Trudeau Breaks Ethics Code

Rev Pesky wrote:

Reading up on the Aga Khan in Wikipedia, stumbled on this:

In 1972, under the regime of President Idi Amin of Uganda, people of South Asian origin, including Nizari Ismailis, were expelled. The South Asians, some of whose families had lived in Uganda for over 100 years, were given 90 days to leave the country. The Aga Khan phoned his long-time friend Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau. Trudeau's government agreed to allow thousands of Nizari Ismailis to immigrate to Canada.

​So it certainly seems the Aga Khan is a family friend of the Trudeau's. At the same time, he is a businessman with a variety of businesses around the world, so presumably could benefit in some way from favourable treatment by the Canadian government.

This issue hinges on whether the Aga Khan is a friend of Justin Trudeau. I don't know what criteria the ethics commissioner uses to decide who's 'friend' and who's not. It would be interesting to know.

As a bit of a sidelight, the current Aga Khan's father (who was skipped over in the succession) was married for a few years to Rita Hayworth.

Justin met the Aga Khan at his father's funeral and did not have contact with him again until after he became PM. Call me old fashioned but I believe holders of high office need principles, not another layer of PR stooges to protect them from self indulgence.

A principled individual is unlikely to become mired in such tawdry indulgences and, if so mired would simply offer a resignation. Unfortunately, Trudeau fils is not made of sterner stuff and will offer only thin excuses, if any.

Trudeau's tone deafness to the implications of an elite holiday funded in part by taxpayers and the rest by wealthy rent seekers is particularly grating in the holiday season for disadvantaged individuals who struggle just for survival and the 'middle class' so beloved of our First Feminist, who save and sacrifice all year for an opportunity to crowd into a flying cattle car for a few days of tropical sun and annoying pedlars.

Trudeau's plea for Bahamian solace rings rather hollow, sandwiched as it is between taxpayer funded gadflying about the globe pressing the flesh and offering the semi-regal profile for those who sit below the salt. The Ninny with two Nannies.

Martin N. wrote:

Trudeau's tone deafness to the implications of an elite holiday funded in part by taxpayers and the rest by wealthy rent seekers is particularly grating in the holiday season for disadvantaged individuals who struggle just for survival and the 'middle class' so beloved of our First Feminist, who save and sacrifice all year for an opportunity to crowd into a flying cattle car for a few days of tropical sun and annoying pedlars.

Agreed.  And I bet that if a retail worker of a department store was found to be accepting gifts from a supplier of one of the product brands in the store, that human resources would turf that worker (aka "associate") so fast for conflict of interest that it would make our heads spin (even if the retail worker had been in contact w/the person 30 yrs ago and thus considered the person a "friend").  It's the double standard that aggravates.

Singh speaks of this:  http://www.cpac.ca/en/programs/headline-politics/episodes/56729147

Mr. Magoo wrote:

I thought the big problem was that the holiday was free, courtesy of some virtual stranger who expects his back scratched in return (and that's the problem).

But now you suggest that you and I paid for it (and that's the problem)?

https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2017/12/20/trudeau-violated-conflict...

Quote:

Last year’s Caribbean vacation cost taxpayers at least $127,000, including $71,988 for the RCMP security detail, $32,000 for the use of the government's CC-144 Challenger jet and about $15,000 for the transportation, accommodation and per diems of staff from Global Affairs Canada.

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:

Trudeau's tone deafness to the implications of an elite holiday funded in part by taxpayers and the rest by wealthy rent seekers is particularly grating in the holiday season for disadvantaged individuals who struggle just for survival and the 'middle class' so beloved of our First Feminist, who save and sacrifice all year for an opportunity to crowd into a flying cattle car for a few days of tropical sun and annoying pedlars.

I thought the big problem was that the holiday was free, courtesy of some virtual stranger who expects his back scratched in return (and that's the problem).

But now you suggest that you and I paid for it (and that's the problem)?

Be as up on your hind legs as you want, but please choose which problem.

And would I be way off the mark when I suggest that perhaps you have a whole bag full of axes to grind with "the First Feminist"?  Or what was that little blurt all about?

Allow me to expand on both the trajectory and velocity of my perturbations with said ninny. The whole bag full boils down to Trudeau's surfeit of entitlement and lack of character. In short, to me, it is a privilege to serve my country. To Trudashian, it is a privilege to have him serve and the nannies, assorted staff, vacations etc are merely his rightful due from an adoring nation.

I doubt the Prodigal PM has spent any time in his office pondering the difficult realities of domestic concerns and is incapable of lending any gravitas to said matters in any event. He disappoints me - Justin Trudeau/Justin Beiber  equals all hat and no cattle. 

Transparently insincere noblesse oblige toward the 'middle class' aside, I expect a Prime Minister to contemplate how his multiple vacations will appear to a citizenry who do not have his advantages rather than rubbing their collective noses in it.

A principled PM will see the concerns and use his judgement to avoid them. Justin Trudashian sees nothing but his own reflection. He is a lightweight ninny in over his head. That of itself is concerning enough but his vanity and narcissism is dangerous. In my opinion, he is capable of sending under-resourced Canadian troops into a dangerous UN mission based on nothing more than an anticipation of personal enhancement.

Hm. Jihadi Justin must be regretting the haste with which he rushed in for a selfie with Joshua Boyle and family after Boyle was charged with 15 sex, assault and confinement charges. 

Anyone with a functioning brain could tell Boyle was bent and anyone concerned with the dignity of their office, never mind their own dignity, would assess the situation very carefully. Not our gadfly though. Ever eager to garner the 'ethnic' vote, our Ninny forever casts himself as an alleged sexual predator's sidekick.

Martin N. wrote:

Jihadi Justin

Hardly neccessary. It's a brute fact that people who are looking to demonize Islam and link it with Trudeau will love this story, but that's no reason to endorse such views(unless you agree with them, in which case, it makes total sense, I guess).  

voice of the damned wrote:

Martin N. wrote:

Jihadi Justin

Hardly neccessary. It's a brute fact that people who are looking to demonize Islam and link it with Trudeau will love this story, but that's no reason to endorse such views(unless you agree with them, in which case, it makes total sense, I guess).  

There is also a picture of Justin and his brother, both wearing tee shirts with a picture of the last supper on them. The head of Jesus is replaced with smiley emoticons. Also an example of poor judgement.

My concerns are not with religion, or even the Prodigal PM himself but with the fact that we have a narcissistic airhead running the nation and that it will take 27 years to balance the budget. At that time, in 2045, interest on said debt will be $67 billion per annum, at current low interest rates. What do we have to show for that debt? New defence toys? No. Housing for the homeless? No. National Childcare Strategy? No. No, no,no etc etc.

There is also a picture of Justin and his brother, both wearing tee shirts with a picture of the last supper on them. The head of Jesus is replaced with smiley emoticons. Also an example of poor judgement.

I have to agree with the commentators who say that that picture is likely photoshopped, going by the position of his head, just for starters. I don't hold any brief for JT, and the shirt isn't really my idea of a hilarious joke(sophmoric anti-clericalism at best). But I think the bulk of the evidence is that it isn't really him. Though probably is his brother.

Quote:

Hm. Jihadi Justin must be regretting the haste with which he rushed in for a selfie with Joshua Boyle and family after Boyle was charged with 15 sex, assault and confinement charges.

Uh, that photo isn't a "selfie".

Quote:

Everyone was already thinking that it was bizarre to subject 3 children to captivity because they didn't want to wait to start their family. Then there was her father pissed of at him for bringing his pregnant wife into such a dangerous area to begin with, as if she has no agency of her own.

Not to mention his former in-laws, and the hinky idea that they ended up in the rural hills of Afghanistan accidentally while "on vacation".  And the fact that he seems to have liked his "Taliban" beard enough to keep it as a souvenir.

There's literally nothing about this whole story that promote the rolling of one's eyes.  The family meeting Trudeau is the absolute least of it.

Pondering wrote:

voice of the damned wrote:

Pondering wrote:

It will be interesting to see if any of this impacts Trudeau's poll numbers or the result of the 2019 election.

What role, if any, is the Canadian government known to have played in Boyle's rescue? And did that role only begin under Trudeau?

If it goes back to the Conservatives, it might be hard to play this as a Justin fuck-up.

I don't think it will matter either way. If it turns out he is abusive towards his wife and children it wouldn't be a reason to leave them with the Taliban. Everyone was already thinking that it was bizarre to subject 3 children to captivity because they didn't want to wait to start their family. Then there was her father pissed of at him for bringing his pregnant wife into such a dangerous area to begin with, as if she has no agency of her own.

I really don't think anyone is going to be thinking "gee, remember that Boyle thing? I'm not voting for Trudeau after that!" No? It's making the front page now.

They will think "are Trudeau Liberals doing an an adequate job running the country? Is it likely Scheer Conservatives or Singh NDPers would run the country better?"

Sub-questions to that will be:

Who will give me the best services for the lowest taxes? Who will provide jobs for me and my kids? Who will help us increase trade with the rest of the world?

 

Pondering wrote:

Martin N. wrote:

I really don't think anyone is going to be thinking "gee, remember that Boyle thing? I'm not voting for Trudeau after that!" No? It's making the front page now.

So it's making the front page, which a minority of people pay attention to. Newspapers have to print something and they sensationalize all the time now. Trudeau is still at the top of the polls by a large margin.

Even when Trudeau dropped to third place I knew he was going to win the 2015 election. His numbers may drop a bit before the 2019 election but all signs point to him winning another majority with a slim chance that he could be pushed into a minority situation depending on events between now and then.

There is a hard core Conservatism out west, particularly in Alberta, but outside of Alberta they are shrinking. Harper and Ford are part of the death throes. Even the IMF and the World Bank have recognized that austerity and low taxes are killing the world economy. Neoliberalism is a failed economic model.

I remember well the Debt burden of the '80s and the resultant misery of Chrétien and Martin's cuts. We only have one chance to use deficit spending and it should be used to protect Canadians from catastrophic events, not frittered away by an airheaded numptie.

Quote:

OK  Was it Trudeau's official photographer?

No, no official photos were taken.  The photo you saw was taken by Boyle's family.

Quote:

Not even Trudeau's lack of judgement?

My hunch is that Trudeau was unaware that Boyle would be accused of a crime two weeks later.  But what say you?  Do you feel Trudeau knew (or ought to have known) that Boyle would be accused of some inexplicable crime?

voice of the damned wrote:

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:

OK  Was it Trudeau's official photographer?

No, no official photos were taken.  The photo you saw was taken by Boyle's family.

Quote:

Not even Trudeau's lack of judgement?

My hunch is that Trudeau was unaware that Boyle would be accused of a crime two weeks later.  But what say you?  Do you feel Trudeau knew (or ought to have known) that Boyle would be accused of some inexplicable crime?

Yeah, logically, the later alleged criminal charges don't prove anything about Trudeau's judgement at the time of the photo. But it does remind people of Boyle's somewhat dodgy character, and indirectly prompts the question: "WHY exactly did Trudeau feel obligated to meet with these people?"

If the government of Canada played some role in getting the Boyles out, it might make sense for Trudeau to meet with them. But if the government wasn't involved, I'm not sure what the rationale was. The PM does not normally do celebratory meet-ups with everyone who has a good thing happen to them.

LOL, after seeing the picture I assumed we did have something to do with the rescue. It's only after I read your post that I remembered we didn't.

Maybe the Boyles requested the meeting?

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:

OK  Was it Trudeau's official photographer?

No, no official photos were taken.  The photo you saw was taken by Boyle's family.

Quote:

Not even Trudeau's lack of judgement?

My hunch is that Trudeau was unaware that Boyle would be accused of a crime two weeks later.  But what say you?  Do you feel Trudeau knew (or ought to have known) that Boyle would be accused of some inexplicable crime?

I do believe that our PM does not have any skills for his present gig other than rock star impersonations. With respect, you and I may not be qualified for the job either but we, at least, can present a cogent rebuttal off the top of the old turnip. Trudeau is a silver spoon dilettante who has never applied himself to anything, including being PM.

Someone in the PMO, highly paid professionals that they are, should have twigged to the possibility of blowback before allowing the numptie to pose for posterity.

Martin N. wrote:

voice of the damned wrote:

Well, it's still not clear to me what exactly Canada did. I did find this statement from Global Affairs...

"Canada has been actively engaged on Mr. Boyle's case at all levels, and we will continue to support him and his family now that they have returned."

I guess if it is the official position of the government that they did something to facilitate the rescue, it's reasonable for the PM to meet with the family.

https://tinyurl.com/yazgvknp

Trusting as you are, does it not occur to you that Global Affairs is polishing a turd when there is evidence that the rescue had nothing to do with Canada? Canadian officialdom is remarkably timid when faced with dilemmas that could impact the world view of Canada, such as the implications involved in disrespecting terrorist sensitivities or, horrors, the risk to bureaucratic careers from decisiveness before the fact.

It is the Canadian way to mitigate risk by letting others assume responsibility while immediately issuing a suitably ambiguous statement that indicates how it was all their idea in the case of a successful conclusion.

You seem to think this is really important but I'm not sure why. I agree the Canadian government is weak in standing up for Canadians in trouble around the world. If you expose that Canada did not participate in the rescue I think the response from most Canadians will be a yawn. 

I'm glad they were rescued but I'm not sure it was the responsibility of Canada or the US to rescue them given that they voluntarily walked into a war zone. Anyone I've spoken to is shocked that they would deliberately create children in a situation in which they would suffer. 

Everyone tries to get their picture taken with Trudeau. It's no big deal. 

All the arms we are selling to non-democratic regimes is a problem. 

Inequality is a problem.

Trudeau having his picture taken with Boyle. Not a problem.

Martin N. wrote:

  Yes, '"as long as" is the point. The problem occurs when tapped out taxpayers are also faced with rising interest rates compounded by inflation. As interest payments, both public and personal, bite into discretionary spending, the debt begins to rise exponentially while GDP is stagnant, or into recession.  

We aren't there now. So far "Trudeau" is right. The GDP is rising faster than the debt. I put Trudeau in quotes because while he is the final decision-maker, he chooses his ministers, Morneau is guiding fiscal policy, he is right wing. I've no doubt "the economy" will tick along just find under him. 

Martin N. wrote:

Well, as I sit on my little island and watch the tide roll in (sorry Otis) I do count my blessings but I also worry about how less fortunate folks will survive. Good governance with an articulate fiscal policy is paramount in maintaining this country's standard of living and Trudashian has nothing of what it takes to accomplish these goals. Mr. Singh, at minimum is a trained lawyer and exhibits the discipline required to succeed. Mr Scheer, to me has a few necessary parts on backorder in this enlightened age.

I don't see how anything Trudeau has done has worsened the situation for "unfortunates".  Parents are getting more money. Pot is becoming legal. Infrastructure projects will soon stimulate the economy. I suspect that next election Trudeau will bring out big goodies, maybe daycare, maybe minimum income. 

Mr. Singh is my current choice but there won't be a lot to say until he unveils a platform and he would be wise to withhold it until the election period begins or close to it. Until then criticism will be as shallow as it was for Trudeau until the election period. 

Quote:

How could the PM's security people not know that he was under investigation for serious crimes?

Because at the time, he wasn't?

Thanks for the Margaret Wente link, though.  I'm pretty sure Christie Blatchford is also clutching her pearls... maybe you'd like to share that here too?

Quote:

You know this as fact?

No, hence the question mark.

You know the opposite as fact?  Tell us more then.  You're proceeding as though everyone knew, or should have known, that B0yle was under investigation.   If you've got a link, throw us a link.

Quote:

No matter your opinion of certain female columnists

I really don't care about their genitals.  But I'm curious why everything you write is in bold?

If you don't know how to stop screaming, just ask.  I (and lots of other babblers} can tell you how to unbold.

Martin N. wrote:

I only have a one inch response window and as soon as an entry is made the cursor disappears out of the box to a higher part of the page and I am posting blind. I though it was merely babble's pecuniary establishment and not a format with ongoing opportunity.

On Chrome at least, but also I presume on other browsers, there is a triangle icon in the lower right corner of the red bar at the bottom of the input window. This can be dragged downwards to enlarge the input area.

Mr. Magoo wrote:

But I'm curious why everything you write is in bold?

If you don't know how to stop screaming, just ask.  I (and lots of other babblers} can tell you how to unbold.

 

I think writing in caps lock is supposed to be yelling, not bold lettering. But if you really want to bug someone you know, next time you're talking with them, tell them to stop yelling even if they're not.

Martin N. wrote:

Very astute, Pondering. I have to agree that not everyone in the Liberal Party of Canada is asleep, or for that matter, the government either but there is a growing body of evidence that it is not the PM who is setting the pace or even trying to keep up. 

Buyer's remorse perhaps but this PM offends me for sanctimonious bleatings followed by personal decisions that point to the hypocracy of his statements. Earnest imploring on climate change followed by a massive personal carbon footprint. His vain reliance on charm rather than substance to move the needle. His attention seeking priorities that put hard work on difficult issues aside. I just believe we deserve better and I am not alone.

Running the country is not a one person job. Prior to be elected Trudeau stated that he sees the job of PM more like Chairman of the Board than CEO. He also stated that he saw himself as a retail politician. Trudeau hears from his advisors and ministers then he determines what to go along with or not but as he chose the people I'm sure he follows their advice unless they disagree with each other. Every PM chooses a team that aligns with them politically so why wouldn't they agree? Every PM has a finance minister that designs the budget and tells the PM what is and isn't possible but it's the PM that determines the priorities.

Trudeau has surpassed my expectations on the world stage.

I don't see any other Liberals I would prefer to see as PM, I certainly don't think Scheer would be any better, fortunately we have Singh. There is a lot of time before the next election so we will have to wait and see.

 

WWWTT wrote:

Mr. Magoo wrote:

But I'm curious why everything you write is in bold?

If you don't know how to stop screaming, just ask.  I (and lots of other babblers} can tell you how to unbold.

 

I think writing in caps lock is supposed to be yelling, not bold lettering. But if you really want to bug someone you know, next time you're talking with them, tell them to stop yelling even if they're not.

No worries, WW, but thanks for the contribution. I certainly feel flattered that Magoo is striving so mightily to gently guide me towards his rabbit hole. The 'screaming' canard was a tad overdone but the thought behind it, namely to goad me into ' bargaining against my own money, as it were, is precious.

Quote:

Similar to any investigation, while details are not publicly available, the security services are able to access evidence of a threat to Canada or officials under its protection whether or not a public announcement of a continuing investigation is made.

The fuck kind of evidence is that??

Do you have something to share with us or don't you?

Quote:

Evidence? What are you rabbiting on about, Magoo?

Let me clarify/repeat.  You asked:

Quote:

How could the PM's security people not know that he was under investigation for serious crimes?

And I asked for for any evidence that Boyle was "under investigation for serious crimes" when he met the PM.  This has nothing to do with a criminal trial.  I'm just asking you to back up your assertion with a link or a quote or something other than your opinion.

lol There is nothing to cobble together because Trudeau didn't do anything. There is no need for him to deny offering money to Boyle or to anyone else unless there is some evidence that he did.

Desperate right wingers are just trying to manufacture some drama.