Cameras were not allowed inside the court house , so Court Painter took on the role of…wait for it….Court Painter.
Court Painter sensed the gravity of the court room’s main event and felt The Donald deserved the stark reality of vintage style renderings in the traditional hen scratch style .
Court Painter’s court sketches of The Donald are revelatory in substance ,never failing to penetrate the copious folds of flesh to reveal the inner void between the lines.
Reporters and camera crews were staked outside of Donald Trump’s appearance in a Miami federal court on Tuesday. But despite all the flashbulbs, there was one crucial, all-important image that Americans and the world were going to be denied: video/photo images of the former president sitting inside of the courtroom. Court Painter’s sketch’s have proven his art can fill that yawning void !
Court Painter remarked without being asked.”His likeness is not elusive . He has a lot of defining features, including the tan pudgy face, the fragile hair, the jowls and scowls and inner bowels he moves around within his formidable girth.His plastic surgery is well concealed and skillfully blended revealing a stud like presence to a fawning world. He is a challenge worth facing”.
Court Painter in a recent portrait sitting with China’s President Xi Jinping ; CP rattled off some quick questions to the president about recent dust ups in the Canadian parliament , stemming from his country’s interference in Canadian electoral affairs.
When asked , President Xi Jinping spontaneously responded by clapping to each query while Court Painter rapidly captured his spontaneity in glowing colour!
President Xi seemed quite pleased with the antics of the Great Dominion’s lower house of the Parliament of Canada …anticipating more…
What did you think of Prime Minister’s Trudeau’s appointment of Donald Johnston as special rapporteur
What did you think of the Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre’s demeaning of Mr. Johnson and his ungoing fasehoods about PM Trudeau’s allegience to the ways of Beijing
What did you think of the opposition parties unanimous call for Johnston’s removal and call for a federal inquiry
What did you think of Mr. Johnson’s rather ignominious resignation
Toronto Star article: Sat., June 10, 2023 : Trudeau’s government wants opposition parties to create their own public inquiry? Good luck with that By Susan Delacourt National Columnist
‘Thesame political forces that shredded David Johnston — forcing the former governor general’s abrupt resignation on Friday — are being challenged to find a new person to restore Canadians’ faith in their electoral system.
Well, good luck with that.
Basically, Justin Trudeau’s government is borrowing one the cardinal rules of retail to get out of the political mess that has dominated Parliament Hill for months, telling the fractious opposition parties: you broke it, you bought it.
In the coming days, Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Dominic LeBlanc announced on Saturday, opposition parties will be asked to create their own public inquiry into foreign interference in Canada’s democracy, including coming up with names of people to replace Johnston.
“We’re now giving the opposition parties something they’ve asked for … a chance to have input directly into that process, and not simply stand up in question period and demand a public inquiry and not offer any constructive suggestions as to how that might operate,” LeBlanc said.
Of course, there’s another problem here too, one voiced by LeBlanc at his news conference on Saturday.
“Many eminent Canadians will understandably hesitate to step forward to undertake this kind of work when they see what the opposition parties did to the Right Honourable David Johnston,” LeBlanc said. That is probably true.
One of the least satisfactory outcomes of the break-it-you-buy-it-rule is that all the customer ends up with a lighter wallet and a broken piece of merchandise. The buyers’ only real choice is to buy the broken object, as well as another, functional intact one to replace it.
That’s a little bit how this whole foreign interference issue feels after weeks and weeks of high dudgeon, random accusations of disloyalty and a healthy dose of character assassination within the halls of our democracy.
The Johnston process got broken and the only option at this point, it seems, is to invest in another one — and to be a little more careful, a little less reckless with its replacement.
Court Painter reacts to news that The Donald has been indicted on 7 counts. Court Painter admitted to someone familiar with the situation that his images might be jumping to conclusions knowing The Donald’s record of remaining above the law. Time will tell.
“I will be on my feet at roughly 7p.m. to stand up against this budget and I will keep speaking and keep speaking and keep blocking this inflationary train wreck until the Prime Minister rises with a plan.”
Conservative Leader of the opposition Pierre Poilievre embarked on a short-lived filibuster of the Liberals’ budget bill last night, (217 minutes) using his right as leader of the Official Opposition to speak without time limits during third reading debate. His filibuster in the House lasted until just before midnight ending with the 900+ amendments not passing, and the Liberals not heeding the Official Opposition’s two demands thus pushing the vote on the bill to today, where it passed with support from the Liberals and NDP.
A Canadian parliamentary filibuster is not actually an American style filibuster since it can’t stop the clock and prevent the House from adjourning.
Pierre “Not Prime Minister Material” Poilievre neglected to point that out in his pre filbuster media bluster blasts.
A wee abridged history lesson on a filibuster worth blustering about which became the biggest filibuster in the history of Canada.
For three years pre 1911, the Canadian House of Commons had discussed the question of naval help for Britain. leading up to an imporant event which occurred on May 30, 1913.
When the Liberals were in power, Prime Minister Sir Wilfrid Laurier had proposed that Canada should build a navy. The Conservatives opposed this under Prime Minister Sir Robert Borden, who said that this was disloyal to Britain. Instead, he had said, Canada should give Britain money to build battleships.
The Quebec Nationalists under Henri Bourassa supported the Conservatives, not because they wanted to help Britain, but because they opposed the building of a Canadian navy.
The Conservatives won the election in 1911 and Sir Wilfrid Laurier(L), as leader of the Opposition, asked them what they would do about the navy or naval aid for Britain.
Sir Robert Borden (C) introduced a measure to give Britain $35 million to build British battleships.
The Liberals tried to force another election on the issue and launched the biggest filibuster in the history of the Canadian House of Commons. They kept the House in session twenty-four hours a day for two weeks, except for one Sunday when there was an armistice (truce–cease-fire). Both parties divided their members into eight-hour shifts. Liberals who hadn’t spoken for years took their turns, quoting the Bible, reading the British North America Act, or Janes Fighting Ships (the bible of shipping), or anything even remotely relevant.
Eventually, Sir Robert Borden ended the debate by invoking the “closure” for the first time in Canada.
‘Tone-deaf’: Singh slams Johnston’s decision to not step down as foreign interference rapporteur
EXCERPTED from CTV NEWS :Published June 1, 2023 12:40 p.m. ADT
NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh slammed foreign interference special rapporteur David Johnston’s refusal to heed the House of Commons’ call for him to step down as “tone-deaf.”
“With all due respect to the service of Mr. Johnston and his previous public service, I believe that his response to the vote on our motion is tone-deaf,” Singh said in a statement Thursday.
On Wednesday, the majority of MPs—all from opposition parties— passed a motion calling for Johnston to “step aside” after he recommended against a public inquiry, and in light of the “serious questions” raised about his mandate and conclusions.
Within an hour of the non-binding motion being passed, Johnston issued a statement asserting his intention to continue on with his work. He said that while he “deeply” respects the right of the House of Commons to “express its opinion about my work going forward” his mandate came from the government.
“I am very disappointed with the lack of understanding of the importance of such a vote calling for him to step aside and the rapidity with which he responded to this vote,” Singh said. “Going forward, I expect, it will be very difficult for Mr. Johnston.”
The federal NDP has tabled a motion calling for David Johnston to step aside as special rapporteur investigating foreign interference in Canadian affairs, leader Jagmeet Singh said Monday.
“We’ve tabled a motion … that will be debated tomorrow in the House,” Singh told reporters.
“Given the clear apprehension of bias at this point, we’re going to be asking for Mr. Johnston to step aside as special rapporteur.”
Singh said it is clear there is a “mounting appearance of bias” with Johnston, so much so that it “erodes the work that the special rapporteur can do.”
NDP leader Singh prefaced his statement with making it clear he was not attacking Mr. Johnston personally.
In an attempt at an explanation to help the Great Dominion’s puzzled media ,irate Substackers,Trudeau haters and opposition government critics 0f Special rapporteur David Johnson’s decision not to hold a public inquiry into foreign interference ; Court Painter and his political prognostication nerd and Press Attache AHM came up with one explanation…the Magic 8 Ball which requires a yes or no question.
Special rapporteur David Johnston’s Magic 8 Ball question
I am a really big proponent for attribution. In interviews and conversations with various Canadian political and intelligence types over the years, I’ve always bemoaned that Ottawa’s aggressive penchant for secrecy actually hobbles Canada’s ability to disrupt this kind of foreign influence. If you have evidence of a coordinated effort by a hostile or adversarial power to muck up domestic politics, you have an obligation to tell the public, with the caveat that you must protect the sources and methods that provided that intelligence. Yet, time and time again, Canada hides behind secrecy, insisting that any disclosure at all would jeopardize collection methods. This, even as other countries — with more impressive intelligence services — regularly disclose and declassify much more information.
But this whole ordeal happened because of this culture of secrecy. And it has been a long and painful process.
And even if the news reports got plenty of specifics wrong, the thrust of the story is true: China ran a much more sustained and serious meddling operation in Canada than the public, or the rest of the world, ever knew.
Court Painter with a still wet portrait of Special rapporteur David Johnston
Former governor general David Johnston issued a decision today on whether Canada needs a public inquiry into foreign interference.
OTTAWA — Special rapporteur David Johnston said Tuesday that a formal inquiry into foreign interference is not needed, that public hearings should be held as part of his own mandate.
Johnston said an inquiry could not be undertaken in public because of the sensitivity of the intelligence involved, and formal subpoena powers are not required for him to hold his own hearings with diaspora communities, academics and political stakeholders.
Johnston’s verdict came in a report released Tuesday May 23/23. He announced his decision to at a a news conference .
The results of the Alberta election on May 29th will determine who the premier is to be. Danielle Smith or Rachel Notley will face what appears to be the most extreme wildfire conditions in the province’s history.
di vobiscum
Editors note: Court Painter wasn’t sure what some of the images were meant to signify and blurted out..’use your imagination ,dammit!’
