It's Canada Day, so we're marking that occasion by looking back at some of the dumbest things about PM Justin Trudeau.
Is it his "male feminist" virtue signalling? His twisted idea about "Canadian values" (or the lack of them...)? His damage to Canada's image abroad?
Our Alberta Bureau Chief Sheila Gunn Reid joins me to hash this out!
I recall something about this last week too.
Any chance Amy is deflecting?!!!
Biggest loser Canadian government EVER .
The UN’s Agenda
#idiotTrudeau also involved.
It’s all in here,
Please Share, https://youtu.be/_mIN2fWpWiU
I do know whether the allegations against Trudeau over the Creston B.C. groping are true, so I am loathe to comment upon it. The “me too” movement has produced many partisan based allegations as we know, against President Trump, former Ontario PC leader Patrick Brown and a host of other targets. No doubt some of these allegations are truth based but others are not and most of them have never been proven. The allegations remain ‘he said, she said’; meanwhile reputations and oft times lives have been destroyed.
Yet, it is fair to mention that on other fronts, Trudeau has proven to be a total hypocrite over his endless claims to be a ‘feminist’. He sees no contradiction for example about being widely photographed and/or filmed in a series of radical mosques where women and girls are obligated to sit separate from and behind the men and boys. For menstruating women and girls, they are obligated to sit in another room entirely. Trudeau ‘the feminist’ apparently sees no contradiction with glad handing and pandering in such retrograde and misogynist institutions while still pretending to be ‘a feminist.’ “It is their culture don’t you know.” As if such superficial and culturally relativist quips explain away the contradictions.
When I think of Trudeau and his endless, flaccid, boasts about being a feminist, the Shakespearean quote, “Methinks thou doth protest too much,” Or, in Trudeau’s case, “boast too much”, comes immediately to mind.
Does his endless posing over his ‘feminism’ come perhaps from his guilt over a less than flawless past on the issue of groping?
Does he, operating on the assumption that the best defense is a good offense, believe that if he touts his ‘feminism’ loudly and often enough, that when the excrement of past peccadilloes hits the fan, he will be insulated from any charges?
http://dailycaller.com/2018/07/02/trump-defense-spending-merkel-trudeau/
P.S. Harper recently met with a dictator last month and while PM he supported Ukrainian neo-Nazis. You didn’t mind then. Why do you mind now?
https://www.infowars.com/gagging-the-nation-government-and-corporate-trolls-on-the-internet/
“Utilizing a UK intelligence outfit known as the Government Communications Headquarters, through a secret unit known as the Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group, paid trolls and shills systematically try to “to control, infiltrate, manipulate, and warp online discourse.””
Amy Lynn, Stark, Ocean = “Jimmy Da Silva” paid troll.
I shook her hand.
You grabbed my boob!
Ah yes, I remember it well.
https://www.infowars.com/gagging-the-nation-government-and-corporate-trolls-on-the-internet/
“Utilizing a UK intelligence outfit known as the Government Communications Headquarters, through a secret unit known as the Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group, paid trolls and shills systematically try to “to control, infiltrate, manipulate, and warp online discourse.””
Crickets
However, Lord Leveson gave an interview to the BBC Radio 4s Law In Action program on June 24th in which he used the case of Mr Robinson as an example of when posting material on the internet can lead to imprisonment due to contempt of court. This means, I would submit, that already, before the case has been heard and therefore before Lord Leveson has had all the facts of the case presented to him, that he has in fact predetermined the guilt of Mr Robinson and is therefore unable to impartially judge his appeal.
Starting at 03:45 Leveson says:
“Members of the public ought to know that publishing comments which impact unfairly on the course of a trial could constitute contempt of court and there is a very good recent example of a man who videoed material which he fed into the internet which did constitute contempt of court as a result of which he was sentenced to a term of imprisonment.” (Our emphasis).
Joshua Rozenberg, the presenter, asks “This is Tommy Robinson?” Leveson replies “It is indeed”. Clearly, Lord Leveson has already formed an opinion of the case he is now being expected to preside over and has expressed that opinion in a public forum. It is kind of ironic that his Lordship saw fit to venture an opinion on the actions of members of the public but has in fact now put himself in a position where he cannot reasonably be relied upon to judge the case of Mr Robinson in an impartial and fair manner.
Share this:
Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)4K+Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)4K+Click to share on Google+ (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)More
Related
… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5eUR_HJMt4
Genuine, or not genuine?