The Canadian trade officials continue to misread the room.  Threatening the Trump administration with something the Trump administration benefits from, is not exactly the best trade strategy.

In the background the DOJ has just arrested a woman for her part in a trafficking operation, smuggling Indian illegal aliens into the USA through Canada {citation}.  Simultaneously, a petition within Canada to remove U.S. Ambassador to Canada, Pete Hoekstra, is gaining support because Hoekstra is focused on American best interests and not looking out for the best interests of Canadians {citation}.

On the economic front, Canadian trade minister Dominic LeBlanc met with U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer for the third time in three weeks. However, it’s Canada’s Chief Trade Negotiator Janice Charette, who also participated in discussions, making headlines with threats.

Janice Charette is telling the Canadian public that formal trade discussions with the USA will end if President Trump and USTR Jamieson Greer trigger the 50% tariffs against Canadian goods which are scheduled to begin on August 19th.

President Trump and USTR Greer announced last month the U.S. would begin 50% tariffs on a range of Canadian products. the tariffs are intended as reciprocal action for Canada’s counter-tariffs on U.S. automobiles and steel, as well as decisions by Canadian provinces to boycott American alcohol. {CITATION} According to USTR Greer the tariffs will affect approximately $20 billion in Canadian imports, representing around 5.2% of the $383 billion in goods the United States imported from Canada in 2025. USMCA covered products would not be exempt from the tariff.

Ms. Charette is reported to have made it clear if the U.S. goes through with the tariffs, the Canadians will pull out of USMCA discussions and walk away from renegotiating the trilateral trade agreement.

This is apparently the threat from Canada.  However, when contrast against the intent to eliminate the multilateral trade agreement, the threat carries terms completely acceptable to the Trump administration.

CANADA – Canada’s lead trade negotiator with the U.S. Janice Charette has warned her American counterparts that if the White House imposes new 50 per cent tariffs on Aug. 19, it could put further trade talks at risk.

(more…)

It has been said that all wars are “bankers wars,” however, against the modern era of inverted fascism where corporations tell the govt what policies take priority, the more accurate truism ‘is all wars being controlled by money’, not necessarily banks.

The European Commission has constructed a very special kind of proactive financing for Ukraine that doesn’t require them to give their own €uros to the historically corrupt country.  Partly because the EU doesn’t have their own money, and partly because everything the EU does in the sphere of finance is always a false construct, what the EU put together was a financial system based on sanctioned, confiscated (ie stolen) Russian sovereign wealth funds {citation}.

As part of the sanction regime, the EU and western NATO alliance seized roughly €250 billion, $300 billion USD, in Russian sovereign wealth assets.  As long as the USA was financing the Ukraine government and war effort, those funds sat on the sidelines undiscussed.  However, once the USA stopped writing checks to Ukraine an alternate finance system was needed.

What the EU (Ursula von der Leyen) put together was a finance package using the confiscated $300 billion in the Russian sovereign wealth fund as collateral for loans to Ukraine.  The EU would send the money to Ukraine as a loan that did not have a payback mechanism. Instead, the thinking goes that when the negotiations for a ceasefire take place, Russia would be forced to give up the confiscated $300 billion as part of a reparations package to Ukraine.

Ukraine doesn’t have to pay back the loans because Russia will be forced to give up their sovereign wealth fund, and those funds will repay the loans.  That’s the way the EU financing of Ukraine is set up. {SOURCE}  The EU isn’t giving Ukraine EU money; the EU is giving Ukraine the Russian wealth fund money.

Now, immediately you can see a few problems.

(more…)

FACT: It has been over 60-years since Canada purchased a submarine.  FACT: Canada has never built one.  FACT: Currently the Canadian military have ONE operable submarine out of a fleet of four used ones previously purchased. FACT: Canada recently proclaimed themselves as the North American defender of the Arctic.

Now, put all those facts in the overlay of the December 2024 meeting in Mar-a-Lago between President Trump and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.  President Trump was demanding that Trudeau increase their NATO spending and develop a working Canadian military.

Someone recently asked in the comments section why I have an issue with Canada, specifically why a new level of distain for our Northern neighbors.  Quite simply, there is a level of lying that exceeds my tongue bite capacity; that level of deceit comes when fabricating lies is accompanied by pretending. The Canadian government is the worst type of political abuser.  They willfully pretend and simultaneously lie to the Canadian people. That’s the answer.

Today, the government of Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney announce that German industrial shipbuilder TKMS will be awarded a contract for “up to 12 submarines” valued between $20 and $30 billion {source link}.  Now, let’s not pretend.

First, the submarine contract is intended to get Canada back into reasonable position on their NATO obligations.

In reality, it is quite remarkable to think about the Canadian nation with only one currently functional submarine. “Canada hasn’t purchased unused submarines since the 1960s, during the Cold War, and has never ordered anywhere near 12 at once. Canada currently owns four subs, all of which were purchased second-hand, and only one of which is typically operational.” {citation} Now, think about that Mar-a-Lago conversation again.

Second, Canada can’t build their own submarines?

(more…)

I previously saw an interesting discussion with NVIDIA Jensen Huang where in the context of AI he was asked: who is the smartest person you ever met?

Jensen Huang paused for quite a few moments thinking about the question before he answered.

Huang then redefined the word “smart.”

‘Smart’ is a word we have historically used in reference to ‘intelligence’.  If a person was intelligent, we say that person is smart. However, in this era of AI at your fingertips, we must break this connection.

Intelligence, the assembly of knowledge about a particular matter of discussion, is no longer limited to educational or real-life training or study by people who focus intensely on subject material.

All of the knowing about a system, any system, process, history or discussion topic is now available almost instantly to anyone in this era of artificial intelligence.

The NVIDIA CEO then continued, therefore, once we break our historic reference connecting ‘intelligence’ and the generalized term ‘smart’, we can properly address the question you present.

Who is the smart man? Or, in the context of the originating question, “who is the smartest person?”

With this baseline established, Jensen Huang then outlined the traits of the smartest person.  The smartest person is not the person with the greatest knowledge; the smart individual is the person who can tune into the frequency of the universal moment, look at the human reality of what is factually taking place that has not yet become an input into the AI capture record, and then predict the material outcome – the destination of knowledge that has not yet arrived.

Essentially, Huang explains the smart person is alone, tuning themselves into the vibration that is the consequence of human activity, financial interests, geopolitical movement, social transformation, economic shifts and cultural modifications.  Then, positioning their interests at the place in the future where they predict all the activity will arrive.

The accuracy of prediction, or predictive positioning, then determines the scale of smart.  The more accurate a person is under this perspective, the smarter they are.

I agree with this perspective.

(more…)

I’m not sure exactly what happened in the protocol of timing, but eventually President Donald Trump arrived for a dinner hosted by France’s President Emmanuel Macron at the Palace of Versailles near Paris.

President and Mrs. Macron waited on the steps of the palace for over eight minutes before the motorcade finally arrived. Every second of those eight minutes there was a massive camera pool in front of them. Here’s the full video. If you are awaiting Trump, take a Snickers. lol  President Trump arrives at 7:45 of video WATCH:

.

(more…)

President Trump is navigating a narrow path through a minefield of foreign and domestic opposition to his preferred trade position on the USMCA. Ironically, or not, on the issue of ending the USMCA we likely have more allies in the labor unions and Bernie Bros than we do amid the congressional republicans.

President Trump was asked again today about his position on the USMCA against the backdrop of a hot-mic moment when Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney was telling him about caps on Chinese EVs coming into Canada. [Prompted]

“I would rather not have the USMCA. The primary reason I wanted it was because there was no way out of NAFTA, which was the worst trade agreement ever made — like, ever — and they had no termination… I would prefer not having an agreement, but I’m open to doing it.”

Several desperate Canadian trade watchers have framed President Trump’s “that’s good” response to Carney as if Trump was approving of the Chinese EV deal.  Again, folks are just not looking at Trump’s position through the correct lens.

Trump doesn’t care about the issue. Trump is ambivalent to the issue. It’s the same mindset Trump has carried throughout all questions and comments since the questions were first raised.

The reason for Trump’s ambivalence about the granular, sectoral questions is simply because in the big picture of Trump’s outlook, he doesn’t plan on staying in a trilateral trade deal.  Any bilateral trade deal Canada makes with a trade partner is perfectly okay, because Canada is not going to be connected to the USA in a trilateral obligation.

(more…)

At the conclusion of the G7 assembly in France, President Trump is scheduled to hold a very consequential press conference. The anticipated start time is 11:00am ET; however, the timing is estimated with ongoing events.  Livestream Links below:

UPDATE: VIDEO ADDED

.

(more…)

The G7 was originally constructed as an assembly for the U.S, Japan, Canada, Germany, Italy, France and the U.K.  However, in the past several years it has abandoned its limited economic purpose and agenda and morphed into an assembly of nations far beyond the original intent.

Now we watch the ridiculous assemblies of dozens of nations who come under the guise of the G7 to discuss everything from cow-farting mitigation to the best weapons and techniques to fight the Russians.  The economic focus of the G7 is entirely lost.  This will never be more evident than the current apex assembly of leaders brought together at the invitation of Emmanuel Macron in France.  Watch, and you’ll see how geopolitically ridiculous this has become.

.

(more…)

Making his ninth trip to Europe since become prime minister 15 months ago, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney once again outlined his governing model to combat a U.S. administration that he claims has fractured the globalist norms.

During his press conference with Micheal Martin, Ireland’s taoiseach (Prime Minister), Carney once again built upon the idea of “middle powers” uniting together in common ideology against U.S. dominance until such a time as the U.S. government can once again return to a leftist ideology.

The specific objectives become clear about halfway through the presser today as Carney notes the importance of grouping nations together who agree on climate change, energy controls and the green agenda.

Canada’s alignment with Europe is seemingly centered on the net-zero carbon model.  This perspective makes sense from Carney as it is the same priority he’s carried since his time as governor for the Bank of England.  WATCH:

As the former Governor of the Bank of England and Bank of Canada, Carney used his platform to position climate change as a systemic financial risk.  He then championed the view that private capital must be the primary tool to force an economic energy transition. [Post-COVID this was known as “Build Back Better.“]

President Trump’s perspective and the majority American view on climate change and energy development is against the core professional effort of Carney and the banking interests he has always represented.  This becomes very important to understand as the U.S-Canada conflict is about to hit an inflection point.

HISTORY: Through the “Net Zero” Banking Alliance (NZBA) Mark Carney pushed banks to agree with policies and protocols that forced them to set lower lending targets to high-carbon industries and clients.  The goal was to force companies to ‘decarbonize’ or find themselves starved of capital.

(more…)

The media frame the early arrival of Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney as part of a bilateral discussion ahead of the G7 which begins on June 15.  However, those who have followed the nuance of geopolitics well understand Mark Carney is in Paris early so that he can strategize with President Emmanuel Macron the best way to defeat Godzilla Trump.

There is a certain irony that amid the G7 only one economy is growing, the USA.

EU leaders including U.K Prime Minister Keir Starmer, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and Emmanuel Macron himself are all barely hanging on to power with almost no public support.  Historically, Macron always tries to reposition his domestic lack of support by focusing on international affairs.

Macron and Carney have one nemesis in common, President Donald Trump.  Emmanuel Macron is famous for scheming subtle ways to overcome his own inadequacy, and hosting the G7 puts him in the spotlight.  Mark Carney is coming back to Europe after previously giving a speech in Davos calling for a collective alignment of middle-economy nations to stand united against the terrible Trump.

There is little doubt the pontificating duo has any other topic other than Trump in their scheme and planning folder.

Factually the G7 is a joke now, with likely around 15 to 20 countries showing up.  The G7 used to be the USA, France, Canada, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the U.K. Then they added the EU, which brings three more Brussels figureheads, and if the last G7 in Canada is any indication of the intention, there will likely be at least a dozen more showing up.

(more…)