Discussion in 'Reality Check' started by HairyAss, Sep 24, 2019.
Nice to see some action in here today, I miss Harper he was a good PM one of the best that we have had in recent history even Jean with his scandals ;lol: was Okay as well just so you know I am not just picking Right PM's I hated Mulroney.
I am done, just winding down from shooting time to hit the rack.
Okay need some action in here been feeling shitty for a while, not sure if it's vaccine or life but feeling a little better today and just relaxing having a coffee and doing some paperwork and hoping to hit the shop a little later and get some work done there.
But first I need to deal with you guys. How do y'all feel about Warren Kinsella?
His argument is not a valid comparison: Canadian doctors and scientists (e.g NACI, etc.) say mixing vaccines is safe. Canadian politicians, like those elsewhere, are following the advice of doctors and scientists. But it's easier to attack politicians. An intellectually dishonest, strawman argument.
As to Kinsella himself, remember Project Cactus: his firm, Daisy Group, was being paid by CPC to portray Maxime Bernier as, among other things, racist. He wrote columns in the Postmedia papers to this effect, while being paid by CPC and not making any disclosure to that effect. Obviously, that speaks to his level of ethics.
At least post a story for all to read.
Newly obtained documents
I am not sure how to take the guy some times I like what he has to post and other times I just want to He is a true greazy lawyer and I still like some of the dirt he digs up so
Well looks like they are going to just cram it through democracy be damned.
From the article.
WARNING ANDREW SCHEER TRIGGER WARNING
And the Pseudo Environmental Prime Minister and the rest of the Left have voted down Private Member’s Bill that would end the practice of dumping untreated wastewater into our rivers, lakes and oceans.
What greater way to support the environment and create jobs. Only problem, this bill would have to shut done the only pipelines that Quebec supports.
I saw that this morning. Almost posted it but figured the others on here would just discredit it and defend the decision to oppose it.
We should build a coast to coast coal conveyor while we're trying to save declining industries lol
No you should pump oil from Alberta through the trans mountain pipeline to BC then ship it all the way to NB down through the Panama Canal to be refined at the Irving refinery rather than building a pipeline across the country because Quebec said no.
Declining industry oil isn't going anywhere anytime soon if you think the electric car fad and the green industry is going to run without oil good luck with that.
We can keep using our farm land to grow corn for ethanol this and that and keep importing our food from Mexico where they are less than stellar in their hygiene and we keep getting recalls when will one of these recalls be something more serious than E. coli. Look what we are going through now they* said this was just a "practice" run for the big one. Are you ready? Our government sure as hell wasn't. Jebus I am down a rabbit hole again, Dog I am done for the night I will pick this up in the mooring.
*The President and his wife
BC is running a ton of coal mines and making great money selling the coal products needed for computer boards and certain types of steel production. They also ship a fair amount to the east coast already....
I've been to a few of the mines. They run a pretty great operation and employee literally thousands of people. You must hate them all! Dirty minors trying to provide good livings for their families!
But I guess you don't use steel... Or computer boards.....in your every day life.... With stuff made in China....
You guys are too easy too rile up lol
Ready to vote CPC yet?
I'd hate to throw a vote directly in the trash lol
Isn't that what you have been doing?
Pretty sure the party I voted for in the last election is leading the country
Into the trash is what you said. Sounds appropriate....
I think he means that the 8% margin for victory was so large that you could have thrown your vote in the trash and the outcome would have been the same
Not cool. But well played....
See article by Rex Murphy, close my browser. It’s like asking Don Cherry to do the news.
He's good for entertaining news pieces. That is funny because he is the Don Cherry of news. I haven't heard that before lol
Here's a thoughtful rebuttal.
So I didn't think I'd have to do this, but because an MP is tweeting out nonsense that they should, or reasonably should, know is both wrong and inflammatory for partisan gain, I have no choice.
The "Liberal Government" isn't taking the Speaker to court for "doing his job". The AG's office (which is independent from the whims of the PMO/GiC) is acting under a statutory requirement of the Canada Evidence Act ("CEA"). The CEA *requires* that the AG act in this way when there is going to be the release of documents that it believes may have an adverse impact on national security or on international relations (s. 38 of CEA). This is done by a specific department in the AG's office - again, this is not directed by, at the behest of, or under the control of the Government. So when the AG activates s. 38 it issues a s. 38 notice to the relevant party prohibiting disclosure (punishable as an indictable offence). It also prohibits disclosure that the notice itself exists until the AG makes it public. This usually becomes public when the AG brings an application to a specially designated judge of the Fed. Ct. naming the parties to receive the information as respondents. The process then largely moves behind closed does on an ex parte basis. That means the AG presents the arguments (on a full and frank disclosure basis) to the judge without the participation of any of the other parties. The judge *usually* appoints an amicus to present an alternative viewpoint. They then seek public input from the parties.
Note: this public input is *without* seeing the documents. Those are kept under wraps until the judge either (1) confirms the AG's redactions; (2) annuls them and orders production; or (3) a mix of the two. This process is normal, and done to protect Nat Sec/IR. Now what's important to note is that this isn't "going rogue against the will of Parliament". Here we have two Parliamentary wills that are in apparent conflict: on the one hand the CEA and its mandatory redaction scheme, on the other the motion and its production demand.
So this isn't "Parliament vs. the Courts" or "Parliament vs. the Government" - this is Parliament vs itself. So what should win? Let's look at a few of the factors (...).
There are a number of principles. The first being temporal nature. Generally in a conflict between two pieces of legislation the newer statute "wins". This is from a presumption that Parliament turned its mind to the issue and chose to implement the conflicting measure. But that principle isn't absolute. Section 38 isn't a secret. It would have been trivial for Parliament to expressly disclaim the application of section 38 (or indeed all of the CEA) in its Order. It didn't do so, it only made a broad statement about redaction. Even so, I'd say this principle would push this towards the House's position. But this principle isn't a stand alone principle: there's also a question of specific vs. general (where a more specific act tends to trump a more general one). In this you can read it both ways.
On the one hand the Order is about one specific instance, whereas s. 38 applies to all disclosures. That would favour the Order. But on the other hand the Order is about production, getting the minister to appear, and all facets of the Winnipeg lab issue whereas s. 38 is *only* about national security and international relations. That would favour giving greater weight to s. 38.
So the TLDR is that this is complicated and there are arguments on both sides. Do I know where a court will fall? Nope, but it is something that likely can be fought over, and doesn't seem to be something that's an immediately cut and dried issue. If Parliament had expressly annulled s. 38 in its demand then we might not be here - but play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
Oh, and don't forget that Harper made an absolute mockery of the Speaker's Chair by appointing Andrew Scheer to it.
2 things. One, Don Cherry is a Canadian icon. I love that guy and loved coaches corner. 2, see a post by C Mike Hunt in the election thread, keep scrolling. It's like asking a Jehovah's witness about religion.
Pretty appropriate actually.
Wait.... Did we just agree about politics?
A rare photo of Justin Trudeau's parents showing baby photos to Pierre Trudeau.
Looks like you're gonna have lots of time for more JT memes. Liberals are polling at majority government levels right now.
that poll was even taken before he got his haircut. That's gonna give him a 10% boost amongst female voters
Until the conservatives shake loose the wingnuts on the far right, I'm afraid it's gonna be like this.
It’s a perfect storm for a liberal majority. The far right nonsense is going to push swing voters to ndp if not liberal.
If the ppc gains any traction it’s going to split the cpc voted even further. The conservatives are going to lose so much ground that may never be recoverable. There’s really no debating it at this point.
Nanos: LPC 37.09 CPC 24.69 NDP 19.31 GPC 7.94 BQ 5.78 PPC 4.10