03.09.2019 12:30 PM

PMO’s #LavScam defender, playing racial politics

Disgusting.

(And God help PMO if they were in any way assisting Copps.)



26 Comments

  1. William R Morrison says:

    Wow. Is this for real? I always thought Copps was stupid, but this is amazing. Are hard-core Liberals allowed to say stuff like this? If she were Conservative, she’d by lynched…

  2. Vancouverois says:

    Speaking of, shall we call them, unfounded generalizations…

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/snc-lavalin-quebec-residents-1.5048832

  3. the real Sean says:

    WTF happened to S.C.? Has she just lost it?

  4. Paul Martin says:

    Is she into the tequila again?

  5. Max says:

    Put down the tequila Sheila.

  6. John B. says:

    Well, that was helpful. When did the CRAP Party get to this one?

  7. Sam Davies says:

    Without a doubt, a stupid tweet.

    With that said, perhaps we should remember what happened in 1996, where the Minister of Environment was shuffled to Canadian Heritage. This same Minister went against the PM, and resigned over a broken promise to cut the GST. She was reelected, but never set foot in cabinet again. My understanding is that within the party, her name was mud.

    We saw how Chretien handled disloyalty. Now we will see how Trudeau II will handle such insubordination.

    • Matt says:

      I wasn’t “a” tweet.

      It’s now been a series of tweets over a number of days.

      • Sam Davies says:

        Sure…

        But my main point being – how would Chretien handle cabinet members that are disloyal? I suspect he had many cabinet members who loathed swapping cabinet portfolios, but refrained from lashing out. What happens if every cabinet member digs in their heels, and insists it is their way or else?

        You can distrust and dislike the PM’s priorities, but he at least was elected for the mandate of leadership, and will face the public for his decisions. Not wanting to relinquish a position bestowed (and not elected) – that’s a different matter.

        • Vancouverois says:

          But she did NOT refuse to relinquish the Justice portfolio. And she DID accept the Veteran’s Affairs portfolio

          She just refused to accept the Indian Affairs portfolio – as they should well have known she would. As they possibly counted on her doing.

          As for the idea that they HAD to move her just to show that they were in charge – I find that patently absurd. It’s nothing more than an excuse. Their goal was always to get her out of Justice to make way for a compliant AG. That was the entire point of the shuffle.

          Another one of my favourite points from Elizabeth May is how she pointed out that they had no need to have a shuffle at all: if all they wanted someone capable of handling the Treasury Board portfolio, the most logical choice far and away was simply to promote Joyce Murray, who is well-acquainted with it because she has already served as the Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board for over three years. That would have been simple, quick, and minimally disruptive.

        • Ronald O'Dowd says:

          Sam,

          Are you conflating two different things? Copps and the GST was a disagreement on principle, which I support. Contrast that with Marleau and others re: the Martinites and that’s a totally different kettle of fish. Blatant, naked personal political ambition always shows.

    • Ronald O'Dowd says:

      Sam,

      Chrétien was wrong then, and Copps is wrong now.

      And we can do without blatantly sexist remarks made above your comment.

  8. Sean says:

    My guess is Copps was contacted and fed a bunch of horse shit such as the 9000 jobs-we now know this to be disinformation. And didn’t Copps recently write a column critical of the Trudeau government for mishandling the Indian file? Something’s not right.

  9. Gord Tulk says:

    And if SNC was an Alberta company with “9000” jobs copps would want them to go to trial.

    This is the lens through which the LPC establishment sees the issue.

  10. Housevader says:

    Disavow!

    – The idea that 9,000 jobs don’t matter to JWR unless those jobs are indigenous is a foolish, and projecting. But it is also an interesting thought experiment, who is JWR loyal to? Because she’s totally screwing up the Liberal Party’s chances in the Fall.

    – I think claims of racism of that tweet are reactionary.
    But remember the subtle bigotry of lowered expectations.

    – JT is being accused of being pro-Quebecois SNC executives all the time without the accusers being called a racist.
    – JWR can be criticized for favouring indigenous people without the accuser being called a racist OTHERWISE, we have true democratic erosion. Treating indigenous people with kid gloves is neo-colonialism.

    I could be wrong.

    • Gord Tulk says:

      Garbage. One could accuse Justin of using the Inuit as pawns to shield him from the MSM asking questions.

      (And let’s not even begin to question the Inuit leaders’ motives for playing along).

  11. Vancouverois says:

    Back to Sheila Copps, let’s not forget *this* gem:

    https://twitter.com/Sheila_Copps/status/1104233701754335232

  12. D Campbell says:

    Sheil Copps is to JT what Kelly Anne Conway is to Donald Trump

  13. Matt says:

    “(And God help PMO if they were in any way assisting Copps.)”

    She’s been tweeting this crap for two or three days.

    Has anyone from the PMO condemned her publicly?

  14. the salamander says:

    .. the polarization within the Liberal ‘Big Tent’ is attaining hysterical levels. When Sheila Copps (among others) attains the exalted shrill screetching status of say, a Denise Batters, Pierre Poilievre or Candace Bergen, one knows the wheels are coming off. Even many Indy Bloggers & tweeters are choosing sides & ignoring the gift they are giving the vapid Andrew Scheer and his shrill cabal of insipid & dim political animals

    • Chris says:

      Your comment can also be called “exalted shrill screeching.”

    • billg says:

      The insipid and dim may be part of Scheers party, however, that is purely speculation. On the other hand, the insipid and dim members of the Liberal caucus that still follow the most vacuous and empty headed suit ever to hold the office of Prime Minister is being proven every day.

  15. Nick M. says:

    Amazing that Trudeau is pulling a Paul Martin treatment of Shiela Copps to well accomplished women, and she is defending Trudeau.

    I am a P.Eng, (can’t you tell by my poor grammar?) I have seen many friends lose their jobs at these Engineering giants. Some struggle, but the most have done way better creating their own boutique engineering companies.

    For LOCAL projects, awarding the work to small and start up engineering companies is a net benefit to the profession and Canada. (The costs goes down and profits go to workers, not the execs.)

    Conclusion: The argument of saving jobs is pure non-sense.

    I am convinced those who are defending SNC have a financial stake in their stock, or they don’t understand what the really is at stake of denying SNC public works project is.

  16. Charlie Kayem says:

    Warren, would it be too on-the-nose to refer to the online supporters of Trudeau who are attacking JWR, Jane Philpott and Celina Caesar-Chavannes as “Trudeau Bros?”

    Obviously Copps is an exception, but it seems like those three are getting a whole lot of vitriol from mostly male supporters of the Prime Minister. Almost like the hate that was directed at Ruth Ellen-Brosseau after “elbowgate.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*