[Non answers in parliament speak volumes!]
Someone in the Prime Minister’s Office came up with a truly “ditzy” stunt when they convinced him to mimic British Parliament and its traditional “Prime Minister’s Question Period”.
The British version is based in Constitution. The Trudeau version is based strictly in satire. It is likely that the notion emerged from one of the not so bright lights regularly drawing pay an inflated check for advising PM Trudeau.
It is most likely that the Trudeau question period stunt is yet another part of the cheesy theatrics that have surrounded too much of way in which this present PM has chosen to conduct himself for his first 18 months in a job he daily shows is beyond his meager intelligence. The theatrics of his “question period stunt” are much about “nothing” and intended to deflect attention away from his own spotty attendance record in parliamentary attendance. Even for a guy with “great hair” it’s difficult to be in two places at once. This chap has demonstrated his personal preference: he’d prefer to be shilling donations than attending to the mundane job to which he had been mysteriously elected.
Humility has never been part of the Trudeau persona. It is a word that simply is not part of the DNA for the Trudeau clan. Public persona and acting out of a huckster-like pantomime are becoming increasingly well known. His father’s childish antics too often have been depicted as iconic. Justin very much spends far too much of his time in delusional mimicking of his father’s antics. In the Trudeau “world”, everything is theater and the more absurd, the better. From the “old man’s” clown like pirouettes while visiting Her Majesty to his thumbs in the belt quasi-threats, Justin Trudeau has updated things to suit the wishes of his administrative “handlers”.
It all does tend to wear thin and become tiresome. Justin Trudeau’s repertoire (and his own vanity) depicts a very troubled human who is simply acting out – void of essential attributes that were sadly missed in teaching from a pair of pretty dysfunctional parents (Pierre and Margaret). Attributes such as conscience, remorse, fairness, compassion and HONESTY never found their way into to consciousness of young Justin.
The Justin Trudeau version of public persona has steadily revealed itself for what it is and depicts a very dark and troubled little boy hiding in the million-dollar wardrobe of a 45 year old adolescent and glimpses of the “real” Justin range from man-handling female Members of Parliament to temper-tantrums full of salty and derisive language.
Far from being stately and emblematic of the most powerful position in Canada, we have somehow inherited a spoilt, ill-tempered and self-entitled child as our Prime Minister.
19 Questions asked and not one Answered
When (current) PM Trudeau deigned to appear in Parliament yesterday and engage in his version of the Prime Minister’s Question Period his “stage directions” had been carefully planned. As is the case with the British Prime Minister’s question period, Justin Trudeau unleashed his latest theatric stunt on a Wednesday. British Parliament’s Prime Minister’s Question Period regularly occurs on Wednesdays each week. The similarities, however end right there. The British parliamentary version of the PM’s Question Period contains a very large amount of substance and civility. Those attributes are anathema to the Trudeau logic. Probably they have never fit as well as Trudeau’s wardrobe of stage props and costumes.
When Justin Trudeau unleashed his latest stunt in parliament yesterday (Wednesday, May 10, 2017 and 2:00 PM) a very unsavory and acrid facet of a twisted and dysfunctional personality was on display.
On 19 occasions, during yesterday’s 45 minute Question Period PM Trudeau was asked (point blank) to reveal the number of times that Ethic Commissioner Mary Dawson had met him pertaining to questionable (and likely unethical) behavior in the way Trudeau conducts “business”. The most recent “stunt” involved Trudeau’s lavish family vacation on Agha Khan’s Caribbean “billionaire’s island”. Ethics enter into things when large dollops of taxpayers’ money find its way into Khan’s charity.
In such cases, it is completely understandable that any conflicts of interest need full disclosure. Justice is best served when it become clear that all facts are on the table. Unreasonable? Probably not. After all, during his first 18 months in office, Justin Trudeau has made a practice of sprinkling huge amounts of Canadian money into various foreign hands.
Here is the Answer to 19 Questions
Justin Trudeau was asked 19 times to reveal the number of times he had met with Ethics Commissioner Mary Dawson. Nineteen times he refused to answer that question.
I am quite prepared to accept the “non-answer” for what it is. In probability, Trudeau has NEVER spoken directly with Ethics Commissioner Dawson about his billionaire’s island boondoggle or about the litany cash-for- access fund raisers that occupy his time and the time of numerous Cabinet Ministers.
Why would he deign to attend?
The most likely answer is that PM Trudeau has been asked to appear and explain his actions but has never seen fit to actually attend. It is much more probable that Trudeau has dispatched one or more of his underlings and has made it known that IF Mary Dawson persists, she will face unemployment and be replaced by a much more compliant Liberal who will “play nice” with Justin.
“Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.” (Thomas Paine was an English-American political activist, philosopher, political theorist, and revolutionary. )
I neither advise nor consent and am just as amused as you probably are.
Follow Lloyd’s articles on Twitter @LloydFournier1
Copyright Thunderbird Rising 2017
The above article is copyrighted. You may use, copy or distribute this article conditional on attributing your source (Thunderbird Rising) and the author (Lloyd Fournier)