
Would you be ok with incompetent and/or violent people being blocked from owning guns? If so, how would you identify them?

I don't care who owns guns. I just want one to protect myself from people who want to kill me.

 

[dumass]

Trudeau has of course denied the allegations via his latest quip to the media in Toronto tonight.....when it comes down to it even the fucking leftist media in Canada CANT sweep this under the rug.

Any minute now, our resident snowflake will come around and somehow blame this on Harper and past Conservative administrations :rofl:

somehow, i admire people that can live in such ignorance, must be a pretty easy stress-free life to be that obvious to facts and the real world around you!:lalala::lalala:

 

[clu]

Who said life was fair? You are one of thousands of sperm cells that impregnated the egg. Your very existence is the product of hundreds of generations of survival of the fittest. It's hypocrisy to critizise survival of the fittest while benefitting from it. It makes you the "people with the grand parents who cheated".

Life was never about equality and always about exploiting. You don't have an equal outcome? Too fucking bad. If you care so much about equality of outcome, share all of your stuff with a homeless guy.


Telling people they need help is a horrible indignation to inflict on someone. People should earn their keep and not be given it. Discriminating the "privileged" to benefit the underprivileged is still discrimination. And breaking the patent system? Who fuck is going to invent anything if they can't profit? The fundamental desire for most creators is wealth. Breaking society's fundamental value is terribly disingenuous to those that actually work hard to get to their places in life.

If you are dealt a bad hand in life, too bad. Life is a giant lottery. If you don't like it, donate half your crap to a homeless guy.


I don't care who owns guns. I just want one to protect myself from people who want to kill me.

You're dodging the question and twisting what I said. And I didn't say break the patent system I said break the unfairly acquired patent.

Ok. Someone hires you to design something for them. They never pay you, yet they use your work and make millions off it. Tough for you huh? Life's not fair. What are going to do?

Oh, might you sue to get what you feel you're owed? Well that's effectively what affirmative action is: one group's ancestors cheated another group's ancestors, and their descendents inherited the butterfly effect of that.

e.g. in the States slavery built many lucrative businesses and families' wealth. Then the slaves were freed, but the ill-gotten benefits of their labour were kept back. So if you think hiring someone to do a job and never paying them is bad, this was worse.

Life isn't fair, but people can choose to be.

 

[clu]

Any minute now, our resident snowflake will come around and somehow blame this on Harper and past Conservative administrations :rofl:

somehow, i admire people that can live in such ignorance, must be a pretty easy stress-free life to be that obvious to facts and the real world around you!:lalala::lalala:

Don't know who your resident snowflake is, but my world view has room for both Harper and Trudeau to be jackasses. They suck. I've always felt that the thing the Liberals had going for them was that they were the lesser of most people's two evils (i.e. Conservative voters would prefer them over NDP and vice versa) but they're making it real hard to hold on to that belief.

 

[nightswhisper]

You're dodging the question and twisting what I said. And I didn't say break the patent system I said break the unfairly acquired patent.

There's only legally and illegally acquired patent. Fair or not is not your decision - It's your opinion and not a fact.

Patent is a system meant to protect inventors. It's not meant to fallback system for morons who can't negotiate a proper deal.

Ok. Someone hires you to design something for them. They never pay you, yet they use your work and make millions off it. Tough for you huh? Life's not fair. What are going to do?

In Canada and US, this is patently illegal. In other countries where they don't protect patents, too bad. The lack of intellectual property protection in China and Brazil is the reason why they steal patented technology rather than develop them, and why inventors leave for the US or UK where their work can be rewarded. This is also why countries with strong IP protections are technologically advanced and wealthy - because inventors can be rewarded for hardwork.

I have NEVER heard of an unfair patent lawsuit, only illegal exploitation and use without licensing. That's a testament to how effective patent licensing is.

Oh, might you sue to get what you feel you're owed? Well that's effectively what affirmative action is: one group's ancestors cheated another group's ancestors, and their descendents inherited the butterfly effect of that.

That doesn't make any sense. If you invented something and someone stole it, you are allowed to sue for damages.

If your parents invented something, it has nothing to do with you. Don't complain if you lost it along the way or feel great if you got to benefit off of it. It had and has nothing to do with your existence. If you happen to benefit, good for you. If you are sucking cock because your great great grandpa was a slave, you can't retroactively sue your grandpa and expect to be paid because your argument is that your grandparents predetermined you to suck cock.

e.g. in the States slavery built many lucrative businesses and families' wealth. Then the slaves were freed, but the ill-gotten benefits of their labour were kept back. So if you think hiring someone to do a job and never paying them is bad, this was worse.

Legality and fairness are not the same argument. Doing something that's illegal is punishable. Doing something unfair is capitalism. Capitalism isn't about fairness. If you have a problem with fairness and capitalism

A) Move to Sweden
B) Give half your shit to the homeless.

Life isn't fair, but people can choose to be.

You can't demand people to be fair to you. Give your stuff to the homless or Africans if you feel so strongly about fairness.

 

[nightswhisper]

Don't know who your resident snowflake is, but my world view has room for both Harper and Trudeau to be jackasses. They suck. I've always felt that the thing the Liberals had going for them was that they were the lesser of most people's two evils (i.e. Conservative voters would prefer them over NDP and vice versa) but they're making it real hard to hold on to that belief.

Trudeau is a great politician but a terrible admninistrator.

Harper is a great administrator but a politician with negative charisma.

I pick the latter.

 

[clu]

There's only legally and illegally acquired patent. Fair or not is not your decision - It's your opinion and not a fact.

Patent is a system meant to protect inventors. It's not meant to be a system on which negotiations is based.



In Canada and US, this is patently illegal. In other countries where they don't protect patents, too bad. The lack of intellectual property protection in China and Brazil is the reason why they steal patented technology rather than develop them, and why inventors leave for the US or UK where their work can be rewarded. This is also why countries with strong IP protections are technologically advanced and wealthy - because inventors can be rewarded for hardwork.



That doesn't make any sense. If you invented something and someone stole it, you are allowed to sue for damages.

If your parents invented something, it has nothing to do with you. Don't complain if you lost it along the way or feel great if you got to benefit off of it. It had and has nothing to do with your existence. If you happen to benefit, good for you. If you are sucking cock because your great great grandpa was a slave, too fucking bad.

You can't quantitatively solve qualitative problems. Equality of outcome is stupid and demeaning.



Legality and fairness are not the same argument. Doing something that's illegal is punishable. Doing something unfair is capitalism. Capitalism isn't about fairness. If you have a problem with fairness and capitalism

A) Move to Sweden
B) Give half your shit to the homeless.



You can't demand people to be fair to you. Give your stuff to the homless or Africans if you feel so strongly about fairness.

Unfairness is not capitalism. Capitalism can be "unfair", but don't conflate two. I'm not arguing for communism here. I'm arguing that restitution is still owed. It may be difficult to quantify but that's no reason not to try. Socialism has become a dirty word lately because like everything these days, its opponents take it to extremes. Is it so wrong to say there should be a baseline quality of life and services? Roads, hospitals, schools, etc. are effectively socialism. Without a modicum of socialism we may as well all be subsistence farming hermits. We're ultimately arguing over degrees.

Anyway, you can't separate laws and fairness. Laws are conceived to create a framework for fairness. Laws can be changed and refined. If the people of the original era were more proactive and complete about restitution, we wouldn't be having this conversation. You believe in effectively a statute of limitations that says ill-gotten gains cannot be reclaimed after the original offender is gone. Others don't. There are obvious international examples of this as, say, artwork stolen by the Nazis is repatriated generations later. I guess you don't support that either since the grandchildren didn't do the stealing.

 

[nightswhisper]

Unfairness is not capitalism. Capitalism can be "unfair", but don't conflate two. I'm not arguing for communism here. I'm arguing that restitution is still owed. It may be difficult to quantify but that's no reason not to try. Socialism has become a dirty word lately because like everything these days, its opponents take it to extremes. Is it so wrong to say there should be a baseline quality of life and services? Roads, hospitals, schools, etc. are effectively socialism. Without a modicum of socialism we may as well all be subsistence farming hermits. We're ultimately arguing over degrees.

Anyway, you can't separate laws and fairness. Laws are conceived to create a framework for fairness. Laws can be changed and refined. If the people of the original era were more proactive and complete about restitution, we wouldn't be having this conversation. You believe in effectively a statute of limitations that says ill-gotten gains cannot be reclaimed after the original offender is gone. Others don't. There are obvious international examples of this as, say, artwork stolen by the Nazis is repatriated generations later. I guess you don't support that either since the grandchildren didn't do the stealing.

I support absolute and complete Darwinism.

I'm a product of Darwinist evolution. It is not correct of me to tell people otherwise.

I'm grateful to live in a legal society whose framework prevents exploitation and predatory behavior. I believe laws should set minimal moral grounds, not absolute and universal standards.

 

[80watts]

It appears that the former justice minister has sunk the liberals for the next election. She , despite her honesty has sunk her political career too. No party will ever have her on inner council, because she is not a team player.... Not being a team player, she got demoted, felt hurt about it and eventually quit her cabinet post. I guess thats the way of politics, even your own party is ready to screw you....

It will be interesting to see how Trudeau can spin this one and still get elected this fall. Scheer should of kept his mouth shut; and let the press condemn the liberals for the next election (due to this scandal). Instead he looks like a hyena chomping at his lips, salivating waiting for the PM's job....

looks like the politicians are fighting over the scraps of meat left in the Canadian prize box....

 

[Mrmotorscooter]

All the Libs have to do is win Quebec, that province knows how its bread is buttered and will overwhelmingly vote for them. Its a crap system, there are enough votes in the rest of the country to nail it. Thats the traditional way to get elected, will be interesting to see how this rotten affair will effect the votes.

 

[jgg]

...Without a modicum of socialism we may as well all be subsistence farming hermits...

Good luck with that.

 

[dumass]

It appears that the former justice minister has sunk the liberals for the next election. She , despite her honesty has sunk her political career too. No party will ever have her on inner council, because she is not a team player.... Not being a team player, she got demoted, felt hurt about it and eventually quit her cabinet post. I guess thats the way of politics, even your own party is ready to screw you....

She is one of the rare few (perhaps only) in politics with courage and conviction to stand up to whats right, in the face of pressure and coercion by the most powerful man-child dictator in the country. Trudeau ihas been bullshitting all along when he said "i believe in the rule of law and independent judiciary", she actually means it and proves it by standing up to our tyrannical pseudo-feminist dictator man-child of a PM. Alot of people have already applauded her courage, and i absolutely believe she can/will get nominated as MP again in Vancouver as an independent. She hasn't lost any public support in my view, in fact has gained more.

The irony in all of this is that she was appointted as AG as part of his "because its 2015" gender neutral cabinet policy, glad to see his feminism policies come back to bite him in the ass!

 

[overdone]

Trudeau is a great politician but a terrible admninistrator.

Harper is a great administrator but a politician with negative charisma.

I pick the latter.

it's already been stated, by him, he was a spokesman for the Liberals

Butts was the idea man

Turdeau was nothing more than an Empty shell in a suit, a used car salesman

he looks like he's selling his last turd

All the Libs have to do is win Quebec, that province knows how its bread is buttered and will overwhelmingly vote for them. Its a crap system, there are enough votes in the rest of the country to nail it. Thats the traditional way to get elected, will be interesting to see how this rotten affair will effect the votes.

Quebec isn't a factor anymore if you win Ont, there are almost 2X the seats in Ont, with the added seats in Ont, AB, BC, in the last couple of elections


you no longer need to win Que, or don't you remember Harper's majority, lol

the days of needing to suck up to Que are over

 

[JimDandy]

What pisses me off is what hypocrites all of the party leaders are. Both the Conservative leader and the NDP leader are trying to crucify the Liberals for trying to find a way to save the 50,000 jobs that would be lost if SNC L. is not allowed to bid on contracts and yet they both say that jobs are important. You can't have it both ways. I suspect that the Quebec voters will remember what the Conservatives and NDP had to say about the SNC L. jobs (a majority of the 50,000 jobs are in Quebec) and punish them appropriately in the next Federal election. And that might be just enough to give the Liberals another majority.

JD

 

[clu]

She is one of the rare few (perhaps only) in politics with courage and conviction to stand up to whats right, ...

There's a saying that goes something like "those who seek power are least qualified to wield it." I think this applies to just about every politician.

 

[dumass]

What pisses me off is what hypocrites all of the party leaders are. Both the Conservative leader and the NDP leader are trying to crucify the Liberals for trying to find a way to save the 50,000 jobs that would be lost if SNC L. is not allowed to bid on contracts and yet they both say that jobs are important. You can't have it both ways.
JD

All politicians are Hypocrites, no exceptions. Their main agenda is first to do anything to get power, and once in control we can see where their real priorities lie.

Jobs are important, but we need to realise at what cost we must pay to keep those jobs. Justin Trudeau had no problem killing thousands of Jobs in BC/Alberta by killing the KM pipeline in the name of environmentalism, but equally has no problem 'saving jobs' for a corrupt and criminally convicted corporation SNC Lavalin by obstructing justice and interfering with the independent judicial process he sings praises of.

I've learned to live with a certain amount of hypocrisy. It's expected and i can tolerate it to a certain extent. I can't tolerate criminality.