How Many Times? That Is The Question


Finance Committee Hearing or Liberal Campaign Ad?

Ken Grafton image

Re-posted from the Canada Free Press By  —— Bio and ArchivesAugust 4, 2020

How Many Times? That Is The Question

Prime Minister Trudeau testified before the Parliamentary Finance Committee on July 30th in connection with the WE Charity scandal, currently under investigation by Ethics Commissioner Mario Dion.

Canadians can be forgiven for wondering why.

Amping up the Trudeau charm, well lit and smiling directly into a high-resolution camera, coiffed hair blacker than beard; the relaxed PM was clearly focused upon communicating directly with voters, rather than answering questions from committee members.

The Trudeau brand was under attack, and the message for Canadians was that his Liberal government is doing a great job. The narrative ran that they would in fact be doing even more for Canadians, if it weren’t for Conservatives bringing up this nettlesome conflict of interest thing. Sure, he should have recused himself from approving the sole-source WE contract, but that wouldn’t have happened if it weren’t for COVID-19…and his long-standing interest in youth-affairs. The Liberals’ commitment to providing financial assistance to students during COVID-19 led to an accelerated implementation of the CSSG Program…which caused the PM to slow down the approval process because of the increased scrutiny and appearance of conflict of interest that his family affiliation with WE would bring…before then failing to recuse himself from the process. The Civil Service made all the decisions anyway, not the PM. If the logic is difficult to grasp here…well….

Although it is impossible to disconnect the damming, feculent bright-red Liberal dots leading from WE to the Prime Minister, distraught Liberal spin doctors had obviously been billing some overtime on damage control.

The central pivot from conflict of interest and Liberal corruption seems to be good intentions and the tremendous benefit to young Canadians that could have been…if only the unfortunate scandal hadn’t blown up (read, if they hadn’t been caught).

Canadians should blame the Conservatives and Bloc Quebecoise, for making a mountain out of a mole-hill, really…when you think about it…from a Liberal prospective…

The questioning began:

MP Pierre Poilievre – “What is the total dollar value of all expenses reimbursed and fees paid and any other consideration provided by the WE group to you, your mother, your spouse, your brother and any other member of your family? Just the total please.”

PM Trudeau – “Uh…I don’t have that exact figure…uh…reimbursing expenses is something done by an organization…uh…for example…so I don’t have…uh…those totals.”

Liberal MP Julie Dzerowicz (trying) – “Mister Speaker…uh…Point of Order…Mister Chair, sorry…not Mister Speaker. My Point of Order is what’s the relevance of these questions…uh…of ancillary…uh…fees paid to family members to the official motion…?”

Chairman Wayne Easter – “I don’t think that is a Point of Order Miss Dzerowicz, back to Mister Poilievre.”
Poilievre – “So you are telling me that you don’t know how much immediate family members have been paid in expense reimbursements by this organization.”
Trudeau – “Uh…my mother and my brother are professionals in their own right who…uh…have…uh engagements…uh…and have for many, many years with organizations across the country…”
Poilievre – “Do you know?”
Trudeau – “…uh…and I…uh…don’t have the details of their…uh…work…uh…work experiences of their…uh…expenses.”
Poilievre – “What about your spouse? What is the dollar figure?”
Trudeau – “Uh…WE…uh…I think WE Charity has been able to share those figures with you.”
Poilievre
 – “When was the last time that she had an expense reimbursed by WE Charity?”
Trudeau – “Uh…I…uh…believe it would have been to uh…”

As one can gather from this short excerpt, the Prime Minister was less than forthcoming. It’s a fine line between pivoting and refusing to answer. In Court, it may well have led to a charge of Contempt. Perhaps a Contempt of Parliament charge would be appropriate here.

Trudeau’s repetitive and vexatious use of the word “uh”

Also telling was Trudeau’s repetitive and vexatious use of the word “uh”. In linguistics, “uh” is known as a “hesitation form”, or “filler word”. Filler words are often a red flag for deception. In Psychology Today, Professor Jack Schafer of Western Illinois University, a behavioral analyst for the FBI, explains. “Little words, often ignored in normal speech, can signal deception. Words such as um and uh indicate cognitive load. Liars experience increased cognitive load. Um and uh signal impending delays is speech. Liars need time to evaluate their answers to ensure their lie will be believed. Liars also need additional time to choose the right words to camouflage the truth. Truthful people do not need extra time to convey information.”

The Prime Minister wouldn’t lie though, would he?

So, what are the issues with WE-Gate exactly?

The growing Hydra-like list may keep Commissioner Dion up at night:

  • Was CSSG designed specifically for WE to administer?
  • Why the Canada Service Corps was not tasked with CSSG?
  • Why a sole-source contract?
  • Details of due diligence done, due to the fact that WE appeared to be in financial trouble and in violation of bank covenants. WE Board Members had resigned and mass layoffs of staff had occurred. WE had also never delivered a similar program previously.
  • Why was WE paid $30M upfront, and how will it repay taxpayers?
  • Why was a WE real estate shell company used, instead of WE Charity?
  • Why was a $30M upfront payment made on contract award?
  • WE claimed initially that the PMO had called, asking if they wanted the CSSG contract.
  • Who authorized WE, and why, to begin spending money on May 5th, prior to June 23rd approval?
  • Failure to recuse/Conflict of Interest –
    • PM has spoken for WE in past
    • WE has paid for Trudeau campaign ads/gave Trudeau a platform to connect with hundreds of thousands of young voters
    • WE has paid Margaret and Alexander Trudeau
    • WE has paid Sophie Trudeau
    • WE relationship with Katie Telford
    • WE paid Bill Morneau $42K expenses
    • WE employs two Morneau daughters.

Beyond the blatant corruption

Beyond the blatant corruption issues however, the CSSG model may have also been fatally flawed from birth. The very real possibility exists that CSSG could violate Minimum Wage laws. CSSG would pay a student up to $10 per hour, which is less than the minimum wages in all of Canada’s provinces and territories. If the concept of paid volunteers seems counter-intuitive, the law actually recognizes two classes of volunteers. According to Labour Law firm Goldblatt Partners, “Volunteers are not covered by the Employment Standards Act in Ontario, and need not be paid the minimum wage. But that does not mean that an employer can evade its obligations under the Act by classifying anyone as a volunteer. Only a ‘true volunteer’ is excluded from the protections of the Act…if a participating student views the program as a means to make a livelihood during a time that fewer summer jobs are available, they may be able to argue that they are not a ‘true volunteer.’” A class action lawsuit waiting to happen then.

But, back to the show.

Poilievre (translation) – “I have a simple question for you. How many times does a Minister in your Government need to break the Ethics Act before being sacked? How many times?”
Trudeau (translation) – “We…uh…take it very seriously, every time there are Ethics issues…
Poilievre – “How many times?”
Trudeau – “…and…”
Poilievre – “How many times?”
Chair – “The Prime Minister has the floor…and he has the right to answer. Mister Prime Minister”

He had the right to answer, but apparently not the ability.

How many times? That is the question…for all Canadians.

Great campaign slogan for Conservatives next election cycle…

Real Money’s Revenge


Beware of a Cashless Society where all is digital — Electronic digits have no value and are extremely easy to change or remove!

Just over 10 years ago I drew several pro-silver cartoons. One of them showed a giant, fast-moving silver coin cutting the JP Morgan ‘paper tiger’ in half. For years, JPM has shorted silver and has been doing it illegally and collusively. I knew this, but I went ‘all in’ on silver anyway because I thought JPM would have to cover and spark a massive short squeeze. I was convinced my long positions would make me a fortune. Instead JPM drove the price of silver down from almost $50 early in 2011 all the way down to $13 just a few years later. Paper covered rock. Needless to say, I learned a hard lesson about putting all my eggs in a silver basket. I should have bought Bitcoin instead.

Now silver is back up over $20 and some are predicting much higher prices on the horizon, just like they said over 10 years ago. Gold is also close to making ‘all-time highs,’ which is incorrect because inflation needs to be factored into such a high due to years of incessant dollar printing. Silver and gold have broken out higher due to a weaker dollar and some experts such as Peter Schiff claim ‘King Dollar’ will die due to over-printing. I have my doubts.

The dollar is still greatly desired by America’s poor and the middle classes, whose wages have not risen much in nearly 30 years. They are not getting more dollars like citizens did in Weimar Germany. You won’t see dollars in wheelbarrows any time soon. Most of the Federal Reserve’s dollar printing goes directly to a handful of fantastically wealthy people at the top of the pyramid. Many of them own the Federal Reserve. The Fed is propping up a market that is mostly owned by the top.

We The People are not receiving what the Fed is buying whether it be treasuries, corporate bonds, or ETFs, but we are forced to pay for it. Citizens must cough up more taxes to pay the interest on the absurdly high debt in order to make sure the fabulously rich get fabulously richer. Until those at the very top start giving their money away to the rest of the country, the dollar will be fine. No, I’m not advocating class warfare and it’s not socialism. What we’re seeing is not capitalism. The top 1 percent are getting their money by ill-gotten means. It’s fascism when their Fed gets to pick and choose which globalist company or sector to prop up.

I took some time off in Idaho last week and I visited one of my favorite places on Earth: Wallace. It’s a mining town in northern Idaho. It’s just off I-90 and has a long, storied history. It’s also known as the center of the universe and it is—at least when it comes to silver. There are many silver mines in the surrounding area, also known as ‘The Silver Valley.’ A total of 1.2 billion ounces of silver came out of those mines over the years and there’s still plenty of silver left to be mined.

It costs a lot of dollars to run a gold or silver mine. Sometimes it costs lives. 91 miners died of carbon monoxide exposure at the Sunshine MIne in 1972 after a ventilation system caught fire.

Precious metals are not easy to find. Gold is rare. It takes a lot of money to start a mine. Equipment, labor, environmental permits—all very expensive. Once the ore is removed it must be milled and smelted. Gold in particular is very hard to find. I know—I drove many miles to do some gold panning on a claim in eastern Idaho only to go away completely gold-less. I could not find gold with my metal detector, either. Compare this to how easy it is for the Federal Reserve to create debt dollars with a flip of a switch.

Gold and silver remain Constitutional money, but they are no longer in common circulation. Gold and silver (and copper, too) have been the best form of money throughout the ages, but no longer. They have become anachronisms and are incompatible with the digital age. There will be no revenge. Sure, the dollar can become gold backed once more, but that’s not likely. What’s likely is the Fed will convert us to a cashless society and adopt a social credit system. This will be the worst form of money because it will mean the total enslavement of humanity.

—Ben Garrison

Ayn Rand – What is Capitalism?


 

Is Capitalism Humane?


 

Wheat & the Fourth Quarter of 2020


COMMENT: Hope all is well

We as farmers are paying a price as our pm is bad-mouthing the Chinese. We, Australian farmers, have had a rough deal over the last 30 years because we lost $12 /ton on the Iraq debt, the UN destroyed our AUST WHEAT BOARD SHARE PRICE OVER WHAT SALES TO SADDAM HUSSEIN  so the SHARE  went FROM $6.5 TO $1 PER SHARE and then it was taken over by a Canadian company for $1.5/share.

Cheers P

REPLY: This coronavirus has been a political coup, and we are heading into a confusing time for markets as well as politics. We have the CEO of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg, who is now calling for the breakup of the US government and boldly saying that no one government can stand up against Facebook. This political turmoil has reached an absolute toxic level, and the impact of that is the destabilization of confidence in the future. That undermines the markets going forward.

As it now stands, we should see a retest of support in wheat produce going into the fourth quarter of 2020. We still see 2020 as a Directional Change, but the market will routinely create the false move to get everyone on the wrong side in order to create the necessary powerful slingshot. So just understand that it will get worse BEFORE it turns around. This virus has undercut the supply chain, and the rising tensions with China will only add to the confusion. We seem to have the worst possible politicians in key places at the exact wrong time.

Recession Part II


As we head into the fall of 2020, the damage from this coronavirus lockdown will begin to make its full impact felt. While about 25 million unemployed receive $600 a week, there remain arguments to reduce that to $200. Meanwhile, the real impact will be witnessed as the eviction moratorium, which lasted for nearly four months, ends as it will raise the risk of many being put out on the street. Over 12 million renters are already behind on rent payments thanks to these lockdowns. The small businesses that are in trouble cast a very dark cloud over commercial real estate. Virtually every small shopping strip even in Florida has signs out for rent.

The total official unemployment figure for the US stands at more than 31 million who have collected unemployment benefits of some form. However, our model shows the real number is closer to 40 million given all the part-time people who were not entitled to unemployment. At the start of the year, the total civil workforce was about 164,606,000. The official unemployment rate is about 19%, but counting the full scope we have reached the same levels of the Great Depression. Small business always suffers the most during such declines disproportionately. This will impact future economic growth.

Is the Dollar Overvalued or Undervalued?


The latest claim running around is that the dollar is overvalued relevant to its trading partners, and it will decline as the economy recovers due to imports. You really have to wonder if these analysts are just working from home and have lost all sense of the world because they are locked down. In that forecast, they are ASSUMING that the world economy will recover as if nothing has taken place.

 

This is the typical analysis that simply focuses on domestic numbers and assumes that if you import more goods, then the dollar must decline. This theory is up there with thinking raising interest rates will be bearish for the economy and the stock market. Interestingly, both the economy and the stock market rallied as long as interest rates were RISING!

 

This is not a world that you can judge simply by looking at trade statistics. It is pure sophistry. In 2018, exports of goods and services from the United States made up about 12.22% of its gross domestic product (GDP), while US imports amounted to 15.33%. We have allocated trade according to the flag the company flies, and then you will see that the US has a trade surplus. Moreover, I assisted the Japanese on how to reduce their trade surplus buying gold in New York, taking delivery, and exporting it to London and selling it there. It does not matter what is exported; the statistics only look at dollars — not goods. This theory about trade to claim the dollar will decline is laughable.

All you have to do is real correlation analysis. Here is the US dollar Index, which was wrongly constructed based upon trade rather than capital flows, and the low in the trade deficit took place in 2006. It began to IMPROVE as the world economy turned down, and in 2008, we see an outside reversal with the dollar rising. The dollar peaked in 2001 on this index and that was the crash in the market from the 2000 peak in the Dot.com Bubble.

 

The true trends that reveal the future are based upon capital flows. The dollar rallied and peaked in 1985 during that recession, but on the US stock market, the Dow performed a rare outside reversal to the upside in 1982, which began the explosion from 1,000 to 6,000. That also attracted capital flows for investment. The dollar peaked in 2001 during that recession as capital contracted.