Jody Wilson-Raybould & Jane Philpott: Where do they go politically from here?

277 posts / 0 new
Last post
NorthReport

(Just not at present to Liberal Caucus members) 

Wilson-Raybould a hero to First Nations people

https://www.thewesternstar.com/opinion/columnists/doug-cuthand-wilson-raybould-a-hero-to-first-nations-people-298786/

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

In the meantime in BC.

The vice-president of the federal Liberal’s Chilliwack-Hope riding association has resigned in support of both Jody Wilson-Raybould and Dr. Jane Philpott.

...

He says that after reaching to people in the community over the last seven weeks, he has found that “my values and the values of many of the supporters in Chilliwack-Hope do not align with the current direction of the Prime Minister and those within the PMO.”

“One of the most valuable assets we have in life is to be trustworthy,” he said. “It is this erosion of trust that the Prime Minister mentions when speaking of blame for the current SNC fiasco…the breakdown of the relationships between himself, the PMO, the former Attorney General and the former Treasury Board President.”

In addition to his resignation, he has also cancelled his financial contributions to the party, and will be withdrawing his candidate-nominee application for 2019.

De Jaeger originally ran for the Liberals in 2015

https://www.theprogress.com/news/chilliwack-hope-liberal-candidate-resig...

NorthReport

There is a deep irony to be seen in brutalizing and - two minority women - and then screeching that (and, in fact, anyone who opposes him) is the white supremacist.

7:49 AM - 6 Apr 2019

https://twitter.com/kinsellawarren/status/1114540608574476288

robbie_dee

JWR confirms NDP and Greens have approached her about joining. She also says Conservatives should not bother.

“I don’t identify with the Conservatives’ ideology,” she said, adding she considers herself “an independent Liberal” representing Vancouver Granville.

https://theprovince.com/news/bc-politics/mike-smyth-wilson-raybould-has-...

quizzical

guess Scheer is releasing more SNC-Lavalin at 2pm est

NorthReport
JKR

robbie_dee wrote:
JWR confirms NDP and Greens have approached her about joining.

She also says Conservatives should not bother.

should not bother getting in line.

“I don’t identify with the Conservatives’ ideology,” she said, adding she considers herself “an independent Liberal” representing Vancouver Granville.

Many of the Indigenous leaders and band leaders I’ve known of are supportive of the federal Liberals and Liberal ideology. 

bekayne

quizzical wrote:

guess Scheer is releasing more SNC-Lavalin at 2pm est

Guess not.

quizzical

guess so as Scheer announced Trudeau is threatening to sue him for libel.

NorthReport
NorthReport

Never a dull day.

Who will entertain us tomorrow?

https://globalnews.ca/news/5143513/jody-wilson-raybould-office-graffiti/

NorthReport
WWWTT

NorthReport wrote:

There is a deep irony to be seen in brutalizing and - two minority women - and then screeching that (and, in fact, anyone who opposes him) is the white supremacist.

7:49 AM - 6 Apr 2019

https://twitter.com/kinsellawarren/status/1114540608574476288

I like that political cartoon. 

But as a side note, is there and/or can there ever be a political cartoon about Justin and JWR that has no violent undertones?

I myself have used boxing/sparring terms such a ko when recently describing the Alberta debates, but this seems a little carried away. Or maybe it’s just me?

NorthReport

These Daughters of the Vote delegates felt bullied by their peers after they protested Trudeau and Scheer in Parliament

https://www.nationalobserver.com/2019/04/08/news/these-daughters-vote-delegates-felt-bullied-their-peers-after-they-protested-trudeau

Pondering

NorthReport wrote:

These Daughters of the Vote delegates felt bullied by their peers after they protested Trudeau and Scheer in Parliament

https://www.nationalobserver.com/2019/04/08/news/these-daughters-vote-delegates-felt-bullied-their-peers-after-they-protested-trudeau

It seems they mistakenly thought they were attending a progressive event rather than one organized by the political establishment including yellow vest types. They also seem to have expected civilized behavior which is not the norm in politics. They should be counseled to expect heated disapproval and ignorance so they can be emotionally prepared for it. Sad and shameful. 

quizzical

pondering your comments border on victim blaming. stop.

the failure of this event to protect marginalized young women stands in testimony of how fake the Liberal government is.

NorthReport

Indeed.

I wondered about that last week when the Liberal MP groupies keep suggesting they were going to vote to kick Philpott and JWR out of Caucus at their regularly scheduled Wedneday Caucus meting, and then Trudeau unilaterally kicked them out on Tuesday, before the Caucus had even met.  When the Liberal Caucus met on Tuesday it was just Trudeau informing the Caucus that he had already kicked the 2 women out. 

I hope the Speaker supports Philpott!  

Trudeau broke law by kicking former ministers out of caucus, Philpott says

 

OTTAWA — Former cabinet minister Jane Philpott says Prime Minister Justin Trudeau violated the law when he expelled her and Jody Wilson-Raybould from the Liberal caucus.

In the House of Commons, Philpott says the Parliament of Canada Act says MPs can't be kicked out of their party groups without a vote and Trudeau ejected them on his own.

She's asking Speaker Geoff Regan to declare that their privileges were violated.

A set of amendments in 2015 was meant to make it more difficult to remove MPs from their caucuses, to shift power away from party leaders and toward rank-and-file legislators.

Philpott says if Trudeau had followed the rules, it would have taken 90 Liberal MPs to vote to kick her and Wilson-Raybould out, and no such vote was held before Trudeau expelled them on the grounds that the caucus didn't trust them any more.

The two former ministers have been thorns in Trudeau's side in the SNC-Lavalin affair, with both resigning from cabinet over the way the controversy has been handled.

https://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2019/04/09/newsalert-philpott-says-trudeaus-caucus-expulsions-violated-law/#.XKy4g-tKig6

quizzical

and it just continues....Reagan had better not deny or there will be more repercussions

NorthReport

By far the most significantly constructive approach the Liberal MPs could do now is to invite JWR & Philpott back into the Caucus, have Trudeau immediately make a full and total apology to JWR, Philpott and a public apology to the Canadian people, cancel his lawsuit, resign, anounce a leadership convention to choose a replacement Leader, and learn how to pray. 

NorthReport

What a surprise!

The secretary's comments must be represented widely amongst Liberal members and supporters throughout the country.

Most of Jane Philpott's Liberal riding association leadership quits

 

Most board members of the federal Liberal riding association for Markham-Stouffville — represented by Jane Philpott — have stepped down in solidarity with the well-liked former cabinet minister because they "have no longer got the heart," CBC News has learned. 

In an exclusive interview, the board's secretary, Leea Nutson, said 10 of its 16 members have tendered their resignations. With the upcoming fall federal election, Nutson said, two are staying on in the interim. Three others will continue serving the riding association, and one member's intentions are unknown.

"This is not a protest resignation, in my part at least, but I have no longer got the heart to run or work on another campaign," she said at her home on Tuesday. 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/liberal-markham-stouffville-riding-resigns-jane-philpott-1.5084247

bekayne

NorthReport wrote:

Indeed.

I wondered about that last week when the Liberal MP groupies keep suggesting they were going to vote to kick Philpott and JWR out of Caucus at their regularly scheduled Wedneday Caucus meting, and then Trudeau unilaterally kicked them out on Tuesday, before the Caucus had even met.  When the Liberal Caucus met on Tuesday it was just Trudeau informing the Caucus that he had already kicked the 2 women out. 

I hope the Speaker supports Philpott!  

Trudeau broke law by kicking former ministers out of caucus, Philpott says

 

OTTAWA — Former cabinet minister Jane Philpott says Prime Minister Justin Trudeau violated the law when he expelled her and Jody Wilson-Raybould from the Liberal caucus.

In the House of Commons, Philpott says the Parliament of Canada Act says MPs can't be kicked out of their party groups without a vote and Trudeau ejected them on his own.

She's asking Speaker Geoff Regan to declare that their privileges were violated.

A set of amendments in 2015 was meant to make it more difficult to remove MPs from their caucuses, to shift power away from party leaders and toward rank-and-file legislators.

Philpott says if Trudeau had followed the rules, it would have taken 90 Liberal MPs to vote to kick her and Wilson-Raybould out, and no such vote was held before Trudeau expelled them on the grounds that the caucus didn't trust them any more.

The two former ministers have been thorns in Trudeau's side in the SNC-Lavalin affair, with both resigning from cabinet over the way the controversy has been handled.

https://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2019/04/09/newsalert-philpott-says-trudeaus-caucus-expulsions-violated-law/#.XKy4g-tKig6

Was there a vote to expel Erin Weir?

bekayne

NorthReport wrote:

What a surprise!

The secretary's comments must be represented widely amongst Liberal members and supporters throughout the country.

Most of Jane Philpott's Liberal riding association leadership quits

 

Most board members of the federal Liberal riding association for Markham-Stouffville — represented by Jane Philpott — have stepped down in solidarity with the well-liked former cabinet minister because they "have no longer got the heart," CBC News has learned. 

In an exclusive interview, the board's secretary, Leea Nutson, said 10 of its 16 members have tendered their resignations. With the upcoming fall federal election, Nutson said, two are staying on in the interim. Three others will continue serving the riding association, and one member's intentions are unknown.

"This is not a protest resignation, in my part at least, but I have no longer got the heart to run or work on another campaign," she said at her home on Tuesday. 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/liberal-markham-stouffville-riding-resigns-jane-philpott-1.5084247

Once again, this is too easy:

https://www.cjme.com/2019/01/31/local-ndp-vote-to-allow-weir-to-seek-federal-nomination/

NorthReport

Ex-Federal Liberal Agency of Canada director calls for party probe into expulsion of Wilson-Raybould and Philpott

 

  • Jody Wilson-Raybould (far left) and Jane Philpott (second from left) were illegally bounced out of caucus without a vote, contends long-time Vancouver Liberal Bert Paul.

  • Jody Wilson-Raybould (far left) and Jane Philpott (second from left) were illegally bounced out of caucus without a vote, contends long-time Vancouver Liberal Bert Paul.MCPL MATHIEU GAUDREAULT, RIDEAU HALL

For more than three decades, Vancouver chartered professional accountant Elbert King (Bert) Paul was a loyal federal Liberal.

POLL

Were the Liberals "batshit crazy" to expel Jody Wilson-Raybould from caucus?

YES 78%

2362 VOTES

NO 22%

653 VOTES

RELATED STORIES

He served on the board of the Federal Liberal Agency of Canada, which is the party's chief agent. And he chaired its audit committee.

Today, Paul asked the Liberal Party of Canada president, Suzanne Cowan, to launch an "independent investigation" into the April 2 expulsion of Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott from the Liberal caucus.

In a letter to Cowan, Paul cited a recent interview with Conservative MP Michael Chong on CBC's Power & Politics show.

In that interview, Chong stated that the two expulsions violated section 49(2) of the Parliament of Canada Act.

"Mr. Chong stated that the LPC caucus violated the Act by not holding recorded votes when expelling the members of the caucus," Paul wrote in his letter.

He added that he has studied the relevant section of the legislation, which says a caucus chair must receive a written notice signed by at least 20 percent of the caucus requesting an MP's membership be reviewed.

That must be followed by a secret ballot.

"Prime Minister Trudeau stated on CTV News on April 2, 2019 that 'he made the difficult decision to remove Ms. Wilson-Raybould and Dr. Philpott from the Liberal caucus'," Paul wrote.

Later in his letter, he stated that he agreed with Chong's assertion that the expulsion of Wilson-Raybould and Philpott from caucus was "unlawful".

Paul closed his letter by stating that it is "vital that we protect the public interest relating to the rule of law".

He copied the correspondence to Canada's chief electoral officer, Stéphane Perreault.

"I have specific concerns arising from possible contravention of the Canada Election Act pertaining to the rights of disenfranchised liberal voters in the ridings of Vancouver Granville and Markham-Stouffville [which are represented by Wilson-Raybould and Philpott]," Paul stated. "I, along with Canadians, await your response with deep concern."

https://www.straight.com/news/1225301/ex-federal-liberal-agency-canada-director-calls-party-probe-expulsion-wilson-raybould

bekayne
NorthReport

Chong disagrees.

bekayne

NorthReport wrote:

Chong disagrees.

Of course he would. It was his bill.

NorthReport

Liberals once again are losing this fight as the SNC scandal is back in the news for an additional day. Incroyable!

NorthReport

Trudeau Liberals get a FAIL on PR. Trudeau Liberals have had a majority since 2015, but they killed it. This stuff about the other parties is just more Liberal smoke and mirrors.

A year later, Trudeau will only revisit electoral reform if pushed by other parties — something MPs don't buy

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-electoral-reform-january-2018-1.4511902

bekayne
Paladin1

Maybe Jody Wilson-Raybould & Jane Philpott will file a lawsuit for being illegally kicked out of the LPC by Trudeau.

bekayne

Paladin1 wrote:

Maybe Jody Wilson-Raybould & Jane Philpott will file a lawsuit for being illegally kicked out of the LPC by Trudeau.

http://rabble.ca/comment/5571856#comment-5571856

NorthReport
NorthReport

The Reform Act is back, and ready for more abuse, thanks to SNC-Lavalin affair

One lesson from the SNC-Lavalin meltdown is that rules cannot save Canadian politics from ethical messes like these. Sometimes they can even make things worse

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/chris-selley-the-final-humiliation-for-michael-chongs-reform-act

NorthReport

Speaker shuts down Philpott's claim that PM contravened law with caucus expulsions

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/speaker-shuts-down-philpott-s-claim-that-pm-contravened-law-with-caucus-expulsions-1.4375510

NorthReport
Unionist

NorthReport wrote:

Few SNC-Lavalin rivals have been granted DPAs, contrary to CEO’s claims

https://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2019/04/11/few-snc-lavalin-rivals-have-been-granted-dpas-contrary-to-ceos-claims/#.XK-EZutKig7

You created this thread, and this article has nothing to do with it. Please move it to an appropriate thread, just as a courtesy to people here who are trying to follow the conversations.

NorthReport

FEATURED MUSING

#LAVSCAM LESSON

Wilson-Raybould: “I feel I’m being shifted out of Justice for other reasons.”

Trudeau: “We would not be doing this if it weren’t for Scott [Brison]’s decision.”

Wilson-Raybould: “I don’t agree. This is not how we change peoples lives.”

Trudeau: “After an election, everything is fresh again.”

Now, my students, who are exceptionally bright, will likely know that Gerald Butts and Justin Trudeau made three critical errors in submitting that transcript.

One, it’s a transcript. Unless Gerald Butts has enhanced shorthand skills no one knew about, it is highly likely that someone taped that conversation. Which, as any sharp-eyed law student will know, is the very pretext Trudeau used to expel Wilson-Raybould from the Liberal caucus: a secret taping.

Two, Wilson-Raybould was not aware Butts was listening in. That’s not breaking a law, per se, but it’s certainly not ethical sunny ways, either.

Thirdly – and most ominously, because my students all know who Marie Heinen is – Gerald Butts submitted many notes. When, in the pre-trial manoeuvrings in the trial Heinen’s client, Vice-Admiral Mark Norman, PMO and PCO solemnly swore that those sorts of notes simply don’t exist. Uh-oh.

If Messrs. Trudeau and Butts don’t think Canada’s best criminal lawyer didn’t spot that error, they’re dumber than dirt found at an SNC-Lavalin job site. She did. And she will be cross-examining them about it starting in August, mere weeks before the election is scheduled to kick off.

There’s a lot more of that sort of thing, but you get the point. In the final minutes of my final lecture, I therefore intend to tell my amazing students this: “In your future legal practice, remember what Justin Trudeau’s party did in LavScam in the year 2019,” I’ll say. “And, if you want to win, always just do this:

“The opposite.”

 

http://warrenkinsella.com/2019/04/lavscam-lesson/

Unionist

Warren Kinsella wrote:

...because my students all know who Marie Heinen is 

Naturally reactionary scum like Kinsella have discovered new heroes - anything to give Andrew Scheer a lease on life.

And his students may all know who Marie Henein is - but Prof. Kinsella doesn't even know how to spell her name. What an ignoramus.

Pondering

Or, as JWR stated she usually does, used a note-taker. 

JWR publicly released a recording she had made secretly.  She withheld it from the committee until after Wernick's testimony.

It is not the same thing as having a note-taker although that too should be announced. JWR was asked why she didn't just take notes from the recording and destroy the recording. She most certainly didn't keep the recording to protect Trudeau. 

Misfit Misfit's picture

When JWR was the AG and Minister of Justice, she was most certainly looking out for Trudeau's best interests. She tried to stop him from unethically tampering in a criminal case that is before the courts.

Unfortunately, Trudeau knifed JWR in the back. He harassed her for months through his staff to act unethically. He demoted her for not doing what he wanted. He then spoke a falsehood to the media on her behalf without her consent. Then Trudeau’s cronies testified before the Justice Committee to redefine what actually happened. They tried to make JWR look bad and to make her look like a fool.  He did everything he could to silence her. He kicked her out of caucus and the Liberal party.

The tape recording was definitive proof that contradicted the established Liberal spin. It confirmed that JWR was telling the truth all along and at the Justice Committee.

It would be very odd to destroy strong evidence like a tape recording. A simple taking of notes and then destroying the hard evidence would easily be dismissed as her selective and subjective interpretation of what the conversation really entailed. Her notes would be dismissed as further wild and hollow allegations on her part.

Only the Liberals and staunch Liberal supporters would wish for the hard copy of the conversation to be destroyed. It is just another Liberal ploy to try to silence and discredit JWR even more.

I cannot imagine why anyone would expect her to maintain her loyalty to Trudeau after all the vile things that he did to her.

Liberals are fixated on the fact that she recorded the conversation. Jane Philpott was interviewed by Anna Maria Tremonti on CBC’s The Current on April 4, 2019. 

Tremonti brought up the issue of the taped conversation to her.

Interview

“AMT:There’s been a lot of criticism of Jody Wilson-Raybould for secretly recording her conversation with the then Clerk of the Privy Council Michael Wernick. Do you think what she did was ethically acceptable?

JP:Well, I encourage people to read her submission that she sent to the Justice Committee, a very good forty-three page document, and it explains the reasons why she made that tape. But what I would say is I think it’s a bit of a red herring to be talking about whether or not her justification is reasonable, and not to focus on the content of the tape, what was said in that tape, what was being attempted in that tape was to interfere with the Attorney-General, who is in that case who was not wearing a political hat, she was representing the independent justice system. And there were attempts to try to make her do something that she didn’t believe was the right thing to do. That’s a disturbing tape, especially following on months of similar kinds of conversations. So I get that people find that its unusual. Conversations in Ottawa between media and politicians and lawyers and lawyers etc. are taped all the time…”

Liberals will do everything to deflect from the actual content of the tape.

Pondering

How could they possibly deflect from the contents of the tape? It isn't a secret anymore. everyone knows about it. It seems to me Trudeau's guilt is being used to deflect all attention away from JWR's actions as though if Trudeau is guilty that means JWR is pure as the driven snow. More than one person can have behaved inappropriately or with self-interest in mind.

If she were protecting Trudeau she would have issued the December warning directly to Trudeau rather than expecting staff to deliver this supposed very stern warning concerning their own behavior. What staff goes to the boss to tell them another executive is complaining about their own behavior? Complaints about top level staff cannot assume to have been delivered especially when the complaint is about the staff's behavior. 

The reason she keeps insisting nothing illegal happened is because nothing illegal happened. In the conversations when she says something to the effect that she is not behaving inappropriately she misinterprets what Wernick was saying. He was saying that it would not be inappropriate for her to use the legal tool that she has available to override the prosecutor's decision. If she thought it was inappropriate why not get outside counsel to give an opinion. 

She isn't just saying the pressure is inappropriate, she is saying using the tool would be inappropriate or wrong. That was the disagreement between her and the PMO. 

At one point she says that the prosecutor's decision was sent to the PMO but he wasn't asking the reasoning for the prosecutor's decision. He was asking why JWR was unwilling to use the directive to change the decision. 

They were talking at cross purposes and the only reasons JWR gave for not using the directive were that it would look bad politically on Trudeau and it would be in the Gazette. 

If she were protecting Trudeau she would have done as requested and sought outside counsel. I'm pretty sure what Trudeau sees as the error was not reassigning her in October so there would have been no need to repeatedly ask her why she wouldn't use the available tool to overturn the prosector's decision. 

Saying it would damage Trudeau politically if she used the directive is a political reason for not using the tool. Objecting to having it reported in the Gazette is a personal reason. 

The prosecutor's report is confidential so we don't know why it was refused beyond speculation. The case is still open and a DPA is still being considered. The only political damage was delivered by JWR herself. 

Misfit Misfit's picture

Omg

Paladin1

Misfit wrote:

Omg

 

Right?

Misfit Misfit's picture

Uff da!?!?

Misfit Misfit's picture

SSorry Paladin, Pondering’s reasoning is not an uff da.  It’s an ish da!

An ish da is much much worse than a simple uff da.

Pondering

I finally found a bit of an explanation on the directive thing. JWR isn't entirely against as she has used it. 

https://www.vancourier.com/independence-at-core-of-federal-prosecution-service-s-creation-1.23631708

"The relationship between the attorney general and the director is premised on respect for the independence of the prosecution function and the need to consult on important matters of general interest," reads a news release announcing the appointment.

 

What does the justice minister have to do with it?

According to the legislation, the service's director acts under and on behalf of the attorney general, the Crown's chief lawyer, through whom it reports to Parliament.

In Canada, the same person is both justice minister and attorney general. Some other places, such as the United Kingdom, separate the justice minister's job from the attorney general's, though both positions are held by politicians.

Except for Canada Elections Act matters, the attorney general is allowed to direct or even personally take over prosecutions but must do so in writing and with notice published in the Canada Gazette, the official record of government decisions. For general prosecution directives, the attorney general must also consult with the director.

Does this happen a lot?

Not very often. But Wilson-Raybould used this power as recently as Nov. 30, with a direction in relation to HIV non-disclosure cases, telling federal prosecutors not to pursue charges against people with HIV who have sex without informing their partners, as long as the circumstances were such that there was virtually no chance of transmitting the illness.

The law didn't change but the instruction to federal prosecutors — which only applied in the handful of jurisdictions where they handle criminal cases — changed the way it is applied.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

She gave the right advice to stop future prosecutions that most likely would have been tossed by the courts for breaching the accused Charter Rights. WTF does that have to do with a criminal corruption case before the courts. Are you actually suggesting that JWR should have told the Crown to stop the prosecution of this corrupt company?

Lavscam is just a peek behind the curtain of our corrupt to the core politics in Ottawa. Note that it is the "independent" civil service that is helping out its corporate masters, no matter which party has been elected.

Unionist

kropotkin1951 wrote:

She gave the right advice to stop future prosecutions that most likely would have been tossed by the courts for breaching the accused Charter Rights. WTF does that have to do with a criminal corruption case before the courts. Are you actually suggesting that JWR should have told the Crown to stop the prosecution of this corrupt company?

I thought Pondering's point was pretty straightforward. She said, "JWR isn't entirely against as she has used it." - referring to A-G directives to prosecutors. Not a very profound point IMHO, but she made her point. I don't recall JWR (or anyone on her behalf) professing that all directives by A-Gs to prosecutors are unacceptable. But certainly, the impression has been left by some partisans that any order from any cabinet minister (who also happens to be an A-G) to any crown counsel would constitute improper interference in the judicial process. Pondering has simply confirmed that that is not the case.

Pondering

From what I heard her say in the recording I thought she might be against the use of the directive and I also wanted to know about the purpose of it and how it works. I thought the explanation about the Justice Minister and Attorney General positions was interesting. 

I would like to change the title of the thread but I don't know what to. I'd like to expand the discussion to everything about this situation other than the obvious Trudeau is to blame aspect. 

The way staff is used by the PMO to shield the PM from accusations. As long as the Wrights/Wernicks of this world insist they didn't inform the PM and fall on their swords the PM will not be held directly accountable. The PMO office has grown exponentially. If Cabinet Ministers don't talk directly with the PM on top shelf files like this there is no hope for back-benchers to access the PM. PMs are shielded from having any meaningful conversations. Trudeau is not running the government. He is a spokesperson who supports the neoliberal worldview of trade and mega-corporations. He spends his days memorizing dozens of talking points on every topic he might be challenged on. He may have some input but it isn't a lot. Butts and Wernik might actually be the primary pushers on this. Wernick actually worked with Harper too which is why he was so incredulous that this was even an issue. 

If prosecution will punish the guilty or act as a deterrent then even if it harms innocent workers and investors then I can see an argument for it. If the only people it will harm are innocent workers and investors then I question the purpose. 

To say Trudeau is guilty so let's just crucify him is a simplification. So what should I call the thread?

swallow swallow's picture

You could call it “mulberries.” 

http://rabble.ca/babble/rabble-reactions/mulberries

Pages