Connect with us

AMERICA

The US contacted the Canada against the truckers

Published

on

In a rare moment in Canadian history, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau testified before the Emergencies Act for an independent public investigation. The reason for the investigation was whether the state of emergency powers exercised against the protests of the truckers who locked Ottawa in January and February of this year were legitimate.

Trudeau stood firm in the face of the investigation. Claiming that the use of extraordinary powers is “unavoidable”, the Canadian leader said it is not possible to negotiate with protesters. “They didn’t want their voices heard, they wanted obedience,” Trudeau said, noting the threat of violence and the inadequacy of the police.

The Canadian prime minister added that he was “absolutely serene and confident” in his choice to exercise exceptional powers. The State of Emergency Law, which took its current form in the 1980s, had never been used in this form before.

One of the convoy lawyers told Trudeau, “When did you and your government become so afraid of your own citizens?” The Canadian replied: “I am not and we are not.”

What was done to the truckers?

Truckers organized under the name of “Freedom Convoy” had locked up the capital Ottawa to protest the COVID-19 vaccine mandate and public restrictions.

The matter was that the vaccine exemption for truckers crossing the US border should end on both sides of the border and the requirement for vaccination to cross the border was introduced. Truckers were saying that the COVID-19 vaccine mandate should be dropped.

The protests, which began on 29th January, entered a new phase after the meeting between Joe Biden and Justin Trudeau on February 11th. Three days later, the Canadian government began implementing the Emergency Act.

The law gave the government the right to block meetings and send federal forces to help local police. Furthermore, the bank accounts of people “believed to be supporting the convoy” could be temporarily suspended. The government also exercised this authority.

The pressure from the US and banks has worked

Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland, a member of the cabinet who testified before the commission, argued that Canada has faced a “dangerous moment” during the protests. What Freeland meant was that the blockade of truckers closed the vital trade corridor with the United States.

Trudeau went further and told US President Joe Biden during the protests that he was trying to reassure him that Canada would “continue to be a reliable partner”.

Chrystia Freeland described the phone call Biden had with one of her economic advisers, Brian Deese, on February 10th, as a “defining” moment. Deese said that if the blockade does not end within 12 hours, all automotive factories in the northeast of the United States will be shut down.

On February 13th, the day before the implementation of Emergency Act, the meeting with Canada’s senior bank CEOs also confirmed US’ concerns.

The CEOs felt that the protests were putting Canada’s reputation at risk. A CEO said he spent a week in the US and that the protests made Canada seem like a “joke” to his neighbour. CEOs complained of the inadequacy of the laws in force and made recommendations to cut off financial support for the protest organizers.

In fact, an unnamed CEO wanted the government to act quickly by declaring protesters “terrorists”. Freeland also made an interesting suggestion, calling it “deplorable” when a foreign investor, whom one of the CEOs tried to convince, called Canada a “banana republic.” “Remind him of Brexit if the foreign investor is British, remind him of the Yellow Vests if he is French, remind him of how badly they are currently managing Russia if he is German.”

‘How many tanks are you asking for?’

As part of the commission’s investigation, obtaining messages among the ministers also revealed shocking remarks.

The phone messages between Public Security Minister Marco Mendicino and Justice Minister David Lametti are an example to this. “You need to get the police to act,” Lametti wrote to Mendicino on 2nd February 2022. And CAF if necessary, ”he said. Mendicino’s answer is nothing more than a “joke”: “How many tanks are you asking for?”

The pair then complained of the inadequacy and inability of the Ottawa police chief to maintain order. The messages suggest that the Justice Minister is considering implementing the Emergency Act only on 30th January 2022. “I was just being cautious,” Lametti says.

Intelligence chief’s advice to Trudeau

Another fact that emerged during the investigation is that David Vigneault, chief of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), was the one to have recommended the use of the Emergency Act to the Canadian government.

Testifying to the commission, Vigneault said the truckers’ protests did not pose a national security threat to the CSIS Act, but the Emergency Act was still necessary.

Shaping media narrative

On the other hand, it was revealed how the Canadian government wanted to determine the media narrative against truckers. Trudeau adviser Mary-Liz Power sends a message to Alexander Cohen, communications director at the Department of Public Safety, outlining a media strategy that the truckers’ protest will resemble those of 6th January 2021 in the United States.

In another text message with Cohen, Power says that global and other media outlets are working on some news. Indeed, Global News, one of Canada’s largest media outlets, cited the headline on 25th January 2022: “Extreme right-wing groups hope that trucker protests will be Canada’s ‘January 6th’.”

AMERICA

Biden plans to write off Ukraine’s $4.6bn debt ahead of Trump

Published

on

President Joe Biden’s administration has officially notified Congress of its intention to forgive Ukraine’s $4.65 billion debt, a move tied to ongoing efforts to support the country amid its conflict with Russia.

This debt represents half of the $9 billion provided to Kyiv as part of the $61 billion aid package approved by Washington in April. Unlike other forms of assistance, this funding was issued as conditionally repayable loans, with provisions allowing the United States President to cancel up to 50% of the debt if deemed necessary.

In a statement, the U.S. State Department explained that the debt cancellation is intended to “help Ukraine win” and serves the national interests of the U.S., the EU, G7+, and NATO.”

According to Bloomberg, President Biden is determined to maximize aid to Ukraine before President-elect Donald Trump assumes office. However, the decision to write off the debt has drawn sharp criticism from Republicans.

Republican Senator Rand Paul argued that the Biden administration’s decision places undue financial burden on the American public. He pledged to demand a vote in the Senate to challenge the proposal.

Despite this, Bloomberg notes that any effort to overturn the debt cancellation would require approval from both houses of Congress, a scenario that appears unlikely given the Democratic majority in the Senate. Furthermore, President Biden holds veto power, making reversal of the decision even more challenging.

Earlier, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced plans to exhaust all remaining aid approved by Congress before President Trump’s inauguration on January 20.

National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan emphasized that one of the administration’s key goals is to position Ukraine as strongly as possible—both militarily and at the negotiating table.

Pentagon officials reported that $9.3 billion in military aid is currently in the pipeline. Pentagon spokeswoman Sabrina Singh confirmed plans for weekly arms deliveries to Kyiv, with the aim of expediting aid distribution before the presidential transition.

On November 20, the Pentagon unveiled an additional $275 million military aid package for Ukraine, further underscoring the administration’s commitment to strengthening Ukraine’s defense capabilities.

Continue Reading

AMERICA

Donald Trump taps Howard Lutnick to lead Commerce Department

Published

on

Donald Trump has announced his intention to nominate Wall Street investor and campaign donor Howard Lutnick as the new head of the U.S. Department of Commerce, placing the billionaire at the forefront of implementing the sweeping tariffs promised during his presidential campaign.

Lutnick, who co-chaired Trump’s transition team, had previously been considered for the role of Treasury Secretary. He is also the CEO of Cantor Fitzgerald, a prominent investment firm.

In a statement on Tuesday, Trump declared that Lutnick would be “directly responsible” for leading the Commerce Department and overseeing the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR).

The USTR, established in 1974 to manage negotiations with U.S. trading partners, traditionally reports directly to the president. If confirmed by the Senate, the 63-year-old Lutnick will play a pivotal role in aiding U.S. businesses and executing Trump’s proposed tariffs on international trade partners.

Trump has outlined plans for a 60% tariff on imports from China and a global tariff of up to 20%, signaling a major shift in U.S. trade policy.

Lutnick, despite lacking prior government experience, has been a steadfast advocate for Trump’s economic agenda. During a New York campaign rally, Lutnick remarked, “When was America great? At the turn of the century, our economy was floundering! That was 125 years ago. We had no income tax and all we had were tariffs.”

While Lutnick has emerged as a major donor to Trump, he has also supported establishment Democrats and Republicans in the past, including Chuck Schumer and Jeb Bush. He contributed to both Hillary Clinton’s 2008 and 2016 campaigns, hosting a fundraiser for her in 2015. Lutnick maintains a personal friendship with the Clintons, noting their attendance at a Cantor Fitzgerald fundraiser in September 2022.

Lutnick has also maintained a long-standing relationship with Trump, even appearing on The Celebrity Apprentice in 2008. He disclosed to the Financial Times in October that he has donated over $10 million to Trump’s 2024 campaign and another $500,000 to the transition team, totaling approximately $75 million.

Treasury Secretary selection process still uncertain

The position of Treasury Secretary, one of the most significant roles in Trump’s administration, remains undecided. Lutnick’s name has been floated for the role, though he faces competition from hedge fund manager Scott Bessent, private equity billionaire Marc Rowan, and former Federal Reserve governor Kevin Warsh.

Marc Rowan, the CEO of Apollo Global Management, has emerged as a leading contender and is expected to meet with Trump to present his case. Rowan’s supporters cite his extensive expertise in financial markets, though competition remains fierce.

Forecasting site Polymarket currently lists Warsh as the favorite for Treasury Secretary, followed by Bessent, Rowan, and William Hagerty. If unsuccessful in his bid for Treasury Secretary, Bessent is reportedly vying for the chairmanship of the National Economic Council.

Trump names Mehmet Oz to run Medicare and Medicaid

Trump also announced on Tuesday his nomination of Dr. Mehmet Oz to lead the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Describing Oz as “one of the most talented physicians” capable of “making America healthy again,” Trump expressed confidence in Oz’s ability to reduce waste and fraud within the nation’s largest government agency.

Dr. Oz, a former heart surgeon and Columbia University professor, rose to prominence as Oprah Winfrey’s health expert before hosting his own popular talk show. However, his career has been controversial, with critics accusing him of promoting scientifically dubious theories and unproven treatments.

Oz’s political experience includes a 2022 Senate race in Pennsylvania, where he was endorsed by Trump but ultimately lost to Democrat John Fetterman.

Continue Reading

AMERICA

U.S. may start its plan to separate Google from Chrome

Published

on

The Department of Justice (DOJ) may move forward with plans to force the sale of Google’s Chrome web browser as part of its ongoing antitrust case against Alphabet (Google).

According to sources familiar with the case, the department intends to ask the judge—who ruled in August that Google illegally monopolized the search market—to address concerns related to artificial intelligence (AI) and the Android smartphone operating system. This information was reported by Bloomberg.

Antitrust officials, along with participating state attorneys, are expected to recommend that federal Judge Amit Mehta impose data licensing requirements on Google. These officials have indicated that Chrome, the world’s most widely used browser, is a critical gateway for many users accessing Google Search. For this reason, they are urging the judge to mandate the sale of Chrome.

Officials stated that a Chrome sale could be considered later if other settlement measures fail to foster a more competitive market. Currently, Google Chrome commands a dominant 61% share of the U.S. browser market, according to StatCounter, a web traffic analysis service.

Over the past three months, state attorneys interviewed numerous companies to prepare their recommendations. Officials noted that some recommendations are still under review, and details may evolve before submission.

While a proposal to force Google to sell its Android platform was considered, officials have since stepped back from this more aggressive option.

If Judge Mehta adopts these recommendations, the ruling could significantly reshape the online search market and influence the emerging artificial intelligence industry.

The case, originally filed during the Trump administration and continued under President Joe Biden, represents one of the most aggressive efforts to regulate a major tech company in decades. The last comparable attempt was Washington’s unsuccessful bid to break up Microsoft in the early 2000s.

Chrome plays a crucial role in Google’s advertising business by providing user data that enhances ad targeting, a primary revenue source. Additionally, Google has been leveraging Chrome to promote Gemini, its new AI bot. Gemini has the potential to evolve from a simple answer bot to a comprehensive assistant, supporting users across the web.

Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Mandeep Singh estimates that Chrome could be worth $15–20 billion if sold, considering its more than 3 billion monthly active users. However, Bob O’Donnell of TECHnalysis Research notes that Chrome’s value depends on its integration with other services, stating: “It’s not directly monetizable. It acts as a gateway to other things. Monetization would depend on how buyers link Chrome to their services.”

Google has strongly opposed the DOJ’s recommendations. Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google’s vice president of regulatory affairs, criticized the move as government overreach, arguing: “This agenda goes far beyond the legal issues in this case and will harm consumers, developers, and American technological leadership at a critical time.”

Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt echoed this sentiment in an interview with CNBC. He emphasized the value of Chrome in enhancing the Google ecosystem, stating: “Singling out these companies won’t fundamentally solve the broader issues.”

In a blog post, Google warned that under new ownership, Chrome might no longer remain free or receive the same level of investment, potentially leading to a shift in its business model.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey