How can you tell that Justin Trudeau is lying to you?

We know, we know: when his lips are moving. Old joke.

But there’s a more recent example of Trudeaupian dishonesty — one that took place in real time, in real life. And, even coming from the sophists who make up Trudeau’s cabal, it was pretty shocking.

On Friday night — not during the day, but “Friday night,” as CBC News , no less, reported — word came that the Trudeau government had quietly filed what is called a Notice of Appeal. It read as follows:

“Canada acknowledges the finding of systemic discrimination and does not oppose the general principle that compensation to First Nations individuals who experienced pain and suffering as a result of government misconduct should be provided.

“Awarding compensation to individuals in the manner ordered by the Tribunal, however, was inconsistent with the nature of the complaint, the evidence, past jurisprudence, and the Canadian Human Rights Act.”

There’s a fair bit of legalese, there. What’s it about?

Well, it’s about a 2019 decision by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, ordering Ottawa to compensate Indigenous children for denying them government services.

What’s it mean? It means the Government of Canada wants to overturn the tribunal’s decision. Period.

But that’s not the impression the Trudeau government wants to give you. Here’s what they want you to think. They issued an official statement and everything.

“Today, the Government of Canada and the parties, the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society and Assembly of First Nations, are announcing that we have agreed to sit down immediately and work towards reaching a global resolution by December 2021 on outstanding issues that have been the subject of litigation.”

Some in the media immediately fell for it, hook, line and sinker. CBC’s Chief Political Correspondent, Rosemary Barton, promptly tweeted this:

“All sides have agreed to a pause in legal action. All parties will continue to negotiate to reach a global settlement. They have until December. The appeal buys all sides time to reach that agreement.”

Gotcha.

So, back to the very first question: how can you tell the Trudeau government is lying to you?

Five ways.

• They issued statement late on a Friday. In political parlance, that’s known as “taking out the garbage.“ When you’ve got something bad to say, you say it late on a Friday, when you know fewer people are paying attention. When you are playing fast and loose with the truth, you don’t want anyone paying attention.

• Their lead spokesperson is in Europe. You know: that Justin Trudeau guy. Purely coincidently, we’re sure, Trudeau was literally out of the country, junketing around Europe and thereby being very difficult to reach. He left the appeal revelation to a couple minor Liberal politicians back in Canada on, as noted, a Friday night.

• They pretend settlement discussions are big news — except settlements can happen at any time. Forgive me for being a lawyer and everything, but settlement was possible at any moment before now. You can have settlement discussions before a case begins. You can have settlement discussions when the trial is underway. You can have settlement discussions when a case is before a jury. You can even have settlement discussions after a verdict is reached. Contrary to what Barton tweeted, no settlement discussions were “continuing.“ What was “continuing” was Trudeau’s multi-million-dollar scheming to deny Indigenous children justice.

• They appeal and pretend it’s not an appeal. Because, you know, that’s what the Trudeau government did. They literally researched the appeal. They wrote the appeal. They typed up the appeal. They filed the appeal in the court registry — and even got an official stamp on the front of it. When it looks like an appeal, and is filed as an appeal, it’s an appeal.

• Their lips are moving. Old joke, yes, and repetitive. But it is no less true for that. The Trudeau regime has taken dishonesty to an entirely new realm. In the B.S. Olympics, they are consistent gold medallists. They are without equal.

Because they are lying to you, again. More particularly, they are lying to thousands of Indigenous children who they continue to fight in court.

It all resembles what Donald Trump likes to call “the big lie.”

Because, if you’ve decided to tell one, make it a whopper.

— Kinsella was Jean Chretien’s Special Assistant

Comments (11)

Comments (2)

Dear World:

Justin Trudeau here. Remember me?

You were in love with me once. You put me on the cover of Rolling Stone. The Washington Post once called me “the anti-Trump.” The Christian Science Monitor wondered if I was “Canada’s JFK.” USA Today wrote that I had “charm, good looks, and progressive policies on feminism and diversity.”

Well, that was then and this is now, I guess.

I won’t bother to repeat some of the things you say about me now, World. They’re not very nice.

I mean, sure, my feminism took a bit of hit when, um, it was alleged that I groped a female reporter. But I repeat what I told her: I wouldn’t have done so if she had told me she was a writer for a national newspaper!

And, OK, Donald Trump and I both arguably obstructed justice — him for cronies, and me for a Liberal party donor being prosecuted for corruption. Sure. But he was impeached, and I wasn’t!

And, yes, my diversity credentials aren’t what they used to be. Lying about where I was on the day I set aside for Indigenous Truth and Reconciliation — and instead jetting off to a surfer’s beach in Tofino, and lounging at an $18-million mansion — wasn’t so progressive, I suppose. But I expressed “regret”! Isn’t that enough, World?

Anyway, World, we are BFFs no more. We aren’t besties like we used to be. I acknowledge that, and know who is to blame.

You, World. You are to blame. I’m the same guy — same chiselled jaw, same flowing locks. It’s you who has changed, World.

And I am serving my revenge, um, hot, World. My revenge is Melanie Joly.

You don’t know much about Melanie, now, but I guarantee you will, soon enough. She’s going to leave an impression on you, and you’re not going to like it.

Here’s a sampling of Melanie Joly’s gravest hits, World. Not one of these is made up.

Canada’s 150th birthday celebrations. Countries only turn 150 once — but Melanie, as minister responsible, turned ours into an unmitigated fiasco. Indigenous youth protested it, and citizens hated it, and even wrote to me about it. A sampling: “I have never seen such a poor, chaotic display. Shame on you Ottawa.” And: “Please, (Minister Joly), I beg you to step out of your protective shell and acknowledge what a mess Canada Day was and take some responsibility for it.” And: “Time for you to resign!” Ouch.

The Netflix fiasco. Melanie gifted the streaming giant tax-free status for a piddling amount of investment in Canada’s cultural sector — including in her home province, Quebec. The media weren’t impressed. The Globe and Mail said Melanie’s “fall from grace has been swift and merciless, sped by her maladroit attempts to sell a deal with Netflix.” The National Post noted that she had been “savaged in Quebec media, artistic and political circles.” And her hometown paper, the Journal de Montreal, said she sounds “like a living answering machine having a nervous breakdown.” Double ouch.

Ottawa Holocaust Monument.Melanie commissioned one, but she forgot something. The Washington Post noticed: “(Joly) forgot to mention Jews on the new Holocaust monument dedication plaque.” Oops.

Parliament Hill hockey rink. Melanie had a rink built on Parliament Hill, which was nice. Not nice: The rink (a) prohibited the playing of hockey; (b) was going to be in existence for less than a month; and (c) was a block from the biggest skating rink in the world, the Rideau Canal. Oh, and this, from the Toronto Star: “The rink is budgeted to cost about $215,385 per day that it’s open.” That worked out to about $300 per skater. Ouch, ouch, ouch!

Anyway, you get the picture, World. If you’re not nice to me anymore, I’m not going to be nice to you. So, I give you Melanie Joly, the worst cabinet minister in the history of Canada.

Take that, World.

Sincerely,

Justin

Comments (29)

Jean Chretien is a winner at politics — and at putting together a cabinet, too.

Consider this: During his 40-year political career, he never lost an election. With three back-to-back majorities, he is the winningest prime minister in modern times.

He beat Quebec separatism, twice. He brought home the Constitution and gave us a Charter of Rights. He held every major portfolio in the governments of Mike Pearson and Pierre Trudeau.

He was, and remains, consulted by international leaders, U.S. presidents, and Her Majesty the Queen.

And when he left active politics in 2003 — on his own terms, not because anyone pushed him out — his approval rating remained above 60%.

Chretien is a winner.

(And, sure, I’m biased. I was his special assistant and then, later, his friend. I would take a bullet for him.)

But objectively, if you were putting together a government — if you were putting together a cabinet, or putting together some contentious policy proposal — wouldn’t you pick up the phone to seek his advice?

He doesn’t charge for it. He’s willing to give free advice to any prime minister who gives him a ring.

Justin Trudeau — whose legacy is now proven to include scandal and political failure — needed to consult with Jean Chretien. But did he do that enough?

Well, Trudeau rolls out his new cabinet Tuesday morning. And Chretien — reached in Montreal when promoting the second volume of his new book, My Stories, My Times — doesn’t reveal if he was consulted on that new cabinet.https://www.youtube.com/embed/3Cz8aRnk5gE?embed_config={%27relatedChannels%27:%20[],%27autonav%27:true}&autoplay=0&playsinline=1&enablejsapi=1

But, exclusively, Chretien has given the Toronto Sun some excerpts from the new book about how to build a cabinet. Check this one out, which tells for the first time how Paul Martin only became finance minister at the last possible moment:

“When we won the election on Oct. 25, 1993, I had to form a cabinet. What was I going to do with my two main adversaries for the party leadership, Paul Martin and Sheila Copps? It was the strategy of Lincoln, who did not lack for opponents in his own camp when he became president of the United States, that inspired me in forming my cabinet. He had given them the greatest possible responsibilities.  

With Copps, it was easy: I named her deputy prime minister and minister of the environment, which delighted her. With Martin, it was much more complicated. I told him that I wanted him to be my finance minister, because I believed that there was no problem more important than the deficit, the national debt, the unemployment rate, and the high interest rates.

He replied that that post was the graveyard of politicians, and he wanted to become the new C.D. Howe, the all-powerful minister of industry and commerce under Prime Minister Louis  St.  Laurent.  I  retorted that John Turner and I had been finance minister before becoming party leader and prime minister. After a number of exchanges, he told me clearly that he would not accept finance, but that he’d be happy with industry and commerce. Given this refusal, I offered John Manley the post of finance minister, which he accepted. Forty-eight hours before the swearing-in, Martin called me to say that he’d changed his mind and would finally agree to be finance minister. It’s clear that had I not insisted, he would never have known all the glory that this post brought him. I had to call John Manley back. He’d been finance minister for only 48  hours, but he would have the position again later on.”

That anecdote provides Justin Trudeau with the best advice of all: don’t play favourites. Don’t cater to big egos. Don’t blink.

Will Justin Trudeau take the advice? We may find out Tuesday morning.

— Kinsella was Chretien’s special assistant

Comments (17)