• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Trump administration 2024-2028

Of course there were; a bunch of people were convicted of sedition. Trump either pardoned or commuted the sentences of all of them though, and he succesfully ran the clock on his own trials.

But you weren’t talking about that. You were replying to a specific post about a specific executive order targeting a specific law firm with repressive executive action that will not ultimately stand up to legal scrutiny. It doesn’t get much more blatantly corrupt than specifically going after a law firm for providing legal services to the person who led the criminal investigation into Trump for election subversion and criminal mishandling of classified documents.
not to mention firing and reassigning every FBI agent who touched to the cases
 
Eby is a huge asshole. Yes he banned US liquor sales in BC, but only US liquor from states that voted Republican i.e. Burbon from Kentucky, but not wine from California.

Shows how this idiot "thinks".

It should have been on ALL American liquor, like Ford did.

Next up on this gong show....Trump wanting to annex southern Ontario according to the NYT


I wonder which ‘Canadians’ the American administration was talking to…Kevin O’Leary?

They want to take Toronto?

No one deserves that ;)

But they do deserve Oak Bay… 😈
 
But they do deserve Oak Bay… 😈

If they watch Hallmark movies they will find it quite familiar ;)

I live in a Canadian town where hundreds of Hallmark movies are filmed. Here's what it's like, fake snow and all.​


 
Doing silly stuff like cutting off essentials of life, can be construed as a hostile act justifying military action....

....

Meanwhile here is what I think is really driving Trump, along with his innate belief that he can make the grand bargain and solve the problem -

The United States has the largest external debt in the world. The total amount of U.S. Treasury securities held by foreign entities in December 2021 was $7.7 trillion, up from $7.1 trillion in December 2020. Total US federal government debt breached the $30 trillion mark for the first time in history in February 2022. As of December 2023, total federal debt was $33.1 trillion; $26.5 trillion held by the public and $12.1 trillion in intragovernmental debt. The annualized cost of servicing this debt was $726 billion in July 2023, which accounted for 14% of the total federal spending. Additionally, in recent decades, aging demographics and rising healthcare costs have led to concern about the long-term sustainability of the federal government's fiscal policies.

In February 2024, the total federal government debt grew to $34.4 trillion after having grown by approximately $1 trillion in both of two separate 100-day periods since the previous June. As of March 6, 2025, the federal government debt is $36.56 trillion.

Russia invades Ukraine Feb 2022

US Federal Debt (Trillion USD)

Feb 2022 - 30.0
Dec 2023 - 33.1 (3.1 TrUSD in 22 months)
Feb 2024 - 34.4 (1.3 TrUSD in 3 months)
Mar 2025 - 36.6 (2.2 TrUSD in 13 months)

....

My opinion.

Trump is selling the silverware.

He is selling access because he doesn't have much else to sell. And he is feeling weak.

He is selling himself to the Saudis. The Japanese, Brits, Dutch and Canadians are all bigger investors but he still needs more money.

He is selling access to his market. Become a taxpayer in my country or pay a tariff to sell in my country.

He is selling his defence capabilities. The US as Falck. You want our protection you will pay for it. A stake in your country or tariffs. If you impose a like burden on your economies to the defence burden we carry then we can discuss a discount on the tariffs.

...

At the same time he is getting angrier because he is discovering that everything is harder than he wants it to be. People don't stop fighting just because he commands it. People don't automatically start paying his tariffs. People object to being put out of work.

...

I don't think he understands that all of this ultimately makes him, and the US, look weaker.
 
He is selling his defence capabilities. The US as Falck. You want our protection you will pay for it. A stake in your country or tariffs. If you impose a like burden on your economies to the defence burden we carry then we can discuss a discount on the tariffs.

But he’s mis-reading the room. Most countries are thinking more along the line of ‘fuck you later, Comrade Uncle Sam!’
 
That is a tidy spin of the Clinton/DNC financed Russia Collusion Hoax and all that went with that. Lets just continue to disagree on what is considered malfeasance not yet dealt with vs alleged malfeasance rigorously investigated and not achieving a prosecution.
In a functioning democracy (which the US is slowly becoming not), law enforcement would be directed to investigation said malfeasance, and if a criminal case is made, use the courts to try and punish them. It seems he does trust his DOJ and courts because he knows they might come to different conclusions. Due process is highly overrated it seems.
 
It should have been on ALL American liquor, like Ford did.



I wonder which ‘Canadians’ the American administration was talking to…Kevin O’Leary?



But they do deserve Oak Bay… 😈
Let’s assume for a minute that this came to pass…Trump nationalized all of the Great Lakes and took over their control. Yes, unlikely to happen. But would NATO be required, under Article 5, to come to Canada’s aid in defence if such action occurred? Would it matter if one NATO member invaded another one? Mind you, Keir Starmer wouldn’t even defend Canada verbally recently. I’m assuming NATO’s failure to act to help Canada would result in the destruction of NATO. Or perhaps Traitor Trump, if he decided to nationalize the Great Lakes (with Congress behind him) knows that it would destroy NATO…something he may want to see happen. A number of suppositions going on here. Yet I never in my life suspected that the U.S. would be a serious threat to our existence.
 
Yet I never in my life suspected that the U.S. would be a serious threat to our existence.
And neither did I - Yet here we are.

I read somewhere DJT wanted Southern Ontario - hey now that is a mistake - don't piss off Torontonians by keeping them from their lattes and mochas. They will give you such a hit.... ;)

beavis and butthead 90s GIF
 
Batshit libertarians want the freedom to build their own nuclear reactors without The Man telling them what to do, and apparently are getting a warm reception.


Hopefully the black bears will steer clear this time.

 
Not sure, I think it really is just BC and Ontario that does a lot of wine. My cousins in Dayton Valley, just west of Edmonton all drink 40 Creek and Alley Kat beer.

I find the Okanagan stuff pretty expensive compared to the choices from California... but they're both good.

And, of course, we all know that the Alberta whine is "Our taxes are too high!!!" ;)
 
. But would NATO be required, under Article 5, to come to Canada’s aid in defence if such action occurred?

The treaty doesn't explicitly address the possibility of a fight between NATO nations. This issue isn't a new one. There are other NATO countries with historic rivalries and where the potential for war exists. Greece and Turkey are perhaps the most notable examples.

Because it is not clearly stated, the appropriate response under the treaty would be open to interpretation by the other NATO countries. They could argue that one or both parties are in violation of Article 8, which requires NATO countries not to act in ways that are hostile to each other. Under these circumstances they could argue that the conflict exists outside of the Treaty's provisions and that neither party is entitled to support.

They might also choose to respect a call to arms under Article 5. It's worth remembering that each state's response to an Article 5 call is discretionary. You could get anything from "thoughts and prayers" to a full national commitment to fight to the end.
 
In a functioning democracy (which the US is slowly becoming not), law enforcement would be directed to investigation said malfeasance, and if a criminal case is made, use the courts to try and punish them. It seems he does trust his DOJ and courts because he knows they might come to different conclusions. Due process is highly overrated it seems.
Why would any administration do business with an outfit that tried to usurp them?
 
But the BC folks might have to buy it from a winery in stinky Alberta....say does AB have wineries?
There are some "wine" products from Alberta. Mostly fruit based wines vs. grape wines. It's mostly sold through smaller orchard type stores but there has been commercial scale wineries going back to the late 1980's/early 90's....mostly around saskatoon berry wine.

Many products are also co-located with mead sales if that's your jam.

Climate doesn't work well unfortunately in Alberta to compete with the Okanogan valley or Niagara peninsula areas. Craft beers on the other hand are quite good :)
 
Back
Top