National
PROC – The Uninvited Ovation of the notorious Waffen-SS at the HoC
Liberal Waterloo MP, Bardish Chagger
From The Opposition News Network
|
|
Unmasking the Hunka Fiasco, A Tale of Evasion, Applause, and the Art of Political Cover-Up
Yesterday, at Meeting No. 111 of the PROC – the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs – things got heated, to say the least. We witnessed yet another chapter in what can only be described as the Bloc/NDP/Liberal cover-up coalition’s ongoing saga. Let’s delve into the heart of this matter, shall we?
Rewind to September 22, 2023. Imagine a scene straight out of a political thriller, but this isn’t fiction; it’s the reality we’re living in Canada today. The House of Commons, a revered chamber of democracy, was transformed into a stage for what can only be described as a bewildering spectacle. The center of attention? Yaroslav Hunka, a veteran of the SS Division Galicia, part of the notorious Waffen-SS. And who were leading the standing ovation for this figure? None other than Speaker Anthony Rota, with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and, shockingly, during a visit by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the entire assembly rose in applause.
This moment, surreal as it may seem, unfolded right before our eyes. It’s a scene that, if pitched for a screenplay, would be rejected for its implausibility. Yet, here we are, folks. Speaker Anthony Rota, in the aftermath, claimed full responsibility for this egregious error in judgment. However, this explanation fell short for many, particularly Conservatives who argued that the responsibility doesn’t just lie with Rota but extends to the Prime Minister’s Office for failing to properly vet the guest list.
This incident isn’t just a domestic blunder; it has international ramifications. Russia, amid their war with Ukraine, has been accusing the West, particularly Ukraine, of Nazification to justify their invasion. This event in Canada’s House of Commons, unfortunately, plays right into their narrative. It’s a talking point that was even highlighted in the Tucker Carlson/Vladimir Putin interview on February 8, 2024.
So, what do we have here? A narrative unfolding that would have any observer scratching their head in disbelief. MP Eric Duncan raised a question that cut to the core of the issue, only to be shut down by a Liberal cohort seemingly intent on narrowing the scope of inquiry to a suffocating point. The question wasn’t just relevant; it was crucial. It highlighted not just a single lapse in judgment but a systemic failure in vetting processes that spanned beyond the walls of the House of Commons to other official events. And yet, here we are, witnessing the procedural gymnastics designed to shield the Trudeau administration from further embarrassment.
Let’s dissect the maneuvering, shall we? The Honourable Bardish Chagger, in her role, made an effort to corral the discussion strictly within the confines of what happened in the House of Commons. But why? Is it because the broader implications of this debacle, spanning across multiple events, might further tarnish the image of Trudeau’s government? It seems clear as day that the aim here is to pad the damage, to keep the fallout as contained and as minimal as possible. But at what cost? The truth?
The stench of political maneuvering is all too familiar, folks. From foreign interference to now what’s being dubbed as ‘Nazi-gate,’ it’s the same old dance. Limit the questions, control the narrative, and hope the public’s attention shifts elsewhere. But here’s the thing – the Canadian public deserves to have all their questions asked and answered. It’s not of mere consequence to the likes of Chagger or anyone else looking to shield their party from the fallout; it’s a matter of public interest, of national embarrassment. And speaking of consequences, let’s talk about Waterloo, where MP Bardish Chagger hails from. The latest polls indicate a shifting landscape: LPC at 32% ± 6%, CPC at 38% ± 7%, NDP at 19% ± 5%, and GPC at 8% ± 4%. It seems the constituents are as fed up with these shenanigans as we are. The prospect of Chagger being dethroned in the next election? Well, let’s just say, it wouldn’t be a moment too soon. To rid the committees of this sort of maneuvering would be a breath of fresh air.
The narrative thickens, as MP Eric Duncan doggedly peels back the layers of this bewildering saga, it’s like watching a detective piecing together clues from a crime scene. Only in this case, the crime is against common sense and competence. Duncan, in his relentless pursuit of clarity, tries to navigate through the smoke and mirrors of governmental protocol and accountability—or, more accurately, the lack thereof.
His line of questioning, aimed at understanding past mistakes to prevent future blunders, is met with the kind of resistance you’d expect from an administration knee-deep in damage control. The conversation veers into the territory of the Prime Minister’s infamous trip to India—a diplomatic disaster that still haunts the halls of Canadian politics. A known terrorist ends up on the guest list, and suddenly, Canada’s international reputation is dancing on the edge of a knife.
The witness’s acknowledgment of this past mistake underlines a crucial point: the importance of vetting, the need for thorough background checks, and the dire consequences of neglecting such processes. It’s a lesson in governance, served cold, courtesy of a glaring blunder on the international stage.
Yet, as Duncan digs deeper, seeking to apply these hard-learned lessons to the current debacle, he’s met with interruptions, procedural objections—tactics to derail, to deflect. It’s the political equivalent of throwing sand in the gears of accountability.
MP Cathay Wagentall point of order captures the essence of the frustration many feel: the need to prevent such embarrassments from recurring, the imperative to shield the Prime Minister from repeated international faux pas. But the irony is palpable. The very mechanisms supposed to protect the integrity of the office are the ones undermining it through their relentless efforts to obscure the truth. This charade, this theater of the absurd we’re witnessing, is more than just a procedural dance. It’s a symptom of a deeper malaise—a government so entangled in its missteps that it seems to have lost sight of its duty to its citizens, its responsibility to uphold the dignity of its office on the world stage.
Luc Berthold stepped into the fray, armed with the kind of questions that make the Trudeau government’s allies squirm in their well-cushioned seats. The issue at hand? The inexplicable invitation of Mr. Hunka to a high-profile event, an invitation that has the fingerprints of incompetence all over it. When Berthold pressed for answers on the how and why of Mr. Hunka’s seating and invitation—moments that should have had clear, straightforward protocols—the responses he received were as clear as mud. The protocol office, seemingly a key player in this drama, claimed ignorance about who gets the golden ticket to the House of Commons gallery. But here’s where it gets interesting: Berthold, with the precision of a prosecutor, pointed out the obvious role the protocol office plays when it comes to diplomatic corps seats. Yet, when it came to Mr. Hunka, suddenly, it’s as if everyone’s memory turned as foggy as a morning in Nova Scotia.
The Liberals tried to shut down the conversation faster than you can say “cover-up.” But Berthold, undeterred, highlighted the gaping holes in their story. The Toronto event, a sideshow in this circus, became a focal point. The witness admitted—oh so reluctantly—that the invitation to Mr. Hunka came from none other than the PMO’s office, upon the suggestion of the Ukrainian embassy. How convenient. But here’s the kicker, folks: despite all attempts to navigate through this mess, the Liberals and their coalition pals, the Bloc and NDP, decided it was time to pull the plug on this embarrassing episode. “Meeting adjourned,” they declared, hoping to sweep the whole affair under the rug. But let me tell you, this isn’t just some parliamentary ping-pong match; this is a glaring testament to the Trudeau government’s disregard for accountability.
And so, as the committee wrapped up, with the cover-up coalition patting themselves on the back for dodging another bullet, one can’t help but marvel at the audacity of it all. Transparency in the Trudeau government? As extinct as the dodo bird.
It’s clear as day, folks. The halls of Ottawa are reeking, and let me tell you, it’s not the scent of maple syrup—it’s the stink of a swamp, a bog of obfuscation that’s determined to muddy the windows through which you, the voter, should be able to see the gears of your government at work. But what we’ve got instead is a theatrical production, a performance so dedicated to the art of cover-up and evasion that it would give Broadway a run for its money.
I, for one, am counting down the days until this Liberal/NDP cover-up coalition is shown the door, kicked to the curb by the very voters they’ve attempted to blindfold. It’s not just a desire; it’s a necessity. It’s a clarion call to the next administration that we, the voters, are fed up. We’re done tolerating the smoke screens, the sleights of hand, and, let’s just say it outright, the outright bullshit that’s been paraded around as governance.
The stench from this swamp has wafted far and wide, but the wind is changing. It’s about time we clear the air, clean house, and restore some semblance of transparency and integrity to the halls of power. So, as we look ahead to the next election, let it be known: the Canadian public is awake, alert, and absolutely unwilling to stomach any more of this. The message is loud and clear—enough is enough.
So, to the powers that be, consider this your official notice. The jig is up. We’re on to you, and we’re not standing for it any longer. It’s time for a clean sweep, a breath of fresh air. Because, at the end of the day, it’s our country, our future, and our very democracy at stake. And that, dear friends, is something worth fighting for.
For the full experience, subscribe
Dan Knight
Business
Trump 2.0 means Canada must put income tax cuts on the table
From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation
By Jay Goldberg
The topic on everyone’s mind is tariffs: Will Trump act on his threat to impose 25 per cent across-the-board tariffs on the Canadian economy?
But there’s something else Canadians should worry about: income taxes.
During President-Elect Donald Trump’s first term, he lowered income taxes for Americans at virtually at all income levels. And Trump pledged during the presidential election campaign to cut taxes further.
Here in Canada, our tax rates are already uncompetitive. With a possible tax cut south of the border, it’s time to re-examine Canada’s income tax policies.
Let’s take a gander at how Canadians who earn $75,000 a year are taxed compared to Americans.
A taxpayer in Ontario earning $75,000 a year pays an income tax rate of about 30 per cent.
Compare that to the two states bordering Ontario: Michigan and New York. In Michigan, a taxpayer earning $75,000 a year pays a 26.3 per cent income tax rate. And in New York, one of the highest-taxed states in the U.S., that taxpayer would face a 27.5 per cent income tax bill.
Considering that sales taxes and hydro rates are lower south of the border, Canada is clearly at a disadvantage. Add to that the fact that Canadians pay a punishing carbon tax while Americans don’t.
The situation is even more stark for those with higher incomes.
A taxpayer earning $150,000 in Ontario sends roughly 41.7 per cent of their income to Queen’s Park and Ottawa in income taxes.
Compare that once again to Michigan and New York. A Michigander making $150,000 a year pays a 28.3 per cent income tax rate. And a New Yorker pays 30 per cent.
These numbers are glaring. Canadians pay dramatically higher income taxes than our neighbours to the south. And Michigan and New York are some of the higher-tax states.
In Texas, a taxpayer earning $150,000 pays a 24 per cent income tax rate. That’s lower than the income tax rate for an Ontarian who earns half that much.
The cross-border tax gap will likely grow further in the new year. Trump says he plans to further lower income taxes while the Trudeau and Ford governments show little appetite for providing taxpayers up north with a similar break.
For the sake of Canada’s economic competitiveness, income tax cuts need to be placed firmly back on the public policy agenda.
Premier Doug Ford promised to cut income taxes for middle-class Ontarians by nearly $800 a year when he was first became premier six years ago. He pledged to do so by lowering Ontario’s second income tax bracket by 20 per cent.
If there was ever a time for Ford to follow through on his election promise, that time is now.
The feds need to look at cutting income taxes too. Most of the income tax burden in Canada is caused by high tax rates at the federal level.
To insulate Canada from the magnetic pull that will be triggered by a second round of Trump tax cuts, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau must look at lowering personal income tax rates.
Trudeau can cut income taxes substantially without hiking the deficit because there’s plenty of opportunities for savings.
Here’s where to start: The Trudeau government spent $47 billion on corporate welfare in 2021.
If Trudeau eliminated corporate welfare, the feds could cut personal income taxes by 20 per cent across the board without hiking the deficit.
Canada’s politicians can’t be complacent. We can’t control what Trump chooses to do when he gets back into the White House, but Canada’s politicians can control public policy north of the border to make the Canadian economy more competitive.
That starts with cutting income taxes.
Business
Canadian Businessman Kevin O’Leary Proposes ‘Erasing The Border’ Between US, Canada To Combat China
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
By Jason Cohen
Canadian businessman Kevin O’Leary proposed on Thursday that the United States and Canada eliminate the border between them to form a united front against China and Russia.
Trump suggested in a Christmas Day Truth Social post that Canada should become the United States’ 51st state, which the president-elect asserted would boost the northern country’s economy and provide it with military security. O’Leary, on “The Big Money Show,” said the potential economic and security benefits of the countries uniting are attractive prospects.
WATCH:
“There’s 41 million Canadians, basically the population of California, sitting on the world’s largest amounts of all resources, including the most important, energy and water. Canadians over the holidays the last two days have been talking about this. They want to hear more,” O’Leary said. “And so there’s obviously a lot of issues and more details, but what this could be is the beginning of an economic union. Think about the power of combining the two economies, erasing the border between Canada and the United States and putting all that resource up to the northern borders where China and Russia are knocking on the door.”
“So secure that, give a common currency, figure out taxes across the board, get everything trading both ways, create a new, almost EU-like passport. I like this idea and at least half of Canadians are interested. The problem is the government’s collapsing in Canada right now,” he continued. “Nobody wants [Canadian Prime Minister Justin] Trudeau to negotiate this deal. I don’t want him doing it for me. So I’m going to go to Mar-a-Lago. I’ll start the narrative. The 41 millions Canadians, I think most of them would trust me on this deal.”
Trump in November threatened to place a 25% tariff on all products from Canada and Mexico unless they do more to curb the flow of illegal immigration and drugs entering the United States, with the Canadian government subsequently boosting its border security apparatus. Trudeau also met with Trump at his Mar-a-Lago residence following the president-elect’s threat.
-
Alberta2 days ago
Alberta’s Massive Carbon Capture and Storage Network clearing hurdles: Pathways Alliance
-
Bruce Dowbiggin1 day ago
Trudeau Parting Gift: Conceding Indigenous Land Claims For All Time
-
Censorship Industrial Complex1 day ago
UN General Assembly Adopts Controversial Cybercrime Treaty Amid Criticism Over Censorship and Surveillance Risks
-
COVID-191 day ago
Intelligence Blob Boxed Out Lab Leak Proponents As It Sold Fading Biden On Natural Origins Theory
-
espionage1 day ago
Textbook Case of FBI Grooming a Troubled Young Man to Commit Violent Crime
-
Brownstone Institute1 day ago
The Spies Who Hate Us
-
Energy12 hours ago
Canada’s Most Impactful Energy Issues in 2024
-
Brownstone Institute1 day ago
Who Is Wei Cai, German Public Health’s ‘Hidden’ Scientist from Wuhan?