Trudeau’s $9 Million Condo Scandal: Elites Party in New York While Canadians Struggle at Home

From The Opposition News Network

It’s no secret that Justin Trudeau and his Liberal cronies love to live large. But this latest scandal? It’s a new low, even for them. We’re talking about a $9 million luxury condo—yes, you heard that right—on Billionaire’s Row in New York City, bought for a Trudeau-appointed diplomat while millions of Canadians are barely scraping by.

What’s worse? Trudeau himself seems to be right at the heart of this.

Let’s break down the facts that emerged during Meeting No. 137 of the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates (OGGO), and you’ll see exactly how Trudeau’s government, under the watchful eye of his loyal minister Mélanie Jolie, pulled this off.

The Timeline of Trudeau’s Elitist Condo Scheme:

1. February 2023: Tom Clark, a former journalist and long-time friend of the Liberal elites, is appointed by Trudeau’s government as Consul General in New York. A cozy appointment, no doubt, for someone with deep ties to the Liberal establishment.

2. April 27, 2023: The Prime Minister himself—yes, Justin Trudeau—drops by Clark’s old New York residence for a dinner. Imagine the wine flowing and the conversation going, all while the rest of Canada is dealing with a collapsing economy, skyrocketing inflation, and an ongoing housing crisis.

3. April 28, 2023: The very next day, Trudeau and Clark are seen together in a motorcade cruising the streets of New York City. What exactly were they discussing? A new condo perhaps? It’s hard to believe that this kind of luxury real estate plan wasn’t at least mentioned during their cozy ride.

4. Spring/Summer 2023: Global Affairs Canada—overseen by Trudeau’s trusted Minister Jolie—suddenly identifies problems with the old residence. That’s right, just a few months after Trudeau’s visit, the decision is made to start looking for a new, more luxurious residence. Coincidence? Hardly.

5. April 17, 2024: An email from Global Affairs states that Tom Clark was instrumental in giving the green light for the purchase of the $9 million condo. The deal is pushed through, and the taxpayer is stuck with the bill.

6. July 12, 2024: The media finally breaks the story about the purchase of the $9 million luxury condo on Billionaire’s Row, one of the most expensive neighborhoods in New York. Public outrage begins to grow as details about this opulent purchase come to light.

7. July 25, 2024: A bogus correction is issued by Global Affairs, claiming that Tom Clark was not involved in the purchase. Conveniently, this correction comes one day after this very committee ordered documents on Clark’s involvement. Sound fishy? It should.

Clark’s Cozy Deal and Trudeau’s Role

Here’s what we know: Trudeau’s government made a $9 million purchase for Tom Clark, a man with deep ties to the Liberals, shortly after Trudeau himself visited Clark’s old residence. Now, emails show Clark was directly involved in the decision to buy the new place, but when he appeared before the committee, he suddenly couldn’t remember any involvement. Instead, he passed the blame onto Global Affairs Canada.

Now, here’s where it gets worse. Documents show that Clark was instrumental in the decision to buy this opulent residence. Emails from within Minister Mélanie Joly’s own department reveal that Clark himself gave the “green light” on the purchase. But when Clark appeared before the committee, he suddenly had a case of selective amnesia, denying any involvement in the decision. According to him, it was all Global Affairs Canada’s doing. He claims he was just an innocent bystander, touring the property “out of curiosity.”

Are we really supposed to believe that? This is a man who, for decades, worked in media and is well-versed in how power operates. The idea that Clark wasn’t aware of the optics or didn’t say a word when shown this mansion is laughable. What’s even more convenient is that a “correction” from Global Affairs magically appeared one day after the committee requested documents about Clark’s involvement. They want us to believe that all of this is just a coincidence, a bureaucratic hiccup. Sure.

But let’s not forget who runs Global Affairs—none other than Minister Mélanie Jolie, one of Trudeau’s closest allies. Jolie has twice appointed Clark to key roles: once as head of an advisory committee recommending appointments to CBC, and then again as Consul General in New York. And it’s Jolie’s department that now seems to be covering for Clark in this scandal, issuing a correction that conveniently contradicts their own internal emails.

So, who’s responsible? The buck stops with Minister Jolie—and ultimately with Justin Trudeau.

The Real Problem: Trudeau’s Elitism and Out-of-Touch Government

While Tom Clark is now enjoying his luxurious $9 million condo—complete with swimming lanes, golf simulators, and some of the most expensive appliances money can buy—ordinary Canadians are lining up at food banks, barely making rent, and trying to survive in Trudeau’s broken economy.

Let’s break down just how absurd this situation is: for this $9 million palace, Clark pays a laughable $1,800 a month. Meanwhile, the actual cost of living in a place like that? Around $42,000 a month. The difference? You, the Canadian taxpayer, are picking up the tab for Clark’s personal playground while you struggle to pay your bills.

And let’s be clear: Clark wasn’t some innocent bystander in this. He toured the condo, saw the luxury, and didn’t once think to say, “Hey, maybe this is too much, especially when people back home can’t even afford to live.” Why? Because this is the Trudeau mindset. The elites deserve the best, and the rest of us? We can pay for it.

Why Jolie Must Testify

This scandal goes straight to the top. Mélanie Jolie must come before the committee and explain how her department managed to spend $9 million on a condo for one of Trudeau’s buddies. She needs to answer for the emails that say Clark was involved, even though they’re now trying to claim he wasn’t. And, most of all, she needs to explain why this government continues to indulge its inner circle while Canadians suffer.

It’s time for real accountability. Trudeau and his ministers cannot continue to dodge these scandals, pretending like they have no part in the decisions being made. Minister Jolie needs to testify, and the Canadian public deserves answers. After all, you’re the ones paying for it.

This isn’t just about one condo; it’s about a government that’s lost touch with reality, that believes it can spend your money however it likes, with no consequences. The Liberals claim to care about the middle class, but when it comes down to it, they’re more interested in living large—and making sure their friends do too.

Minister Jolie, it’s time to step up and explain why you let this happen. Canadians are watching.

You can subscribe for free to The Opposition with Dan Knight, but for the full experience, you’ll need to upgrade your subscription.

Subscribe to The Opposition with Dan Knight

Related Topics:#DanKnight #TheOppositionNewsNetwork CanadianConsulGeneralNewYorkAppartment TomClark

Up Next

With Only Months Left In Term, Biden Is Starting To Run Out Of Options In Russia-Ukraine War

Don't Miss

Former Clinton adviser calls for investigation of ABC debate between Trump, Harris

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Trump Abolishes DEI for the Feds

Business / 3 hours ago

Trump, taunts and trade—Canada’s response is a decade out of date

Business / 3 hours ago

Trade retaliation might feel good—but it will hurt Canada’s economy

Business

Trump, taunts and trade—Canada’s response is a decade out of date

Published on January 21, 2025

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Ross McKitrick

Canadian federal politicians are floundering in their responses to Donald Trump’s tariff and annexation threats. Unfortunately, they’re stuck in a 2016 mindset, still thinking Trump is a temporary aberration who should be disdained and ignored by the global community. But a lot has changed. Anyone wanting to understand Trump’s current priorities should spend less time looking at trade statistics and more time understanding the details of the lawfare campaigns against him. Canadian officials who had to look up who Kash Patel is, or who don’t know why Nathan Wade’s girlfriend finds herself in legal jeopardy, will find the next four years bewildering.

Three years ago, Trump was on the ropes. His first term had been derailed by phony accusations of Russian collusion and a Ukrainian quid pro quo. After 2020, the Biden Justice Department and numerous Democrat prosecutors devised implausible legal theories to launch multiple criminal cases against him and people who worked in his administration. In summer 2022, the FBI raided Mar-a-Lago and leaked to the press rumours of stolen nuclear codes and theft of government secrets. After Trump announced his candidacy in 2022, he was hit by wave after wave of indictments and civil suits strategically filed in deep blue districts. His legal bills soared while his lawyers past and present battled well-funded disbarment campaigns aimed at making it impossible for him to obtain counsel. He was assessed hundreds of millions of dollars in civil penalties and faced life in prison if convicted.

This would have broken many men. But when he was mug-shotted in Georgia on Aug. 24, 2023, his scowl signalled he was not giving in. In the 11 months from that day to his fist pump in Butler, Pennsylvania, Trump managed to defeat and discredit the lawfare attacks, assemble and lead a highly effective campaign team, knock Joe Biden off the Democratic ticket, run a series of near daily (and sometimes twice daily) rallies, win over top business leaders in Silicon Valley, open up a commanding lead in the polls and not only survive an assassination attempt but turn it into an image of triumph. On election day, he won the popular vote and carried the White House and both Houses of Congress.

It’s Trump’s world now, and Canadians should understand two things about it. First, he feels no loyalty to domestic and multilateral institutions that have governed the world for the past half century. Most of them opposed him last time and many were actively weaponized against him. In his mind, and in the thinking of his supporters, he didn’t just defeat the Democrats, he defeated the Republican establishment, most of Washington including the intelligence agencies, the entire corporate media, the courts, woke corporations, the United Nations and its derivatives, universities and academic authorities, and any foreign governments in league with the World Economic Forum. And it isn’t paranoia; they all had some role in trying to bring him down. Gaining credibility with the new Trump team will require showing how you have also fought against at least some of these groups.

Second, Trump has earned the right to govern in his own style, including saying whatever he wants. He’s a negotiator who likes trash-talking, so get used to it and learn to decode his messages.

When Trump first threatened tariffs, he linked it to two demands: stop the fentanyl going into the United States from Canada and meet our NATO spending targets. We should have done both long ago. In response, Trudeau should have launched an immediate national action plan on military readiness, border security and crackdowns on fentanyl labs. His failure to do so invited escalation. Which, luckily, only consisted of taunts about annexation. Rather than getting whiny and defensive, the best response (in addition to dealing with the border and defence issues) would have been to troll back by saying that Canada would fight any attempt to bring our people under the jurisdiction of the corrupt U.S. Department of Justice, and we will never form a union with a country that refuses to require every state to mandate photo I.D. to vote and has so many election problems as a result.

As to Trump’s complaints about the U.S. trade deficit with Canada, this is a made-in-Washington problem. The U.S. currently imports $4 trillion in goods and services from the rest of the world but only sells $3 trillion back in exports. Trump looks at that and says we’re ripping them off. But that trillion-dollar difference shows up in the U.S. National Income and Product Accounts as the capital account balance. The rest of the world buys that much in U.S. financial instruments each year, including treasury bills that keep Washington functioning. The U.S. savings rate is not high enough to cover the federal government deficit and all the other domestic borrowing needs. So the Americans look to other countries to cover the difference. Canada’s persistent trade surplus with the U.S. ($108 billion in 2023) partly funds that need. Money that goes to buying financial instruments can’t be spent on goods and services.

So the other response to the annexation taunts should be to remind Trump that all the tariffs in the world won’t shrink the trade deficit as long as Congress needs to borrow so much money each year. Eliminate the budget deficit and the trade deficit will disappear, too. And then there will be less money in D.C. to fund lawfare and corruption. Win-win.

Ross McKitrick

Professor of Economics, University of Guelph

Business

Trade retaliation might feel good—but it will hurt Canada’s economy

Published on January 21, 2025

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Steven Globerman

To state the obvious, president-elect Donald Trump’s threat to impose an across-the-board 25 per cent tariff on Canadian exports to the United States has gotten the attention of Canadian policymakers who are considering ways to retaliate.

Reportedly, if Trump makes good on his tariff threat, the federal government may levy retaliatory tariffs on a wide range of American-made goods including orange juice, ceramic products such as sinks and toilets, and some steel products. And NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh said he wants Canada to block exports of critical minerals such as aluminum, lithium and potash to the United States, saying that if Trump “wants to pick a fight with Canada, we have to make sure it’s clear that it’s going to hurt Americans as well.”

Indeed, the ostensible goal of tariff retaliation is to inflict economic damage on producers and workers in key U.S. jurisdictions while minimizing harm to Canadian consumers of products imported from the U.S. The hope is that there will be sufficient political blowback from Canada’s retaliation that Republican members of Congress will eventually view Trump’s tariffs as an unacceptable risk to their re-election and pressure him to roll them back.

But while Canadians might feel good about tit-for-tat retaliation against Trump’s trade bullying and taunting, it might well make things worse for the Canadian economy. For example, even selective tariffs will increase the cost of living for Canadians as importers of tariffed U.S. goods pass the tax along to domestic consumers. Retaliatory tariffs might also harm productivity growth in Canada by encouraging increased domestic production of goods that are produced relatively inefficiently here at home compared to in the U.S. Make no mistake—once trade protections are put in place, the beneficiaries have a strong vested interest in having the protections maintained indefinitely. While Trump will be gone in four years, tariffs imposed by Ottawa to retaliate against his actions will likely remain in place for longer.

The U.S. president has substantial leeway under existing legislation to implement trade measures such as tariffs. While Trump has several legislative options to impose new tariffs against Canada and Mexico, he’ll likely use the International Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA), which grants the president power to regulate imports and impose duties in response to an emergency involving any unusual and extraordinary threat to national security, foreign policy or the economy. According to Trump’s rhetoric, the emergency is illegal immigration and drug traffic originating in Canada and Mexico.

However risible Trump’s emergency claim might be when applied to Canada, overturning any action under the IEEPA, or some other enabling legislation, would require a legal challenge. And in fact, because no president has yet used the IEEPA to impose tariffs, the legality of Trump’s actions remains in doubt. In this context, a group of governors sympathetic to Canada’s position (and their own political fortunes) might spearhead a legal challenge to Trump’s tariffs with encouragement and support from the Canadian government.

To be sure, any legal challenge would take time to work its way through the U.S. court system. But it will likely also take time for domestic opposition to Trump’s tariffs to gain sufficient political momentum to effect any change. Indeed, given the current composition of Congress, it’s far from clear that a Team Canada effort to rally broad anti-tariff support among U.S. politicians and business leaders would bear fruit while Trump is in office.

While direct retaliation might be emotionally satisfying to Canadians, it would likely do more economic harm than good. And while a legal challenge will not obviate the immediate economic harm Canada will suffer from Trump’s tariffs, it might help limit the ability of Trump (and any future president) to use trade policy for political leverage in our bilateral relationship. After all, there’s no guarantee that the next president will not be a Trump acolyte.