The Liberal elite are not subject to the rules of us mere mortals. They are above that as are the majority of the Globalist elite. The fact was that the Prime Ministers office circumvented and meddled within our judicial system in order to save a lobbying business partner, SNC Lavalin, who was caught in massive criminal corruption charges for bribing Libyan officials for contracts. Much of the downplaying of the seriousness of the PMO’s crimes belongs with the mainstream media who purposely made it seem like a misdemeanour when never has a more serious crime ever been committed by a leader in the history of the country. SNC Lavalin is a business partner through the Liberal Infrastructure Bank and also a business partner in the WEF. It was imperative SNC Lavalin be able to bid on government projects to make them a major player in the Infrastructure Bank and for other contracts in the future. The Prime Minister was willing to destroy our rule of law in order to make this so. They not only believe they make the laws but that they are also above them.
It might not be about Trudeau wanting more money. He’s helping other people line their pockets. You can’t tell me he’s not friends with the Kielburger Brothers. How much do they make annually from their charity. What about that creepy ad that WE (you scratch my back & I’ll scratch yours) did for Trudeau. It has power, status & narcism written all over it!
Andrew Potter's implied assertion is that 'high status' people are a problem, a detriment to the broader community because they have undue influence and are readily corruptible. How best to solve this problem? How best to curtail the undue influence 'high status' people have over public policy, social development, and the economy? Perhaps Potter didn't intend it, but he's making a implicit argument for an aggressive tax on wealth and income. If Bill Morneau and, spouse, Nancy McCain, for example, weren't wealthy, charities like WE wouldn't court them for financial support. I wonder what practical measures Potter would recommend to address the problem of 'high status' people?
How would the electorate detect a 'stupid' leader though ? We don't make intellectual capacity or vision a deciding factor in our process of selecting leaders, so ... it doesn't seem to matter. For that matter, the public sphere seems to be afraid of insulting the intelligence of the typical voter so issues are discussed at the simplest level possible.
It feels to me like the system is so complicated that no one can understand it, even MPs. And so it steers itself, somehow, while we select leaders based on impressions and ad campaigns.
Where were thier staffs? Someone in the PMO must have seen this coming.
The Liberal elite are not subject to the rules of us mere mortals. They are above that as are the majority of the Globalist elite. The fact was that the Prime Ministers office circumvented and meddled within our judicial system in order to save a lobbying business partner, SNC Lavalin, who was caught in massive criminal corruption charges for bribing Libyan officials for contracts. Much of the downplaying of the seriousness of the PMO’s crimes belongs with the mainstream media who purposely made it seem like a misdemeanour when never has a more serious crime ever been committed by a leader in the history of the country. SNC Lavalin is a business partner through the Liberal Infrastructure Bank and also a business partner in the WEF. It was imperative SNC Lavalin be able to bid on government projects to make them a major player in the Infrastructure Bank and for other contracts in the future. The Prime Minister was willing to destroy our rule of law in order to make this so. They not only believe they make the laws but that they are also above them.
It might not be about Trudeau wanting more money. He’s helping other people line their pockets. You can’t tell me he’s not friends with the Kielburger Brothers. How much do they make annually from their charity. What about that creepy ad that WE (you scratch my back & I’ll scratch yours) did for Trudeau. It has power, status & narcism written all over it!
Andrew Potter's implied assertion is that 'high status' people are a problem, a detriment to the broader community because they have undue influence and are readily corruptible. How best to solve this problem? How best to curtail the undue influence 'high status' people have over public policy, social development, and the economy? Perhaps Potter didn't intend it, but he's making a implicit argument for an aggressive tax on wealth and income. If Bill Morneau and, spouse, Nancy McCain, for example, weren't wealthy, charities like WE wouldn't court them for financial support. I wonder what practical measures Potter would recommend to address the problem of 'high status' people?
How would the electorate detect a 'stupid' leader though ? We don't make intellectual capacity or vision a deciding factor in our process of selecting leaders, so ... it doesn't seem to matter. For that matter, the public sphere seems to be afraid of insulting the intelligence of the typical voter so issues are discussed at the simplest level possible.
It feels to me like the system is so complicated that no one can understand it, even MPs. And so it steers itself, somehow, while we select leaders based on impressions and ad campaigns.
Oh well.