Justin Trudeau keeps making the same mistakes…
As I’ve previously written, Justin Trudeau’s handling of the Julie Payette situation is emblematic of his tenure as Canada’s Prime Minister.
Now, we finally have heard from Trudeau in regard to this Independent Investigation of the workplace at Rideau Hall and…
If you do not understand the problem with that and you’ve read my previous article then let me help you understand. This is the equivalent of not believing the victims. And the victims agree…
Trudeau did give himself an out by including “right now” in his statements. Essentially, if the review comes back with seriously damning evidence against Payette and her secretary, Assunta Di Lorenzo (who happens to be a longtime friend…*cough* cronyism *cough*), then he will most likely call for dismissal and replacement (or she’ll “voluntarily” step down).
First, Trudeau accepted a trip from a Billionaire that was a lobbyist for his government. Trudeau said he didn’t believe there are any ethical dilemmas. A billionaire helps you get elected and then flies you out to their island to stay there free of charge and you don’t see anything unethical about that? When I was a Financial Advisor, my employer would not allow me to accept a gift over $200 from one of my clients and all potential gifts were to be reviewed before accepting to determine if unethical.
Then there was the SNC-Lavalin Scandal. Quick side note, if one of your scandals has their own Wikipedia page then you know it was bad. I’m not going to get into it all, but, basically, SNC-Lavalin did some unethical stuff in Libya and Trudeau tried to influence his Attorney General’s prosecution of the company because he wanted to save jobs. Trudeau not realizing why that is unethical is still mind-blowing.
Next is the WE Charity scandal…(another scandal with it’s own Wikipedia page…)
First, I’m going to give you a regular person example to tie to this. When a person applies for a Self-Direct Brokerage Account to buy and sell items on the Stock Exchange, they must answer some questions to determine if the account requires extra monitoring or has a potential conflict within it. There are questions asking if the applicant, or family members, are 20+% shareholders in any publicly-traded companies. If they are, that could lead to a potential conflict of interest.
Example, I hold 50% shares in ABC Company, which means I have great access to information regarding that company. My wife opens up a self-directed account and these questions are not asked. Now, I know that ABC Company is going to be purchased by a conglomerate and our value will skyrocket, but this information is not public. My wife could purchase shares in ABC Company at the current price, which is lower than what it will be after the purchase is completed and made public. Strangers purchasing our shares do not know they are about to come into a windfall, but my wife does. That is an example of Insider Trading.
Now, let’s tie that back to the WE Charity Scandal. Trudeau’s wife, Sophie Gregoire Trudeau, has a podcast with the WE Charity and has been paid to participate in their events . Additionally, his mother, Margaret, and brother, Alexandre, “have been paid tens of thousands of dollars to appear at WE Charity events.” You may say, “but the WE Charity is just going to be helping give money to students.” To that, I say, you are ignoring the fact that not all of the money being given to the WE Charity will be going to the students. There are administration costs and such that will be used to pay employees and such. That is where the Conflict of Interest comes in because it was uncovered that relatives of politicians within the Liberal Party worked for WE Charity.
Unfortunately, there is actually a worse part to the process that took place in selecting the WE Charity. In the letter from the Conservatives to the Auditor General, they stated that by “outsourcing this program to a third party, the proper channels for Opposition scrutiny, the very bedrock of our parliamentary democracy, have been circumvented. Indeed, it is your office that will provide the most legitimate and transparent examination of this program.” Based on previous experience, I am apt to believe that this was something Trudeau and his cronies knew about.
Now, back to the Julie Payette situation. This is another example of Trudeau making the same mistake because he refuses to truly acknowledge that he potentially made a mistake in hiring her and he is doubling-down by backing her when the evidence of his mistake starts to come out.
When you start to look at the whole Trudeau experience, it actually looks scarily like what is happening below us. We have a leader that thinks they can do whatever they want and has no understanding of what “Conflict of Interest” means…