Comments by "Aaron Carson" (@aaroncarson1770) on "CBC News" channel.

  1. I think a conversation between the attorney general of the crown and the clerk of the Privy Council has EVEN MORE reason to be taped than other conversations in government precisely BECAUSE of the hats they are respectively wearing.
    29
  2. 🦅 He's on thin ice for me with First Nations issues. There's the pipeline, the Wilson Raybould controversy, and now this.
    13
  3. Paper ballots people, or verifiable backup system. Listen to Tulsi Gabbard. To tremble about cyber threats is childish. The solution is simple.
    13
  4. I sincerely hope the police aren't confident purely based on those pictures. They're worse than useless.
    12
  5. Yes, the fourth estate must be protected. It was wrongful arrest.
    10
  6. A journalist is someone looking out the window, seeing something happening and telling someone else. There's no ordination process.
    8
  7. It's the Imaginarium!
    5
  8. Thank you! I hadn't seen Jodi Wilson-Raybould in the news since her testimony!
    4
  9. And how could she have faith that her efforts to effect reconciliation (for example) would be successful, if the rule of law was compromised?
    4
  10. I liked her speech!
    4
  11. I did think she was hit by a ricochet bullet in this whole thing.
    4
  12. She's got a point about the baby and the bath water. I'm not impressed with Scheer's failure to denounce the yellow jackets.
    3
  13. But wouldn't we have Torys now if it weren't, also?
    2
  14.  @user-yx6qt3pb1e  huh?
    2
  15.  @user-yx6qt3pb1e  the real issue for me is that here lies a problem which is actually solvable at relatively low cost.
    2
  16. He was not "one of the key people". He was THE key person. His conduct was quite putrid, Warnick.
    2
  17. I hope she brought a book.
    2
  18. Me too!
    1
  19. I don't think he's partisan. He's just an a-hole. I do find him unpatriotic though.
    1
  20. No footage? Why is she so elusive?
    1
  21.  @colinsinclair4728  skunks eat pests.
    1
  22. That was his side of the story? "It's given me cause to reflect"? The rest of the time he doesn't?
    1
  23.  @lorrainearmstrong7587  Which party would be best for indigenous rights do you think?
    1
  24. For me it was never a question of partiality, or neutrality, it was his bullying tactics that made me lose faith in him. He's possibly more powerful than the PM, working "in the shadows" as he does. If we must have powerful officials working on the shadows, I'd hope for a more humanitarian demeanor.
    1
  25.  @derosa1989  it would have been great if she'd asked, but I don't consider it "unconscionable" that she didn't. Wernick is a public official and has no presumption of privacy, particularly when acting in official capacity, which he was in this case.
    1
  26. Dude! That's cold! 😁 Well it is Canada.
    1
  27.  @sandrasauve7691  I second you.
    1
  28.  @MetaGirl67  yeah, I mean they're saying Wilson Raybould's taping of the Clerk (shudder), was "unconscionable" but what did the nice doctor do? It's like they said "get out and take your friend with you! SLAM!" I'd be stunned too!
    1
  29. Ooooh that Prince Edwardian accent is so lilting!
    1
  30. I love it! American politics: "The sky is falling! Children are dying! The world is ending!" Canadian politics: "Did you say 'fart'?" Meanwhile I believe Elizabeth May's press gallery speech included another F word. Bless her.
    1
  31.  GodBotherer1  the best to watch is South African parliament! It always makes me happy!
    1
  32. Nice of him to give us permission to have confidence. I feel so honoured. Shame it didn't work though.
    1
  33. But CAN we see Bulgarian adult content?
    1
  34. What's with all the Doctor Evils? All the villains are bald!
    1
  35. "There will be crispy toes!"
    1
  36. 💖
    1
  37. "Moving forward" into a faceplant.
    1
  38. Canada remains helpless as long as US is it's best friend.
    1
  39. "Robust conversations" "moving forward" "this narrative" aaaaaaah. These guys need some new terminology.
    1
  40. Ugh this is old already.
    1
  41. I actually think pressuring the attorney general showed a distinct lack of liberal ethics on Trudeau's part, and possibly Jody was doubting if he could still be considered a liberal. I agree with the interviewer. You can believe in a party and want to remain in a position of influence in order to further those beliefs without believing in the bad seed who has been elected as it's leader.
    1
  42. There's probably enough we can do Trudeau, Wernick and Scheer!
    1
  43. Don't forget his name. Michael Wernick. Prime ministers come and go, but that man has been spinning his web for years. I personally think both parties are corrupt and he's the corruption facilitator.
    1
  44. @Alphonse Ulliac I second that.
    1
  45. I don't need to see the section thirteen notice. To me it's obvious why she didn't think it's appropriate to use the dpa. She's not supposed to consider financial concerns. Even if it were allowed, I'd expect her to ethically deny eligibility. Wernick's excuse about a "cut and paste" law was flaccid and paper thin. The merit of the law is self evident. I can't have faith in a government who puts financial concerns above the rule of law. "Good Canadian jobs" does not excuse it. That would put all corrupt corporations above the law simply because they have employees. There was nothing special about this case to merit a dpa.
    1
  46. This is wicked cool!
    1
  47. Actually I find this quite transparently corrupt. If this is a "good spin", it's a rather flaccid attempt.
    1
  48. I think Jodi's decision made perfect sense. She'd formed the opinion that the PM was corrupt. Wernick's "involvement" which looks to me more like masterminding, probably made her wonder how deep the corruption went. I think she stayed in caucus to protect the party. All the parties have worthy platforms, and all of them are vulnerable to corruption.
    1
  49.  @MsBeautifulRed  Yes. Quite right. I don't think she wanted to come out and say it was corrupt or illegal, because she was sitting before a justice committee, who's role it was too determine that. I merely meant that she MAY have been wondering that in her mind, and rightly so.
    1
  50.  @MsBeautifulRed  I liked your comment by the way. I know YouTube doesn't tell you.
    1