Rodriguez est-il en difficulté à cause de ses organisateurs ?

L'allégation est très claire : selon plusieurs sources, certains membres du parti auraient reçu des pots-de-vin de 100 dollars chacun pour voter en faveur de la candidature du chef actuel. Le directeur général des élections mène actuellement une enquête. Pour ma part, je ne m'implique pas dans la recherche de l'auteur des deux SMS. Il s'agit là d'un faux débat. Quoi qu'il en soit, l'important est de découvrir qui est à l'origine de cette situation grave et s'il s'agit d'un complot des organisateurs ou d'un acte individuel. 

Cela nous amène au débat sur qui savait et, plus important encore, qui aurait dû savoir. Les faits nous amèneront-ils à conclure à un aveuglement volontaire ? Nous verrons bien. Je pense que c'est une question très importante, et nous devrons déterminer qui est responsable et quelles mesures correctives seront prises.

Je peux vous dire que le soir de son élection à la tête du parti, j'ai vu quelqu'un qui était peut-être un organisateur de la campagne de Pablo essayer d'intimider l'un des candidats perdants. Malheureusement, je n'ai pas entendu la conversation, mais le langage corporel était très révélateur.

Le mandat de Rodriguez est de 52 %. Ce n'est pas beaucoup, et c'est loin d'être sans équivoque. Si l'agitation de sa campagne a influencé le résultat final, le chef sera alors en grande difficulté. Comme disent les Américains, que savaient les auteurs et quand l'ont-ils su ? L'avenir s'annonce, pour le moins, compliqué pour le chef et son entourage.

C'est pourquoi PSPP et le PQ sont déjà au paradis.

Rizqy c. Hinse : zones d'ombre.

Rizqy a licencié sa cheffe de cabinet pour des raisons « graves ». Le congédiement a eu lieu immédiatement, sans consultation du chef ni de son cabinet. Dans son esprit, la cause alléguée était nettement suffisante pour justifier cette décision et, à mon avis, c'était effectivement à Rizqy de prendre cette décision. L'erreur stratégique a été de ne pas consulter le chef, et encore moins de l'informer. Vous comprendrez que cette décision ne relève pas de la responsabilité du chef ou de son bureau. Mais à tout prix, le chef aurait dû être informé avant le licenciement. 

Au cours des deux réunions avec le chef, a-t-elle dévoilé son jeu concernant le comportement présumé de Hinse ? Et si oui, les preuves étaient-elles suffisantes pour justifier la mesure prise ? Si la première réponse est oui, il semble que ces preuves n'aient pas été suffisantes pour le chef.

Quant à Hinse, une enquête officielle sur la conduite de l'ancienne cheffe de cabinet devra être menée. Si l'enquête ne révèle rien, Rizqy se retrouvera dans une situation encore plus délicate.

Pour l'instant, la situation est en transition : Rizqy n'est plus officiellement cheffe de l'opposition à la Chambre et a été suspendue du caucus parlementaire. Cette controverse sera un test majeur pour le leadership de Rodriguez. Nous avons deux versions probablement complètement contradictoires provenant de deux amis proches du chef ! À tout prix, les liens personnels doivent être mis de côté et une décision équitable et transparente doit être prise.

En conclusion, je suis heureux de ne pas être le chef du parti. Quelle que soit la décision finale, c'est le parti lui-même et son chef qui devront subir les conséquences politiques malheureuses et déchirantes. Pour ma part, je ne suis pas d'accord avec la suspension de Rizqy du caucus du PLQ. À mon avis, c'est une mesure excessive en réponse à cette affaire.

Will A Conservative MP Break Ranks And Vote Yes On The Budget?

Maybe, and I don't mean Jeneroux.

Budget 2025: The Wimps Will Abstain To Save Carney's Ass.

They just never learn. This will lead to a spring election, one in which the Liberals will win a majority because most NDP voters will switch to the Liberals, as they did last time, given that the NDP is now an informal and ad hoc branch plant of the LPC.

Why Trump Is Finished: The Deep State Has Finally Had Enough.

Trump was supposed to be their puppet and focus like a laser beam only on their interests. But Trump went off script, became unstable and unreliable, and that was the kiss of death. Trump wreaks havoc and destruction wherever he goes, both in societal and business terms. The former can be forgiven as long as Trump stays on the team, but the second, never.

Trump is in the process of ruining the economic might of the United States. The Deep State's business agenda has been compromised and adversely affected by this Administration's fiscal and trade policy, and so Trump must go.

It's no accident that the Deep State has attributed to itself the powers of judge and jury and condemned Trump without a trial. They will use every means at their disposal to bring his presidency to as quick an end as is humanly possible. The once-sacred and unbreakable alignment now lies in tatters.

Watch the news flow for proof of their agents and sympathizers hard at work. It's hardball time now, with the final political kill not too far off. Trump saw it coming and backed away from getting blown away in Budapest. A short reprieve from his inevitable fate as President. The Deep State has allies and interests across the globe. And it makes good use of them. Providence provided Trump with an escape window that is now rapidly closing. One way or another, his destiny, coupled with kompromat, will take him down.

Negotiating With Trump: Albo Gets It, Carney Not At All.

Rudd, as the Australian ambassador, did what he had to do. He apologized to Trump for previous unflattering comments. Apparently, meetings went much better later on as Trump appeared to forgive and forget. That's not usually his style, especially in private. You can bet that tons of pressure came Albo's way, but to his credit, Albanese backed Rudd and kept him in his job.

All of this to say that the Canadian delegation is not taken seriously in DC. Trump regularly twists them around his little finger and plays psychological games against them, including this prime minister. Negotiators are meant to be competent and respected. Trump may loathe Rudd in an Australian context, but he knows he's an opponent who's worthy of respect. LeBlanc, all soft soap and flattery is getting nowhere. We've come up with precisely nothing so far in negotiations with the Trump Administration. That's no surprise given who's taking the lead on Canada's behalf. Trump has us pegged as losers and intends to bulldoze right over the Canadian delegation. Carney keeps talking up agreements, but then delivers nothing. The proof is already in the pudding. The trouble is that our pudding remains invisible. A Carney win always remains aspirational only. For how much longer are Canadians prepared to put up with that? 

Brasil: o grande erro de Lula.

Em suma, Lula é o novo Biden. Anteriormente, o presidente disse que não estava inclinado a concorrer novamente, a fim de promover a renovação política dentro do Partido Trabalhista, um elemento essencial, dado que a política no Brasil é tão polarizada entre a esquerda e a direita quanto nos Estados Unidos. Ao contrário de Biden, Lula continua com uma saúde física relativamente boa, mas, como tantos outros políticos, seu ego domina tudo. Lula está pensando mais no que é bom para si mesmo do que para seu país. É simples assim. 

No contexto americano, Biden esperou demais antes de mudar de ideia e desistir da candidatura pelo Partido Democrata. Isso deixou Harris sem tempo suficiente para derrotar Trump, o demônio da direita. Seria de se esperar que Lula já tivesse percebido e, mais importante, compreendido essa semelhança. 

E o mais alarmante é que Lula lidera as pesquisas, mas ainda tem um índice de rejeição de pelo menos 50%. Nunca, jamais, se concorre à presidência com números como esses. É um convite ao desastre político. Se Lula mantiver sua decisão e a direita encontrar um candidato nacional reconhecido e promissor, é provável que Lula perca no segundo turno. 

Biden afundou Harris de forma mais eficaz do que Trump. Lula parece disposto a fazer o mesmo. Que Deus ajude o Brasil...

Brazil: Lula's Huge Mistake.

In short, Lula is the new Biden.  Previously, the president said he was not inclined to run again to foster political renewal within The Workers' Party, an essential element given that politics in Brazil is as polarized between left and right as it is in the United States. Unlike Biden, Lula remains in relatively good physical health, but like so many other politicians, his ego rules the roost. Lula is thinking more about what is good for himself than for his country. It's as simple as that. 

In an American context, Biden waited far too long before changing his mind and withdrawing as the Democratic Party standard-bearer. That left Harris with not enough runway to win against Trump, the right's demon seed. One would think Lula already sees and, more importantly, understands that parallel. 

And even more alarmingly, Lula leads in the polls but still has a disapproval rating of at least fifty percent. You never, ever, run a presidential candidate with numbers like that. It's an invitation for political disaster. If Lula sticks with his decision and the right finds a recognized up-and-coming national candidate, Lula is likely to lose in a runoff. 

Biden sank Harris more effectively than Trump did. Lula seems prepared to do the same. God help Brazil...

CPC Convention 2026 In Calgary: The Fix Is ALREADY In.

The OLO bears sole responsibility for what is happening now in Conservative ranks: it's called not inconsiderable division among MPs over the leader, his forceful leadership style, and some party positions imposed by Pierre on caucus.

They can deny it until the cows come home, but Jeneroux was at the very least intimidated and possibly coerced by the powers that be not to follow d'Entremont into the Liberal caucus. That tells you two things: firstly, that the leader is panicking, knowing that thanks to his behaviour, he has a good share of fair-weather friends in caucus. That means that Pierre needs a contingency plan to keep CPC MPs in line.

Now that caucus has apparently been effectively muzzled, the OLO can turn its attention to delegate selection. They're making sure that each riding only sends Poilièvre loyalists to the convention.  Hence, the fix is in. But the convention will still be interesting given that a big surprise awaits: a handful of delegates are planning one hell of a show in a public setting, and the OLO has no idea who they are. So, Pierre will definitely get to watch fireworks while in Calgary, but they'll come on the convention floor rather than in clear night skies. 

Heavy-handed measures, pressure tactics, and the leader's demonstrable lack of class against dissident MPs are vote losers. Poilièvre and Scheer already know that. But they care not that the CPC big tent is drifting away thanks to internal party headwinds manufactured by the leader. Pierre is good at winning battles and losing wars. Don't be delusional and expect that to change come next spring. Pierre knows that if he loses the next election, he's gone. So, he'd better start praying feverishly right about now. 

Réforme de la Constitution canadienne : en 2025, il faudra plus que les deux dernières tentatives pour modifier la Constitution.

L'Accord du Lac Meech, également connu sous le nom d'Accord sur la coopération entre provinces et territoires du Canada, a été signé en 1987 à Lake Meech dans le Nouveau-Brunswick (Canada). Il a été conclu entre le gouvernement fédéral canadien et les gouvernements des provinces et territoires canadiens pour promouvoir la collaboration et la coordination entre eux.

Les principales conditions de l'Accord du Lac Meech sont les suivantes :

1. Coopération économique : Les provinces et territoires s'engagent à travailler ensemble pour promouvoir le développement économique régional et national.
2. Partenariat pour une gestion efficace des ressources naturelles : Les parties conviennent de collaborer pour gérer efficacement les ressources naturelles, y compris l'eau, la forêt, la faune et la flore.
3. Développement régional : Les provinces et territoires s'engagent à encourager le développement régional et à promouvoir le développement économique, social et culturel.
4. Amélioration de la qualité de vie : Les parties conviennent de travailler ensemble pour améliorer la qualité de vie des citoyens canadiens en faisant la promotion de la santé, de l'éducation et du bien-être des communautés.
5. Protection de l'environnement : Les provinces et territoires s'engagent à protéger l'environnement et à préserver la biodiversité en adoptant des politiques et des pratiques durables.
6. Gestion des affaires interprovinciales : Les parties conviennent de travailler ensemble pour résoudre les problèmes interprovinciaux, tels que la migration, la sécurité publique et la défense.
7. Recherche et innovation : Les provinces et territoires s'engagent à soutenir la recherche et l'innovation en encouragant la coopération scientifique et technologique.
8. Culture et patrimoine : Les parties conviennent de valoriser et de protéger la culture et le patrimoine communautaire en encourageant la coopération culturelle.
9. Éducation : Les provinces et territoires s'engagent à coordonner leurs efforts pour améliorer l'éducation en encourageant la coopération éducative.
10. Droit de veto mutuel : Chaque province et territoire a le droit de veto sur les décisions qui affectent directement ses intérêts provinciaux ou territoriaux.

L'Accord de Charlottetown était un accord global signé en 1997 entre le gouvernement fédéral du Canada et les gouvernements des provinces du Québec, de l'Ontario, de la Colombie-Britannique, de l'Alberta, de la Saskatchewan, du Manitoba, du Nouveau-Brunswick, de la Nouvelle-Écosse, de l'Île-du-Prince-Édouard et de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador. Les principales conditions de l'accord étaient les suivantes :

1. Réforme constitutionnelle : l'accord visait à moderniser la Constitution canadienne en clarifiant les rôles et les responsabilités du gouvernement fédéral et des provinces, et en reconnaissant les cultures et les identités distinctes du Québec et des autres régions du Canada.

2. Arrangements fiscaux : l'accord proposait des modifications aux arrangements fiscaux entre le gouvernement fédéral et les provinces, notamment la répartition des points d'impôt et le partage des revenus provenant des ressources naturelles.

3. Rôle du Sénat : l'accord proposait des réformes du rôle et des pouvoirs du Sénat, notamment de sa composition et de son processus d'élection.

4. Droits linguistiques : l'accord reconnaissait et renforçait les droits linguistiques des anglophones et des francophones au Canada, notamment le droit de recevoir des services publics dans la langue de leur choix.

5. Autonomie gouvernementale des Autochtones : l'accord prévoyait une plus grande autonomie et une plus grande autonomie gouvernementale pour les peuples autochtones du Canada, notamment la création d'un Institut autochtone de gouvernement public.

6. Questions territoriales : L'Accord abordait plusieurs questions territoriales, notamment le statut du Québec en tant que société distincte au sein du Canada, la reconnaissance des populations acadiennes et inuites et le règlement des revendications territoriales en suspens.

7. Union économique : L'Accord proposait la création d'une union économique entre les provinces et les territoires, y compris l'élimination des barrières commerciales et l'établissement d'un tarif extérieur commun.

8. Union sociale : L'accord promouvait l'idée d'une union sociale entre les provinces et les territoires, y compris l'adoption de normes communes pour les programmes sociaux tels que les soins de santé, l'éducation et l'assurance-emploi.

9. Renouveau démocratique : L'accord proposait des réformes des institutions démocratiques aux niveaux fédéral et provincial, y compris la création d'un système de représentation plus proportionnel et la réduction du nombre de représentants élus.

10. Mécanisme référendaire : L'Accord établissait un mécanisme référendaire qui permettrait aux citoyens de voter sur tout accord ou amendement constitutionnel futur.

Voici les principales conditions de l'accord de Charlottetown, signé en 1997 :

Modernisation de la Constitution : l'accord visait à actualiser la Constitution canadienne afin de refléter l'évolution des besoins du pays et de sa population. Il prévoyait notamment de donner plus de pouvoirs aux provinces et de protéger les langues et les cultures minoritaires.

Arrangements fiscaux : l'accord proposait des changements dans la répartition des impôts entre le gouvernement fédéral et les provinces. Il suggérait également des moyens de partager les revenus provenant des ressources naturelles.

Réforme du Sénat : l'accord prévoyait des changements dans la structure et les pouvoirs du Sénat, notamment en le rendant égal à la Chambre des communes et en élisant directement les sénateurs.

Droits linguistiques : l'accord reconnaissait et renforçait les droits linguistiques des anglophones et des francophones au Canada, y compris le droit de recevoir des services publics dans l'une ou l'autre langue.

Autonomie des peuples autochtones : L'accord prévoyait une plus grande autonomie et une plus grande indépendance pour les peuples autochtones du Canada, notamment la création d'un Institut autochtone de gouvernance publique.

Questions territoriales : L'accord abordait plusieurs questions territoriales, notamment le statut du Québec en tant que société distincte au sein du Canada, la reconnaissance des populations acadiennes et inuites et le règlement des revendications territoriales en suspens.

Union économique : L'accord proposait la création d'une union économique entre les provinces et les territoires, notamment l'élimination des barrières commerciales et l'établissement d'un tarif extérieur commun.

Union sociale : L'accord promouvait l'idée d'une union sociale entre les provinces et les territoires, notamment l'adoption de normes communes pour les programmes sociaux tels que les soins de santé, l'éducation et l'assurance-emploi.

Renouveau démocratique : L'accord proposait des réformes des institutions démocratiques aux niveaux fédéral et provincial, notamment la création d'un système de représentation plus proportionnel et la réduction du nombre de représentants élus.

Mécanisme référendaire : L'accord établissait un mécanisme référendaire qui permettrait aux citoyens de se prononcer sur tout accord ou amendement constitutionnel futur.

Et si la réponse est Non, eh bien la réponse du Québec devrait être Bye-bye !

CPC: Not Crossing But Doing Damage.

The OLO is really earning their pay these days. What can I say? Jeneroux apparently met with Carney but, in the end, didn't fully trust the Liberals. Imagine that. Not that paragon of virtue?

All of this confirms that Pierre remains in control. But some are visibly uncomfortable in caucus. What else is new? So, the delicate internal party dance continues all the way to the leadership review vote in Calgary next January. It won't affect perceptions internally in caucus, but it will create doubt about voting Conservative next time. No question that Pierre will make it to the next election. What happens then, likely next spring, is anyone's guess.

And the other fun thing: Carney seems to have no interest in poaching NDP MPs.

d'Entremont Is The First But Also The Last.

Sure, about a dozen CPC MPs are uncomfortable with the leader's style and some of the party's positions. But take it from me, no one else will cross the floor from Conservative Party ranks. This is a one-and-done. Poor Carney, that will make him flaccid. 

d'Entremont.

A resignation without honour. Opportunistic, but also a sad reflection of our party's relationship with caucus. He'll fit right in with the Carney Liberals. And I don't mean that as a compliment.

Élections au Québec en 2026.

En résumé, après avoir consulté les sondages, on peut affirmer sans risque que tous les partis politiques se réjouissent que les élections n'aient lieu qu'à l'automne prochain. Le PQ serait en perte de vitesse au profit de QS. Quant au PLQ, il n'a pas enregistré d'augmentation significative de son soutien. Les libéraux semblent être dans une impasse avec l'électorat. Enfin, le parti sortant continue de perdre du terrain, le PCQ occupant désormais la troisième place dans les sondages. Il n'est pas déraisonnable de conclure que tant que le premier ministre restera en fonction, la CAQ n'aura aucune chance de revenir au pouvoir. C'est une question d'ego individuel, si vous voulez.

Aucun des partis ne semble capable de trouver la formule magique qui lui permettra de se démarquer dans les sondages. Je connais la réponse. Les élections se gagnent avec un programme positif et rassembleur, et non avec des campagnes fondées sur la peur ou l'isolationnisme. Il faut tenir ses promesses économiques en montrant que si l'on vote pour un parti en particulier, on sera mieux loti individuellement et collectivement que si l'on vote pour un autre parti. Et voilà : les Québécois veulent un pouvoir d'achat plus élevé et des impôts moins élevés. Essentiellement, comme le disait Parizeau. Le reste est secondaire. Le sentiment qui prévaut dans la province est celui du changement. Ce qui manque pour l'instant, c'est la personne qui en sera le messager. Le PLQ fait le tour des régions. Les autres partis devraient en faire autant. On recherche quelqu'un qui mérite la confiance de l'électorat. Pour l'instant, les citoyens du Québec sont encore en délibération. Le bon choix sera connu au plus tard l'été prochain. 

Abacus: Ontario - Liberals And Conservatives TIED.

I was always skeptical about the CPC making significant inroads in Ontario, especially with Pierre as leader. In short, at least according to this poll, he has. Both the Liberals and Conservatives are tied at forty-four percent. As for leading, the CPC is ahead across the board in the West and is competitive in Atlantic Canada. Even in Quebec, they are only two points behind the BQ, which is good. The LPC leads in both Atlantic Canada and Quebec. 

The Conservatives win all voting demographics except two: only 60+ years old and female voters prefer the Liberals. 

As for the national numbers: CPC: 42%, LPC: 40%, NDP: 8%, BQ: 6%, GP: 3% and PPC: 1%.

One wonders about the methodology of some of the other pollsters who aren't capturing this trend. Ontario and Atlantic Canada are the likely places to keep pushing. 

But all of the above may be irrelevant if the NDP choose to prop up Carney. If they do, that could mean four more years of Liberal government. 

Davies: Abstentions Allowed.

Well, there you go. Three NDP MPs will abstain or not show up, and the CarneyCircusTM will survive. Didn't think the NDP was this stupid. Now, they've guaranteed that the Liberals stay in power for another four years. 

HouseOfCardsCarneyTM...

Carney's pathetic. Now, he's apologized to Trump for the ad. What a wet blanket. This guy has absolutely no clue how to stick up for Canada's interests. As soon as the weather gets stormy, Carney is an automatic cave. What a useless prime minister. 

Look, Carney, let me clue you in: you're supposed to fight tooth and nail for Canadian interests. You're supposed to give only when it's reciprocal -- which it never is with Trump. You have to fight like hell just to get an OK deal with the Americans. That's reality, Mark. Thank God that Ford has the guts to take Trump on. Someone has got to work in Canada's interests, given that Carney can't successfully negotiate his way to a White House bathroom...

NINE MONTHS LATER, and Carney still has nothing to show for the negotiations. All Carney can bring back is the big goose egg. Man, oh man, now that's way beyond hopeless. Hope we get to an election because this guy needs to be replaced yesterday. Put someone in there who'll actually fight for Canada instead of being Trump's ever-compliant flunky. Carney stinks as prime minister. 

24 60 : Trente ans depuis le dernier référendum sur la souveraineté.

Pablo n'était pas présent. Cela démontre la médiocrité de ses proches conseillers. C'est un grave manque de respect envers la population du Québec, l'événement et l'histoire du Québec. Quel manque de jugement.

Carmant : une bombe pour la CAQ.

Il démissionne non seulement du Conseil des ministres, mais aussi de son poste de député de la CAQ à l'Assemblée nationale. Nous comprenons qu'il y avait des tensions familiales, étant donné que sa femme et sa fille sont médecins et s'opposent fermement à la loi 2. Démissionner de son poste de ministre est une chose, mais quitter son poste de député de la CAQ en est une autre. Nous sommes amenés à croire que sa famille aurait pu se désagréger si Carmant n'avait pas choisi de devenir député indépendant.

Je ne suis pas un partisan de la CAQ, loin de là, mais changer la façon dont les médecins sont rémunérés est un changement fondamental qui devait être fait, car la rémunération à la pièce n'est plus possible dans le contexte budgétaire au Québec. Seul Legault a eu le courage de le faire, dans un contexte où la FMSQ est actuellement devant la Cour supérieure. Legault a eu du cran, du guts, comme on dit en anglais. Mais comme pour tout ce qui touche à la législation, on peut craindre que la loi ait été rédigée à la hache plutôt qu'au scalpel. Nous verrons bien ce qu'il en sera devant la Cour supérieure.

Why The Chance Of A Holiday Election Is Likely 99%.

Let's start with the Liberals: MacKinnon is full of shit with their fake woe is us. They WANT an election because their polls tell them that a majority government is almost guaranteed if we go to the polls. They will use their usual playbook and blame the Conservatives, and it will work. They can't wait for that majority, so if the government falls, it'll be great for them.

For their part, the Conservatives want additional spending cuts and a substantial reduction in the public service. In other words, greater cuts and austerity measures than Carney is prepared to make, so we'll more than likely be voting against this budget.

Both the Bloc Québécois and the New Democrats want more targeted spending, so both are definite No votes on the budget. Carney has pledged to deliver austerity and some public service layoffs, so forget about some NDP MPs abstaining. They're opposed to cuts full bore. The NDP also knows that if they abstain, they will go the way Social Credit did in 1979. As for the Greens, with Carney's commitment to natural resources and particularly oil and gas, May is also a negative vote.

In short, see you on the campaign trail!

Central Intelligence Agency - Statement of Policy.

1.    The removal of the President (JFK) and the Attorney General (RFK) from their positions because of high treason has been determined.

2.    By their contacts with top-level officials of the Soviet Union, and the subsequent release by the President and the Attorney General of the highest level security material to a government that stands in direct opposition to the United States, these individuals cannot be permitted to occupy their official positions.

3.    By treating with the enemy on the Cuban issue and actively blocking legitimate military actions against a Soviet Cuban armed entity in close proximity to the United States, these individuals have endangered the people of the United States, and permitted enemies of this country to actively place atomic weapons within the reach of many American cities.

4.    Removal by impeachment or other legal means is considered unfeasible and too protracted. 

5.    Therefore, an alternative solution has been found to affect this removal. 

6.    This removal is the result of a consensus between the various concerned official agencies.

7.    This operation, code named ZIPPER, was under the direction of James Angleton of the Agency, assisted by Robert Crowley and William Harvey, also of the agency.

8.    The government departments directly concerned consisted of:

a. The Central Intelligence Agency

b. The Federal Bureau of Investigations

c. The Joint Chiefs of Staff

9.    Other government agencies involved but not with specific knowledge were:

a. The US Department of the Treasury, Secret Service Division

b. The National Security Agency

c. The National Security Group

d. INTERARMCO

e. The US Department of State, Passport Division

10.    Following the removal of the President (JFK), the new President (LBJ), who had been fully briefed prior to the act agreed "in the interest of national concerns" to appoint a special commission chaired by the Chief Justice, for the purpose of "setting public concerns to rest." (continued)

10. Mr. Angleton was in complete control of all evidence presented to this committee and worked closely in conjunction with Mr. Sullivan of the FBI to ensure that nothing was brought before the committee that it did not want to acknowledge. 

11.    As both the Vice-President and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigations had been slated for replacement by the Kennedy faction, their support for the project was practically guaranteed from the outset. 

12.    The Vice-President came to believe that an attempt would be made on his life at the same time and was greatly concerned for his own safety.

13.    As the Vice-President (LBJ) and the Director of the FBI were longtime neighbours and very friendly, the Director has repeatedly assured the President (LBJ) that he was not a target and that no shots were fired at him in Dallas.

14.    The President (LBJ) has been reassured but is still considered very leery of any possible such actions being taken against himself or members of his personal family.

15. One of the primary goals of ZIPPER, the removal of the Attorney General, has been discussed repeatedly with the President by DCI, and the President has agreed to gradually force him out of his position. He has stated, however, that the popularity of the AG is such that his removal must be performed with care.

16.    Representative Ford (R) of Michigan, a member of the Commission is working directly with Director Hoover and reports all incoming information directly to him.

17.    Full cooperation with friendly media sources has ensured that public attention has been drawn to Oswald as the sole killer. The President (LBJ) feels strongly that any attempt to portray Oswald as a tool of the Soviets is liable to create "too high a level of international tension," which the President feels might lead to direct confrontation with the Soviet Union. 

18.    The President (JFK) is not receptive to plans of the JCS, supported by the entire agency, to eradicate Castro and his Marxist government from Cuba. The President states that war almost occurred as a result of the last military attempt to dislodge the Cuban dictator, and he does not wish to replay that aspect of the enforcement of the Monroe Doctrine.

19.    The President has indicated, however, that an escalation of U.S. Military involvement in French Indochina is not unreasonable. Reports given to him by the agency, as well as the JCS, have been well received.

20.    The President's aide, (Walter) Jenkins, has also supported this idea and the Secretary of Defense has come down strongly in favor of it.

21.    The President believes that his occupancy of the White House is due to the death of his predecessor and has a desperate desire to achieve a degree of legitimacy.

22.    He has been advised that a war-time president is always assured of re-election (i.e. Wilson, Roosevelt) but only in the event that the war is prosecuted with vigor and has attendant military successes.

23.    On a related topic, the French President de Gaulle, while in Washington for the late President's funeral, held several conferences with the new President as well as other officials to include the agency.

24.    The General stated several times and with some asperity that he had been the object of a number of assassination attempts in the past, some going back to the war, and that he had grown tired of them. He stated that the OAS attempts to shoot him or bomb him had been known to members of the agency who and, in at least one case, assisted the IAS assassins.

 25.    The General also stated that he was aware through a French Intelligence report that the assassins of the President were French citizens.

26.    Because it is viewed as vital that the French become involved in NATO and to assuage the concerns of the General, guarantees were given by both the President and the DCI that no further actions would be undertaken that could result in an assassination and further, that the United States would support French commercial interests in French Indochina in return for French cooperation with NATO.

27.    The French President agreed to this but made several oblique threats to the President about his reactions in the event of future agency "meddling" in French domestic and foreign policy.

28.    The General was reassured repeatedly on these points and is now apparently in agreement with the United States' aims in Southeast Asia. He made several remarks about the trade in opium in that area being extremely lucrative and stated that he had his own problems with narcotics traffic in the Mediterranean area.

29.    It is now believed, and electronic surveillance of the President's lines of communication while in the United States does not support the possibility that he might have active knowledge of any American involvement, or projected involvement, in this area.

30.    Both the agency and the President feel that the French President has fired a "shot across our bows," but that these issues have now become resolved. The President feels however that the French will have to be watched carefully in the future and that if American interests become established in French Indochina, we had best consider our own interests at that time.

31.    In the matter of the Soviet Union, it is evident that they were initially concerned that the removal of Kennedy might be laid at their doorstep. As this was certainly one of the objectives of the agency as well as the JCS, it has been necessary to repeatedly reassure their leadership that there would [be] no further attempts to execute any military or overt clandestine operations against either Cuba, or its leader, Castro.

32.    In the matter of the public perception of the Dallas action, extensive use has been made of Agency connections with major American media organs i.e. New York Times and the Washington Post. The Times is strongly supporting the Commission and its findings and we are assured that they will continue to do so. The same attitude has been clearly and strongly expressed by the Post.        

 

Ford: Damned Right, He Has Absolutely Nothing To Apologize For.

I don't give a shit about the amateur psychological analysis in the media: supposedly, Carney is the good cop while Ford is the bad one. That's probably bullshit. Anyway, as Ford said, he gave both Carney and Blanchard a heads-up before going with the ad, and that was enough.

Ford understands the psychology of dealing with a demented POS like Trump. Trump, on his best day, is both an asshole and a bully. He doesn't want USMCA-CUSMA to survive. In fact, he'll do as much as he can to kill it. Ford knows that. Carney, that babe in the woods, not so much. What Trump wants is a bilateral agreement where Trump wins and Carney loses. THAT'S the real deal here.

So, Ford is sticking to a hard line, and that's what's needed, not sucking up to that bastard, as you know who is prone to do...

As a result, Ford has my, and hopefully your support 1000%. That's pretty much it. 

China: Post Fourth Plenum Uncertainty.

The reform and military factions appear to have won the upper hand over Xi Jinping. Publicly, Xi came out of the Fourth Plenary Session with his three titles intact. However, behind the scenes, the view is quite different: Xi reportedly offered his resignation, and it was accepted but made a state secret. Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao's Reformers likely came out on top. During his speech, those who know Xi well probably got a good laugh: his speech was full of acknowledgements that he had made mistakes while in office. He humbled himself before the Plenum with what were more likely crocodile tears than a genuine expression of contrition and regret. 

A parade of other officials appeared at the lectern to acknowledge their own errors, including Zhang Youxia, who is now firmly in control of the Chinese military after record-setting purges of generals and admirals for corruption and other offences. Read moves to oust Zhang Youxia and his allies.

You will likely argue that I'm out to lunch when I say that I expect Xi to try once again to gain control over the military. Xi is nothing if not ruthless and steely determined to put it politely. One might argue that he will go for Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao, but I suspect he will take a different tack. Reformers in the end are not really reformers. They are, in fact, proponents of reform only to the extent that it saves the CCP. That is their only objective: to keep the party in power. Mao Zedong said that political power grows out of the barrel of a gun, and he wasn't far off. My suspicion is that Xi realizes that the Reformers are too old and far too cautious when it comes to sidelining him, so expect some kind of move by Xi against them. Reformers made a serious mistake when they allowed Xi to hold on to his three posts, at least for public consumption. That was a major strategic error. I think Xi will move against Wang Yang and Hu Chunghua next. If he does, that will cut all the wind out of the Reformers' sails. Hope I'm wrong. That will leave Zhang Youxia isolated. Will Zhang have the stomach to take on Xi directly, or will he back down? It could go either way, so don't bet on the end result. 

In CCP terms, is this the end of the beginning or the beginning of the end? Only Confucius really knows.

中国：四中全会后的不确定性

改革派与军方势力似乎在与习近平的博弈中占据上风。公开场合，习近平在四中全会后保留了全部三个职务头衔。但幕后情况截然不同：据称习近平曾主动提出辞职，辞呈虽获接受却被列为国家机密。胡锦涛与温家宝领导的改革派很可能最终胜出。在习近平的讲话中，熟悉他的人或许会会心一笑：整篇讲话充斥着对任内失误的承认。他向全会示弱的姿态，与其说是真心悔过，不如说是鳄鱼的眼泪。

其他官员也纷纷登台认错，包括张友夏——这位在破纪录的将领军官腐败清洗后，如今已牢牢掌控中国军队的掌权者。阅读《张友夏及其盟友面临被清除的动向》。

当我预言习近平将再度试图掌控军队时，你或许会认为我疯了。但习近平若非冷酷无情，便是意志如钢铁般坚毅——姑且用委婉的措辞形容。有人或许认为他会针对胡锦涛和温家宝，但我怀疑他将另辟蹊径。改革派终究不是真正的改革者。事实上，他们只在能保全中共的前提下支持改革。这才是他们的唯一目标：维持党的执政地位。毛泽东曾言“枪杆子里面出政权”，此言确有道理。我怀疑习近平意识到改革派年事已高且过于谨慎，无法有效边缘化他，因此预计习近平将对改革派采取行动。改革派允许习近平保留三职（至少在公开场合如此）是个重大战略失误。我认为习近平接下来将针对汪洋和胡春华。若果真如此，改革派势必元气大伤。但愿我判断有误。届时张友夏将陷入孤立。他究竟有胆量与习近平正面交锋，还是会选择退让？事态走向难料，切莫妄下结论。

用中共术语来说，这究竟是“开始的结束”还是“结束的开始”？唯有孔子知晓答案。

ASEAN and APEC: Carney's Proof Will Be In The End Results.

Mr. Jet Set is at it again. Flying high and away as Prime Minister. No problem there. But what will count is results, or, as is more likely when it comes to PM WordSaladTM, the lack thereof. How many deals will be announced at either of those summits? POS is reportedly close to a Free Trade Agreement with China. Meanwhile, Dom the Intrepid is going nowhere fast as Trump adds another ten percent to tariffs against Canada. Dom is a running joke in DC, so don't expect any meaningful breakthroughs anytime soon because they ain't coming.

Watching Carney negotiate with Trump is like waiting for a saline or glycerin enema to finally take effect and relieve congestion. Not very pleasant to watch while awaiting results and eventual satisfaction. 

 

Ford Is Driving Trump Nuts.

Wonderful. MoronTrumpTM even said that the excerpts from the Reagan speech are fake news! Keep the damned trade talks suspended. The Americans haven't suffered enough to this point. Right on, Doug. Please continue to play hardball against these assholes. Don't pull the ad until Trump says Uncle and agrees to return to the negotiating table. Fucking Carney, so useless. Can't even successfully negotiate his way to the Oval Third-Rate Whorehouse can. Glad I didn't vote for that guy.

SNC-Lavalin and Aga Khan: I apologise to Mr. Pierre Poilièvre.

(I'm publishing this post again since I had trouble posting the link previously.)

I've just watched a program on Northern Perspective where Mr. Duff Conacher of Democracy Watch expressed his opinion following an investigation and examination of the evidence that, in his view, former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau appears to be guilty of obstruction of justice. Furthermore, Mr. Conacher believes it is clear that the RCMP tried to cover up the investigation in both cases. Democracy Watch even initiated a private prosecution under the Criminal Code against Mr. Trudeau last February. However, the Ontario Crown would not give its consent to proceed with the matter in court.

I must say at the outset that Democracy Watch is not a judicial decision-maker on the facts or the law in this case. Following the revelations in this video, the evidence Mr. Conacher provides seems rather compelling and solid. Consequently, I offer my apologies without reservation to Mr. Poilièvre for my previous writings on this subject and the accusation of a cover-up. 

I must also tell you that, in good conscience, I no longer feel credible when commenting on the internal affairs of the Conservative Party or Mr. Poilièvre's leadership. 

To review the issues and nuances related to these investigations, readers can watch this video. 

"Pierre Was Right, RCMP Covered It Up" - Jaw Dropping Interview With Duff Conacher -Democracy Watch

BC: This Is Ridiculous...

Push Rustad out now! If he stays, it means a quick end to the Conservative Party. The NDP would just love that.

France: Sarkozy Goes To Jail.

Sad but interesting. It means once convicted, no head of state or government gets a pass.

How Many Of The Following Have Contacted Duff Conacher at Democracy Watch?

CBC

CTV

Global

Radio-Canada

TVA

The Canadian Press

The Globe and Mail

The Star

The National Post

Ottawa Citizen

Le Droit

The Gazette

Le Devoir

Le Soleil

Answer: My understanding is none of them.

Fall Election: A Pox On Both Their Houses?

It doesn't take a genius to discover that there are a few prevailing trends this fall: to begin, the Liberal minority government has become more vulnerable, what with its failure so far to come up with anything substantive or even minimal on the Trump tariff front. You can tell in QP that the Liberals are feeling the heat and starting to crack. Carney hasn't buckled yet, but Champagne and Joly already have. To modify Warren's famous political dictum: when you're screaming, you're losing. Contrast that with Pierre's delivery. He isn't yelling.

The other trend is softening in Liberal support. They received 44 percent on election day as opposed to 42 percent for the Conservatives. Each party has been range-bound within an exact ten-point range: Liberals, 48-38; Conservatives, 41-31. Theoretically, either party could make gains in an unexpected election, but I suspect that Carney definitely doesn't want one. He'd like to go when they have more than a decent shot at a majority, and that ain't now. I don't think Poilièvre wants one either. We simply don't have enough of a consistent and growing lead in a plurality of polls. We love to cite Abacus Data and Angus Reid, but other polling companies are not confirming our consistent narrow lead with those two pollsters. And then, there's the matter of vote efficiency, where the Liberals clearly have a built-in advantage.

Don't think for a minute that either the NDP or the Bloc will vote against this budget. Quite simply, the NDP has just kicked off its leadership race and has no money. As for the Bloc,  it's too far behind the Liberals in Quebec to risk an election now and possibly lose even more seats to the Liberals.

Pierre will have an interesting tactical decision to make: either roll the dice and go for it or support Carney. The first camp will argue that Liberal support is already soft, vulnerable, and not seen as results-driven. They'll stress that we can steadily make consistent gains in the campaign that would be enough for us to win at least a minority government. The other camp will advise extreme caution: Pierre will be reminded what happened to Ignatieff when he supported Harper's 2009 budget. That move was widely seen as the beginning of the end for the Liberals.

If this were a year ago, with Trudeau still in the picture, there's no question that the CPC would be itching for an election, expected or otherwise. But as Pierre knows only too well, having previously lost his own riding, Carney, even a wounded Carney, is no Trudeau.

My prediction. The Conservatives will not vote against this budget if it appears the government could fall. Our time was yesterday. Our priority now is to ensure that tomorrow becomes our time. Today is not tomorrow. 

SNC-Lavalin et Aga Khan : Je présente mes excuses à M. Pierre Poilièvre.

Je viens de regarder une émission sur Northern Perspective dans laquelle M. Duff Conacher, de Democracy Watch, a exprimé son opinion à la suite d'une enquête et d'un examen des preuves qui, selon lui, semblent indiquer que l'ancien premier ministre Justin Trudeau est coupable d'entrave à la justice. De plus, M. Conacher estime qu'il est clair que la GRC a tenté de dissimuler l'enquête dans les deux cas. Democracy Watch a même intenté une poursuite privée contre M. Trudeau en février dernier en vertu du Code criminel. Cependant, le procureur de la Couronne de l'Ontario n'a pas donné son consentement pour que l'affaire soit portée devant les tribunaux.

Je tiens à préciser d'emblée que Democracy Watch n'est pas un décideur judiciaire sur les faits ou le droit dans cette affaire. À la suite des révélations contenues dans cette vidéo, les preuves fournies par M. Conacher semblent plutôt convaincantes et solides. Par conséquent, je présente mes excuses sans réserve à M. Poilièvre pour mes écrits précédents sur ce sujet et concernant l'accusation de dissimulation. 

Je dois également vous dire qu'en toute conscience, je ne me sens plus crédible lorsque je commente les affaires internes du Parti conservateur ou le leadership de M. Poilièvre. 

Pour passer en revue les enjeux et les nuances liés à ces enquêtes, les lecteurs peuvent regarder cette vidéo.

 "Pierre Was Right, RCMP Covered It Up" - Jaw Dropping Interview With Duff Conacher -Democracy Watch

This Dickwad Must NEVER Be Allowed To Serve As Prime Minister.

You want to know what a true dickhead Pierre is? Just read his clarification statement which says it all about what this guy is really like. He desperately needs professional psychlogical help:

"My comments were directed to former RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki who has a lengthy track record of publicly documented scandals, deception and political interference to the benefit of the Liberal government."

That's right moron, compound the damage to the RCMP even more and make your self-inflicted gaffe far worse. We all know that you have absolutely no sound political judgment. That's nothing new. What we didn't realize is that you take every direct or indirect perceived slight as a personal insult. You are one mean POS and it shows for the whole world to see, not just those in Ottawa. You are beneath comtempt. You wouldn't even have the decency to apologize, much less backtrack on your irresponsible accusations.

To Commissioner Lucki I say, sue the shit out of this bastard for defamation. To Canadians generally and those interested in politics don't even give the Conservative Party a second look or serious consideration for support as long as this contemptable creature remains as party leader. We don't deserve your vote, or even your support, as long as this asshole remains our leader.

Mon point de vue sur Northern Perspective et SNC-Lavalin.

Tout d'abord, après avoir délaissé le PCC en raison de désaccords avec la façon dont Harper dirigeait le gouvernement, j'ai quitté le parti et passé une décennie en tant que membre du Parti libéral. Comme beaucoup d'entre vous, j'ai été dégoûté par SNC-Lavalin et la tentative du cabinet du premier ministre d'élargir les options juridiques de la ministre de la Justice contre sa volonté. Je me fie à ma mémoire, mais je me souviens que la ministre avait fermement soutenu la décision de la DPP selon laquelle un accord de poursuite différée n'était pas approprié dans l'affaire SNC-Lavalin. À mon avis, le greffier n'avait pas à s'immiscer dans ce débat et aurait dû dire non au premier ministre lorsqu'il s'agissait de passer cet appel. À mon humble avis, il s'agissait là d'une grave erreur de jugement de la part du greffier. Un greffier prudent aura dû, au préalable, consulter un avocat-conseil au bureau du BCP avant d'accéder à la demande du CPM.

Passons maintenant à Northern Perspective : à la suite de cette controverse, je me suis abonné à cette chaîne et j'ai regardé certaines de ses vidéos par le passé. Oui, ils sont du centre droit, mais certainement pas d'extrême droite. Le commentaire de Fife était un coup bas. Les journalistes auraient dû être plus ouverts à la découverte, même si l'ancien premier ministre n'est plus en fonction. En bref, et alors ?

Ce n'est pas à moi, ni à PP, ni même à Northern Perspective de décider sommairement qui devrait ou ne devrait pas aller en prison. Cela relève uniquement de la compétence des tribunaux. En tant qu'observateur de ce qui s'est passé en commission parlementaire, j'ai l'impression que la GRC était plus soucieuse de limiter les dégâts et, oui, de se couvrir que de toute autre chose lorsque les dirigeants ont témoigné devant la commission.

Est-ce que je pense que cela était prédéterminé dès le départ ? Absolument, mais cela n'avait rien à voir avec la GRC ou ses décisions. C'est pourquoi je soutiens que PP a eu tort et a agi de manière irresponsable en portant ces accusations sans ce que j'appellerais des preuves nouvelles ou en cours d'élaboration concernant le voyage de l'Aga Khan ou l'affaire SNC-Lavalin. La législation a été délibérément conçue de cette manière afin de donner à tout premier ministre une échappatoire juridique. En vertu de l'article 121(1)(c) du Code criminel, qui se lit comme suit : 

(c) étant fonctionnaire ou employé du gouvernement, exige, accepte ou offre directement ou indirectement, ou accepte d'accepter d'une personne qui a des relations avec le gouvernement, une commission, une récompense, un avantage ou un bénéfice de quelque nature que ce soit pour lui-même ou pour une autre personne, à moins d'avoir le consentement écrit du chef de la branche du gouvernement qui l'emploie ou dont il est fonctionnaire ;

Trudeau n'avait pas de supérieur hiérarchique direct et, par conséquent, personne ne pouvait légalement approuver ou désapprouver par écrit son comportement prévu ou réel. À mon humble avis, à partir de ce moment-là, l'enquête menée par la GRC était compromise. 

La confidentialité du Cabinet a également été utilisée comme un mécanisme pour limiter ou restreindre la circulation des preuves tant au niveau parlementaire qu'éthique. Une fois de plus, la GRC était dans une impasse. La première question qui se posait alors était de savoir s'il existait un recours juridique permettant de porter cette question devant les tribunaux pour qu'ils se prononcent. J'ai le sentiment qu'il existait un recours juridique limité, à savoir une ordonnance de production et/ou un mandat de perquisition, mais quel tribunal serait susceptible de défier la règle de confidentialité du Cabinet et l'interdiction de délai ? Cela a-t-il déjà été fait ? Si ce n'est pas le cas, ma réponse est qu'aucun tribunal ne le ferait.

Certains diront que la GRC a fait le jeu du gouvernement en demandant des documents supplémentaires. Elle savait d'avance que la réponse serait négative. Quoi qu'il en soit, son erreur a été de ne pas renvoyer l'affaire devant les procureurs de la Couronne. Cela lui a donné une mauvaise image, sans parler du fait qu'elle s'est retrouvée politiquement coincée. 

Imaginons maintenant que la GRC ait renvoyé l'affaire pour une éventuelle poursuite, aucun procureur de la Couronne n'aurait probablement donné suite aux accusations, compte tenu de l'accès limité et prédéterminé aux preuves. De plus, le défendeur potentiel aurait été le chef du gouvernement lui-même. Dans ces circonstances, le procureur de la Couronne n'aurait probablement pas donné suite, même si la GRC avait recommandé de porter des accusations criminelles. À mon humble avis, l'affaire présumée contre Trudeau n'aurait donc probablement pas abouti sur le plan juridique. 

En bref, il faut se concentrer sur cette question ou sur une future modification du Code criminel et d'autres lois par le Parlement afin de s'assurer que la situation actuelle est légalement supprimée pour de futures enquêtes potentielles. Enfin, ces dossiers peuvent-ils être ouverts à nouveau et la GRC peut-elle contraindre l'ancien premier ministre à se soumettre à un interrogatoire sur l'un ou l'autre de ces scandales ? Si vous voyez un mécanisme juridique, vous êtes bien plus perspicace que moi.  

My Take On Northern Perspective And SNC-Lavalin.

First off, after leaving the CPC over disagreements with the way Harper was running the government, I left the party and spent a decade as a Liberal party member. Like so many of you, I was disgusted by SNC-Lavalin and the PMO's attempt at broadening the Justice Minister's legal options against her will. I'm going from memory now but my recollection is that the Minister stood firmly behind the DPP's decision that a DPA was not appropriate in the SNC-Lavalin case. To my mind, the Clerk had no business injecting himself into that debate and should have told the Prime Minister No when it came to placing that call. IMHO, that was at least a serious error of judgement on the Clerk's part. A wise Clerk would have consulted internally with PCO legal counsel before agreeing to the PMO's request.

Now to Northern Perspective: in the wake of this controversy, I've subscribed to this channel and admittedly watched some of their videos in the past. Yes, they are centre-right but definitely not far-right. Fife's comment was a cheap shot. The journalists should have been more open to discovery even given the fact that the then Prime Minister is no longer in office. In short, so what.

It's not my place nor that of PP or even Northern Perspective to summarily decide who or who should or should not go to jail. That is solely a matter for the courts. As an observer of what took place in committee my sense of it is that the RCMP was more concerned with damage control and yes, covering their ass than anything else when they testifed in committee.

Do I think this was predetermined from the get-go? Absolutely I do but that had nothing to do with the RCMP or their decisions. That's why I argue that PP was wrong and irresponsible to make those accusations without what I would call new or developing evidence on the Aga Khan trip or SNC-Lavalin. The legislation was deliberately designed that way to give any PM a legal out. Under that Criminal Code section 121(1)(c),that reads as follows: 

• (c) being an official or employee of the government, directly or indirectly demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept from a person who has dealings with the government a commission, reward, advantage or benefit of any kind for themselves or another person, unless they have the consent in writing of the head of the branch of government that employs them or of which they are an official;

Trudeau had no immediate superior and therefore no one in law could either in writing signoff or disavow his intended or actual conduct. IMHO, from that point on the investigation's inquiry by the RCMP was cooked. 

Cabinet confidentiality was also used as a mechanism to limit or curtail the flow of evidence at both the parliamentary and ethics levels. Again, the RCMP was over a barrel. The first question then became was there a legal remedy whereby this issue could be taken before the courts for adjudication? My sense is that there was a narrow legal remedy, a possible production order and/or search warrant but what court would likely defy the cabinet confidentiality rule and time limit ban? Has it been done before? If not, no court is my answer.

Some will say that the RCMP played right into the government's hands when they requested additional documents. They had to know ahead of time that the answer would be No. In any event, where they went wrong was in not referring this matter to the Crowns. That made them look bad not to mention politically boxed in. 

Now imagine that the RCMP would have made a referral for possible prosecution, no Crown would have likely proceeded with charges given the limited and predetermined access to evidence. In addition, the prospective defendant would have been the actual head of government.  The Crown given those circumstances was probably unlikely to proceed even if the RCMP had recommended laying criminal charges so IMHO, the alleged case against Trudeau more than likely still would have gone nowhere legally speaking. 

In short, the mind needs to be concentrated on this or a future Parliament amending the Criminal Code and other laws to make sure that the present out is legally removed for future potential investigations. Finally, can these files be reopened and can the RCMP compel the now former prime minister to submit to an interview about either of these scandals? If you can see a legal mechanism, you're far more perceptive than I am.  

Poilièvre lève enfin le voile et bascule dans le fanatisme idéologique.

Pierre vient de mettre fin à son leadership avec ses récentes remarques sur Trudeau et la DEI. Non seulement est-il un fanatique idéologique obsessionnel, mais il veut aussi imiter Trump. Après ces deux déclarations, personne ne peut affirmer de manière crédible qu'il n'est pas l'incarnation parfaite de MapleMagaTM. Quel perdant.

Ce type vient de détruire la chance infinitésimale du PCC de remporter les prochaines élections. Le PCC est fini. Voici mon pari : dès que Carney tirera la prise en mai prochain, les conservateurs perdront les deux tiers de leurs sièges en Ontario au profit des libéraux. Carney est impatient d'obtenir cette majorité, et grâce à cet idiot, cela semble déjà bien parti. Pierre est la représentation parfaite de MapleMagaTM, nous contre eux. Il se vante de diviser plutôt que d'unir, et à ce titre, il devrait immédiatement démissionner de son poste comme chef. Mais étant donné que les membres du caucus ont peur de cet imbécile, aucun d'entre eux n'aura le courage de le pousser vers la sortie. En fait, la situation est si grave que les moutons ont déjà décidé de soutenir en masse ce gars, à la manière soviétique, lors du vote sur la chefferie en janvier prochain. Oui, monsieur, le résultat est déjà connu d'avance. 

S'il avait un peu de décence, il partirait maintenant et nous épargnerait la défaite que le PCC subira inévitablement lors des prochaines élections. Mais non, pas lui. Il est plus intelligent que nous tous et meilleur que la plupart d'entre nous. N'oubliez pas que même lorsque les conservateurs perdent, ils n'apprennent jamais vraiment leur leçon. Et ce sera à nouveau le cas dès que Carney aura tiré le rideau. Je vous l'avais dit. J'avais raison concernant Harper, Scheer, O'Toole, et maintenant ce type, et devinez quoi, j'aurai encore raison après les élections. Adieu, PCC, vous avez une fois de plus consolidé votre place dans les rangs de l'opposition. Bravo, du moins pour les libéraux.

Je continuerai à me battre jusqu'en janvier, même si cela ne me sert à rien. Nous sommes coincés avec cet arrogant et suffisant salaud jusqu'à ce que les électeurs le démettent finalement de ses fonctions comme chef. J'attends ce moment avec une grande impatience. 

Poilièvre finally lifts the veil and tips over into ideological fanaticism.

Pierre has just ended his leadership with his recent remarks about Trudeau and DEI. Not only is he an obsessive ideological fanatic, but he also wants to imitate Trump. After these two statements, no one can credibly claim that he's not the perfect embodiment of MapleMagaTM. What a loser.

This guy has just destroyed the CPC's infinitesimal chance of winning the next election. The CPC is finished. Here's my prediction: as soon as Carney pulls the plug next May, the Conservatives will lose two-thirds of their Ontario seats to the Liberals. Carney is eager to get that majority, and thanks to this idiot, it already seems well on its way. Pierre is the perfect representation of MapleMagaTM, us versus them. He prides himself on dividing rather than uniting, and as such, he should immediately quit as leader. But since caucus members are afraid of this fool, none of them will have the courage to push him out. In fact, the situation is so dire that the sheep have already decided to support this jerk en masse, Soviet-style, during the leadership review next January. Yes, sir, the outcome is already a foregone conclusion. 

If he had any decency, he would leave now and spare us the defeat that the CPC will inevitably suffer in the next election. But no, not him. He's smarter than all of us and better than most of us. Remember, even when the Conservatives lose, they never really learn their lesson. And that will be the case again as soon as Carney pulls the plug. I told you so. I was right about Harper, Scheer, O'Toole, and now this guy, and guess what, I'll be right again after the election. Farewell, CPC, you've once again cemented your place on the opposition benches. Well done, at least for the Liberals.

I'll keep fighting until January, even if it doesn't do me any good. We're stuck with this arrogant, smug bastard until the voters finally remove him from his job. It can't happen soon enough for me. 

China: Nine Senior Military Officers Dismissed Ahead of Fourth Plenum.

The Fourth Plenary Session of the 19th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China is scheduled to convene this Monday. Before this, nine senior military officers were relieved of their duties: He Weidong, Miao Hua, He Hongjun, Wang Xiubin, Lin Xiangyang, Qin Shutong, Yuan Huazhi, Wang Houbin, and Wang Chunning. Speculation abounds regarding the instigator of this purge and its implications for the plenary session. One view holds that this represents a defensive manoeuvre by Xi Jinping to consolidate power, targeting allies and confidants—reportedly including several members of the Fujian faction. Another theory suggests Zhang Youxia spearheaded the operation to strengthen control over the military. Given the prior deployment of the 38th Group Army to Beijing, a likely standoff has now formed at the Jingxi Hotel.

I will monitor the movements of Defence Minister Dong Jun closely. Should he be removed, Xi Jinping would face significant difficulties. Coupled with the abrupt reversal of rare earth export licensing policies, this clearly indicates Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao may be regaining the initiative—at least within limited circles.

中国：四中全会前九名高级军官被免职

中共十九届四中全会将于本周一召开。在此之前，九名高级军官被免职：何卫东、缪华、何红军、王秀斌、林向阳、秦树通、袁华志、王厚斌、王春宁。关于此次清洗的发起者及其对全会的影响众说纷纭。一种观点认为这是习近平为巩固权力采取的防御性举措，目标直指盟友及亲信——据称包括数名福建系成员。另一种理论则认为张又侠主导了此次行动以强化对军队的掌控。鉴于第38集团军此前已进驻北京，京西饭店现已形成对峙局面。

我将密切关注国防部长邓多动向。若其遭撤换，习近平将面临重大困境。加之稀土出口许可政策迅速逆转，这显然表明胡锦涛与温家宝可能正在掌握主动权——至少在有限领域内如此。

Trump Tariffs: A Helpful Guide For Canadians.

I'm going to help all of you out and save you a lot of time and energy. Here's what you need to know and consider regarding the Carney government and Trump's tariffs.

Don't get upset, angry, desperate or lost. Life's too short for that. Just get it in your mind that Prime Minister WordSaladTM is never, ever, going to get anything of substance or value out of Trump. Period. 

Carney took Canadians, and especially voters, for a ride in the election campaign. He made chumps out of all of us, including those who fell for his con game. 

Normally, that should guarantee a CPC government after the next election in May. But that won't happen. People like Carney less and less, but they still prefer him over the Conservative dickwad. That's why Carney will get to win again. God help us...

Ford Is About To Have An Epiphany.

Ford says if there's no agreement soon, then we have to hit back hard. Of course, that's what we have to do, but it won't move Trump. He doesn't care about the American economy, private corporations or workers. All he cares about is getting his way. He has decided to endlessly threaten and browbeat each domestic automobile company until all North American production is returned to the United States. He won't settle for anything less. That's the epiphany that Ford is about to have -- our auto jobs are already lost. It's only a matter of when all Canadian production comes to an end. 

Additionally, Trump doesn't want a renegotiation of the USMCA. He wants it dead. The only thing he will offer Carney going forward will be a bilateral deal where the United States wins and Canada caves. In his eyes, Carney is a wimp now that he cancelled the reciprocal tariffs. Our naive and foolish Prime Minister played right into Trump's hands. If he had listened to Freeland, well...

So, Doug, rethink Chinese EV tariffs and push for unionized Chinese auto plants tied to market access. Our workers need jobs in this sector. The Chinese future production has to be our Plan B because there is no other realistic plan for Canadian autoworkers. 

Tell our PM tomorrow not to give in on Chinese EVs unless unionized plants are part of the bargain. As long as Trump is breathing, Canada will be fucked and that means three and a half more years. Time to cut our losses and bring in other automobile production. 

China: The Silent Struggle for Power.

Power struggles seldom resolve through political compromise or sudden concessions. The history of China's communist era is littered with figures purged or meeting even more tragic fates. Authority has remained firmly in the hands of the princelings—descendants of the nation's political elite who have weathered multiple leadership transitions almost unscathed.

Consider Xi Jinping's triple role: head of state, party chairman, and commander-in-chief of the armed forces. By consolidating these positions, he appears to have secured lifelong control. This move has stirred discontent among various factions: the princelings, the Hu Jintao camp, and the remnants of the Jiang Zemin faction.

During a recent plenary session of the Central Committee, Xi Jinping suddenly collapsed. Some attributed it to overwork, others to a stroke. Subsequently embroiled in a struggle for military control, he desperately sought to maintain the armed forces' loyalty. After losing this contest, his subsequent attempts to seize power failed, culminating in Zhang Youxia assuming command of the military. Ironically, fresh stroke rumours surfaced on the eve of the Fourth Plenum – unconfirmed both domestically and internationally.

It is alleged that senior figures led by Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao abruptly launched a power struggle: planning to remove Xi Jinping at the forthcoming plenary session, elevate Wang Yang as interim successor, and position Hu Chunhua as future Premier. The latter would assume state leadership at the Fifth Plenary Session. Concurrently, Premier Li Qiang—reportedly appointed by Xi—is said to have defected, negotiating power transfer arrangements with US officials. His primary objective is to maintain stability in Sino-American relations.

Regardless of his health, Xi Jinping remains an extraordinary figure: this radical hardliner is determined to confront America, exhibiting isolationism, suspicion and paranoia. The elite regard him as a fool, yet are acutely aware of his latent threat. This evokes the proverb about a cornered rat striking back. Xi remains a formidable adversary; it is premature to count him out.

Reports indicate that before the Fourth Plenum, 155 of the 370 plenum members faced personal pressure to choose sides in political struggles, while another 48 were detained.

Historical lessons are starkly evident: Li Keqiang's drowning death and Xu Qiliang's sudden collapse during morning jogging foreshadow China's latent crises. Two major warnings have become clear: closely watch Zhang Youxia and his deputies Liu Yuan and He Hongsheng; and be especially wary of ‘teapots’ during the Fourth Plenum – particularly bottled water.

中国：无声的权力角逐

权力斗争鲜少通过政治妥协或突然让步解决。中国共产主义时期的历史充斥着被清洗或遭遇更悲惨命运的人物。权力始终牢牢掌握在太子党手中——这些国家政治精英的后代历经多次领导层更迭仍安然无恙。

试看习近平身兼三职：国家元首、党主席、武装部队总司令。通过整合这些职位，他似乎已确保终身掌控权力。此举激起了各派系的不满：太子党、胡锦涛派系以及江泽民派系的残余势力。

在最近一次中央全会期间，习近平突然晕倒，有人归因于过度劳累，有人认为是中风。随后卷入军事控制权争夺战的他，拼命试图维持武装部队的忠诚。在这场较量中落败后，他后续的权力争夺尝试均告失败，最终张又侠接管了军队指挥权。讽刺的是，四中全会前夕再度传出中风传闻——国内外均未证实。

据称以胡锦涛、温家宝为首的高层突然发动权力争夺：计划在即将召开的全会罢免习近平，推举汪洋为临时接班人，并安排胡春华担任未来总理。后者将在五中全会接掌国家领导权。与此同时，据称由习近平任命的李强总理已倒戈，正与美方官员协商权力交接事宜。其首要目标是维持中美关系稳定。

无论健康状况如何，习近平仍是位非凡人物：这位激进强硬派决心对抗美国，表现出孤立主义、猜疑和偏执。精英阶层视其为愚者，却深知其潜在威胁。这令人想起“穷鼠反噬”的谚语。习近平仍是强大对手，将其排除在局外为时尚早。

据报道，在四中全会前，370名全会成员中有155人面临个人压力被迫在政治斗争中选边站队，另有48人遭拘留。

历史教训昭然若揭：李克强溺水身亡、许其亮晨跑猝倒，预示着中国潜藏的危机。两大警示已然明晰：严密监控张友夏及其副手刘源、何鸿生；更要警惕四中全会期间的“茶壶”——尤其是瓶装水。

Remove The Chinese EV Tariffs But ONLY If We Get A Deal On New Auto Plants.

I opposed the Trudeau government's imposition of tariffs against Chinese EVs. I like the idea of a free market for consumers. Those who don't support removing the tariffs point out that China unfairly subsidizes their EV industry, which leads to price cutting on vehicles. 

Ford, who normally sizes things up correctly, is wrong on this one: he knows perfectly well that Trump will never budge an inch on automobile tariffs. He wants all American-made cars to be manufactured in the United States going forward, and he won't deviate from that in the future. Ford may not want to admit it publicly, but that's a reflection of reality. The only reason automobile parts aren't on the list is that without Canadian-made parts, automobiles could not be assembled in domestic plants on a timely basis.

So, in the end, Kinew is on the right track, but the Chinese think they've got us over a barrel. They believe they were clever in imposing canola and pork tariffs. We need to outclass them in the negotiations, and that means getting a future commitment on auto plants. Once that pledge is in place, maybe just maybe, tough guy Trump will get so much shit from the American auto industry that he'll have no choice but to pull his precious automobile tariffs. Hardball is the only language that dipshit Trump understands. Canada needs to make the most of it.

CPC: Ford, MacKay and Moore Have That Keen Look.

Just saying.

I expect they'll all be keeping their calendars open after next spring. The trashing is coming! 

Discours et constitution.

Il est amusant de voir le tollé suscité par le discours du premier ministre Legault à Québec, prononcé presque exclusivement en anglais, la langue de l'Amérique du Nord. Les partis d'opposition ont critiqué Legault pour avoir prononcé ce discours.

Disons simplement que je préfère analyser cela sous plusieurs angles : premièrement, il me semble qu'au Québec, la forme est importante et qu'il est essentiel que tout discours soit prononcé dans la langue de la majorité au Québec, ou du moins à 80 % dans cette langue.

Quant à la réaction politique, il y a plusieurs façons de la considérer : on peut se sentir fier d'être Québécois et à l'aise dans sa peau, sans aucun complexe vis-à-vis du monde anglophone extérieur. En bref, on peut se considérer comme parfaitement égal aux anglophones de notre province et d'autres juridictions. Quelqu'un qui voit la situation sous cet optique ne sera pas personnellement blessé par les actions de notre premier ministre, même s'il n'est pas d'accord avec la conduite de Legault. L'autre façon d'envisager les choses consiste à voir cette controverse à travers les yeux de quelqu'un qui se considère comme inférieur ou de seconde classe dans son propre pays. Cette personne sera inévitablement profondément perturbée par la conduite de Legault. Dans ce contexte, le discours de Legault équivaut à un péché mortel, une tragédie inacceptable et sans fin. Pour ma part, je m'identifie au premier groupe. C'est regrettable et cela sert d'avertissement à ceux qui nous dirigent, mais le débat s'arrête là. Chacun a sa propre position sur ce débat linguistique.

J'aimerais maintenant aborder le débat sur une constitution québécoise. Tous les partis y sont favorables, et l'ensemble de la classe politique déplore l'approche du gouvernement Legault. Pour l'opposition, une constitution est un projet qui nécessite un consensus et une étude par les élus et la population en général. C'est un projet pour les États généraux, si vous voulez, et non pour un projet de loi devant l'Assemblée nationale. Jolin-Barrette est brillamment fustigé !

Je suis généralement d'accord avec les positions des partis d'opposition et leur vision de la situation politique. Le monde idéal est le reflet parfait de la vision de ces partis. Mais nous devons composer avec le gouvernement en place. Dorénavant, nous devons nous concentrer sur la modification du projet de loi de la CAQ. C'est mieux que rien. C'est un début.

Cependant, l'ironie qui prévaut est que la nation québécoise n'a toujours pas signé la Constitution canadienne de Trudeau, quarante-cinq ans après son adoption. Pendant cette période, aucun gouvernement fédéral ni aucun parlement souverain au Québec n'a été en mesure de remédier à cette situation plutôt déplorable, mais personne sur la scène politique québécoise n'en parle aujourd'hui, ni même avant. Depuis l'ère Mulroney, comme le disent les anglophones, le silence radio règne sur les priorités du gouvernement québécois. De plus, il est clair qu'il n'est pas dans l'intérêt du PLQ de parler du manque de progrès réalisés dans ce dossier. Bien au contraire, surtout avec le chef actuel. 

Dans l'ensemble, les politiciens à Québec seront confrontés à un défi de taille : transformer le projet de loi de Legault en une solution qui reflète le consensus politique de notre société et de notre nation. Je leur souhaite bonne chance. L'heure de la citronnade ou de la limonade !

His "Guy" Preparing For The Presidency And The Nomination.

This has been in the works for years. Fund and finance him politically from Day One. When Trump dies, will Vance have a lock on the nomination, or will it suddenly become open and contentious? His "Guy" wants it done and dusted as soon as possible. But how will MAGA feel about that? Will MAGA break in two, or will they tow that "Guy's" line? Money means unlimited influence and power, not to mention privileged access for your corporate or personal agenda. Yes, sir, bought and paid for and set to wag the dog's tail.

Predicting Trump's Last Words.

"So long, suckers!"

Hello Again, Walter Reed. Goodbye Oval Third-Rate Whorehouse?

Today was an important day: Trump travelled to Walter Reed for his second annual physical of the year. Does this mean that Trump is about to check out on a fast timetable? I think so. That means the whiff of resignation is in the air, given that the President is both physically and mentally incapacitated. Follow this story daily. Don't think in terms of weeks, much less months, because Trump just can't competently do the job anymore. 

Léger: Liberals Still Ahead But Their Lead Is Shrinking.

LPC: 44%;

CPC: 38%;

NDP: 6%;

BQ: 7%;

GP: 3%.

46th Federal Election: May 2026.

The Liberals will call this election in search of a majority mandate after no CUSMA deal has been reached with the Trump Administration. In addition, in January of that year, Trump will announce that CUSMA is dead and that Canada has no choice but to negotiate a new bilateral deal with the United States.

That means that you, dear voter, will have a simple choice to make on election day: re-elect a government headed by a dope or take a chance on a party headed by a dick. Which way will either a majority or at least a plurality of voters go? To ask the question is to answer it. The past is prologue.

Poilièvre's Letter.

How predictable. It reads like a dick. It was written by a dick and his minions. He's such a jackass. He goes out of his way to reinforce and accentuate people's doubts about him, his personality and his fitness for the prime ministerial job. That CPC spring election loss will be big! That's it, guys and gals, stick with PP, the Liberals will LUV it. Pierre, the CPC gift that keeps on giving.

"Uncle Mark" Heading To DC on Tuesday.

They're sure getting the last laugh in the Oval third-rate whore house: don't delude yourself, when Carney caved on CUSMA countertariffs, the Trump Administration pegged him as an Uncle Mark. Carney and LeBlanc haven't got a clue what they're doing, and it shows.

Being nice and recently subservient hasn't worked. No kidding. Up to now, they got zip from Trump, and that's exactly what they'll leave with on Tuesday unless they royally cave like the EU did. 

I repeatedly reminded this so-called government that Freeland was the key to success, and not only did they ignore my incredibly wise advice, but they also sidelined Freeland right out of politics. Meanwhile, the people's champion is in Brampton at a Unifor rally fighting for auto jobs at Stellantis. Pretty much marks the end of Ford kissing Carney's ass, and yes, it does have future national implications. Poilièvre better start praying now. Mind you, they could always fix the leadership review next January in Calgary, but nah, they'd never do that...

Gaza: Terrorism Blinks.

Hamas has agreed to certain conditions for a ceasefire, a plan pushed by Trump and apparently endorsed by Netanyahu. There are still some questions as to whether Hamas will release all remaining Israeli and other hostages. If they do, it will be a great day for the families.

But don't kid yourself: Netanyahu is going to scale down operations in Gaza City but not for very long. This is not the beginning of a process that will see the IDF evacuate Gaza. Far from it, Bibi is still bent on going in for the kill against Hamas once all the hostages are safely back in Israel. After all, Netanyahu is desperate for this war to continue. It's likely the only thing keeping him and Sara out of jail. Nothing quite like something that concentrates the mind.

Pablo comprend-il la leçon de Carney ?

Au niveau fédéral, nous avons un nouveau Premier ministre, un novice en politique, quelqu'un qui n'a aucune expérience politique, contrairement à son prédécesseur. Carney est un homme perdu dans l'arène politique, quelqu'un qui croit que l'austérité permettra à son gouvernement de remporter la majorité lors des prochaines élections, qui devraient avoir lieu au printemps prochain. Il se trompe. En fait, la baisse dans les sondages ne fait que commencer, mais Carney ne le comprend toujours pas.

L'austérité a sa place pendant le mandat d'un gouvernement, mais ce n'est certainement pas le moment : notre économie reste fragile et les besoins de notre société continuent de croître parmi la population. Rodriguez considère-t-il les coupes dans les services et la réduction de l'État comme une arme pour les périodes où le Québec est prospère ? Pour citer un chroniqueur récent : Coiteau, coûteux en termes de soutien des francophones du Québec. Comme le disent certains anglophones : les dépenses inutiles et les excès du gouvernement doivent être réduits lorsque l'économie est forte et dynamique.

Il y a ensuite la question de la souveraineté. PSPP parie que la souveraineté sera une question secondaire pour les Québécois pendant le premier mandat d'un gouvernement PQ. Il a peut-être raison. Dans le passé, le débat politique sur la souveraineté était le principal enjeu des campagnes électorales du PQ. C'était tout ou rien, mais pas nécessairement pendant un premier mandat. Aujourd'hui, même à une époque où la majorité des Québécois ne veulent pas de référendum après l'élection du PQ, la question nationale semble être d'importance secondaire pour la population. Elle ne sera pas l'enjeu des prochaines élections, loin de là. La bataille entre les partis portera sur l'économie et l'emploi. À mon avis, les Québécois n'ont plus peur de la souveraineté. Ils voient cette possibilité comme une évolution naturelle de la nation québécoise, quelle que soit leur position sur un éventuel référendum. Pour nos concitoyens, le débat sur la souveraineté se poursuit, un débat sur le début du processus de maturation de l'État-nation. On peut être pour ou contre, mais cela reste une projection de la dynamique du Québec. C'est pourquoi Pablo ne fera pas de progrès majeurs si la campagne libérale se concentre principalement sur le débat sur la souveraineté. PSPP comprend très bien la dynamique et fait preuve d'audace. Malgré les avertissements de Bouchard et d'autres, le PQ ira de l'avant avec un plan pour la souveraineté lors des prochaines élections. En d'autres termes, l'époque où le débat sur la souveraineté était la principale question déterminant l'issue d'une élection est désormais révolue.

Nanos: Liberals And Conservatives Down, New Democrats Up.

LPC: 41%;

CPC: 37%;

NDP: 12%.

TylenolTM, If You're Reading...

Sue the shit out of the old fool.

Украина стала уроком, который Запад не сумел усвоить.

Вспомните, как перед началом вторжения в Украину Москва сосредоточила войска и технику на границе, в Беларуси и Крыму. Большинство наблюдателей, включая меня, расценивали это как демонстрацию силы, но не ожидали, что Путин пойдет на вторжение. Мы ошиблись.

У Путина театральные жесты всегда являются неизбежным предвестником ясных и решительных намерений. Он продемонстрировал это Западу на примере Украины. Но если бы не второсортный характер и недостатки российской армии и ее некомпетентное руководство, Украина давно была бы в кармане Москвы.

В последнее время Путин стал более агрессивно тестировать западную оборону, посылая самолеты или дроны в воздушное пространство НАТО в Польше, Эстонии, Латвии и Румынии. Все эти страны, за исключением последней, граничат с Россией или ее анклавом, Калининградской областью. Это не совпадение. Это сигнал о том, что на самом деле замышляет Путин: он зациклен на возвращении прибалтийских государств в орбиту России, и эти вторжения служат для проверки готовности НАТО противостоять этой цели. Россия также оценивает силу и решимость заранее размещенных войск в Эстонии, Латвии и Литве, и не только из интеллектуального любопытства. Нет, господин, Путин хочет провести блицкриг против прибалтийских государств, застав НАТО врасплох. И Путин, и Медведев рассчитали, что у НАТО не хватит воли для полномасштабного наступления на восточном фланге против России в защиту стран Балтии. Они также считают, что Трамп у них в кармане: одним словом, компрометирующая информация.

Я бы сказал, что в российском сознании возвращение стран Балтии в объятия России рассматривается как стратегическая неизбежность. Вопрос не в том, произойдет ли это, а в том, когда. НАТО, по крайней мере публично, этого не понимает. 

Вспомните, что в прошлые века Франция совершила серьезную ошибку, отдав свои несколько акров снега в Северной Америке. Путин рассчитывает на такое мышление в альянсе. Он пришел к выводу, что когда в Восточной Европе неизбежно наступит критический момент, НАТО не хватит мужества сражаться. Это довольно рискованная ставка с его стороны. Очевидно, продолжение следует.