What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[Jacob]

Canadians don't expect him to criticize the US? Why the hell not?

Because it gets us nothing.

[MadImmortalMan]

Canadians don't expect him to criticize the US? Why the hell not?

Because it gets us nothing.

But it makes you feel so good! 

[crazy canuck]

Trump-Trudeau meeting.
Trudeau refused to comment on the refugee policy saying Canadians did not expect him to criticize the US.  Fair enough.  Then he added "my role is to reflect canadian values and be a positive example to the world".  And that got Trump furious, apparently.

Soft skin, you said?

Canadians don't expect him to criticize the US? Why the hell not?

Because it is an American issue for Americans to work out for themselves.  It has always been unacceptable for a PM or President to comment the other country's internal political issues and especially when they are visiting. 

[garbon]

Canadians don't expect him to criticize the US? Why the hell not?

Because it gets us nothing.

You don't really lose much either. Well maybe chance that Trump randomly decides to like you and your evil NAFTA.

[crazy canuck]

Canadians don't expect him to criticize the US? Why the hell not?

Because it gets us nothing.

But it makes you feel so good! 

Seeing your current political situation causes no good feelings whatsoever.

[crazy canuck]

Canadians don't expect him to criticize the US? Why the hell not?

Because it gets us nothing.

You don't really lose much either.

[garbon]

Trump-Trudeau meeting.
Trudeau refused to comment on the refugee policy saying Canadians did not expect him to criticize the US.  Fair enough.  Then he added "my role is to reflect canadian values and be a positive example to the world".  And that got Trump furious, apparently.

Soft skin, you said?

Canadians don't expect him to criticize the US? Why the hell not?

Because it is an American issue for Americans to work out for themselves.  It has always been unacceptable for a PM or President to comment the other country's internal political issues and especially when they are visiting. 

Okay but with Trump, we aren't really in charted waters. I'd hate for evil to triumph for the sake of decorum.

[crazy canuck]

Trump-Trudeau meeting.
Trudeau refused to comment on the refugee policy saying Canadians did not expect him to criticize the US.  Fair enough.  Then he added "my role is to reflect canadian values and be a positive example to the world".  And that got Trump furious, apparently.

Soft skin, you said?

Canadians don't expect him to criticize the US? Why the hell not?

Because it is an American issue for Americans to work out for themselves.  It has always been unacceptable for a PM or President to comment the other country's internal political issues and especially when they are visiting. 

Okay but with Trump, we aren't really in charted waters. I'd hate for evil to triumph for the sake of decorum.

Not so uncharted.  You have had a number of Presidents who were less than popular here in Canada but no Canadian PM has ever commented on domestic US political issues.  It simply is not done.

[Razgovory]

CC hasn't been posting enough.  He needs to pick up the pace.

[dps]

Trump-Trudeau meeting.
Trudeau refused to comment on the refugee policy saying Canadians did not expect him to criticize the US.  Fair enough.  Then he added "my role is to reflect canadian values and be a positive example to the world".  And that got Trump furious, apparently.

Soft skin, you said?

Canadians don't expect him to criticize the US? Why the hell not?

Because it is an American issue for Americans to work out for themselves.  It has always been unacceptable for a PM or President to comment the other country's internal political issues and especially when they are visiting. 

I'm not sure that the refuge issue is entirely an internal issue.  Sure, ultimately, whether or not we take in refugees and how many and under what circumstances and conditions is up to us, but then, ultimately, American membership in NAFTA or NATO is up to us, and if Trump actually tries to take us of NAFTA or renegotiate the terms of the agreement, if I was Canadian or Mexican I'd sure as hell expect the head of my government to comment on it.

[viper37]

Trump-Trudeau meeting.
Trudeau refused to comment on the refugee policy saying Canadians did not expect him to criticize the US.  Fair enough.  Then he added "my role is to reflect canadian values and be a positive example to the world".  And that got Trump furious, apparently.

Soft skin, you said?

Where did you see this?

La Presse columnist (French)

Well, re-reading it, it's not very clear, it seems more like what the journalist thinks.

Or, tout diplomatique fût-elle, une des réponses du premier ministre sur ce sujet a poussé une analyste de CNN à utiliser l'expression «to throw shade» pour la décrire. Dans le langage de tous les jours, l'expression a le sens de «dénoncer publiquement».

Rough translation:
As diplomatic as it was, one of the Prime Minister's answers pushed a CNN analyst to use the expressioN "to throw shade" to describe it.  In day to day language, the expression means "publicly denounce"

Auparavant, le premier ministre canadien avait rappelé que son pays avait accueilli près de 40 000 réfugiés syriens au cours de la dernière année, une approche d'«ouverture» que le président américain jugerait incompatible avec la sécurité de son pays.

Pas sûr qu'il n'ait pas eu l'impression que Trudeau venait de lui faire un peu la morale en se félicitant d'être un «exemple positif» sur la question des réfugiés.

Just before, the canadian Prime Minister remembered everyone that his country granted asylum to close to 40 000 syrian refugees in the last year, a widening approach the american president judged incompatible with his country's security.

Not sure he did not get the impression Trudeau just moralized him by congratulating himself of being a "positive example" on the refugee question.

[viper37]

Trump-Trudeau meeting.
Trudeau refused to comment on the refugee policy saying Canadians did not expect him to criticize the US.  Fair enough.  Then he added "my role is to reflect canadian values and be a positive example to the world".  And that got Trump furious, apparently.

Soft skin, you said?

Canadians don't expect him to criticize the US? Why the hell not?

for the same reason Obama never used the expression "Islamic terrorism" when discussing ISIS in public.

[dps]

Trump-Trudeau meeting.
Trudeau refused to comment on the refugee policy saying Canadians did not expect him to criticize the US.  Fair enough.  Then he added "my role is to reflect canadian values and be a positive example to the world".  And that got Trump furious, apparently.

Soft skin, you said?

Canadians don't expect him to criticize the US? Why the hell not?

for the same reason Obama never used the expression "Islamic terrorism" when discussing ISIS in public.

Trudeau is afraid that criticizing the US will upset moderate Muslims?  How odd.

[jimmy olsen]

Get ready for 200 dollar a barrel oil

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/02/13/the_trump_administration_in_one_photo.html

On Sunday, the New York Times ran a piece on the confusion and dysfunction on the National Security Council, where the Trump team's political concerns and unpredictability have reportedly rattled the staff. "Three weeks into the Trump administration," the Times' David Sanger, Eric Schmitt, and Peter Baker wrote,  "council staff members get up in the morning, read President Trump's Twitter posts and struggle to make policy to fit them." According to the Times, these staffers don't know who to trust: "Some staff members have turned to encrypted communications to talk with their colleagues, after hearing that Mr. Trump's top advisers are considering an 'insider threat' program that could result in monitoring cellphones and emails for leaks."

Much of the article focuses on Trump's National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, now the subject of controversy over reports that he discussed the lifting of Russian sanctions with Russia's ambassador to the U.S. before Trump's inauguration. But the most alarming anecdote in the piece is actually about Defense Secretary James Mattis, whom many expected to be a stabilizing force within the administration:

Last week, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis was exploring whether the Navy could intercept and board an Iranian ship to look for contraband weapons possibly headed to Houthi fighters in Yemen. The potential interdiction seemed in keeping with recent instructions from Mr. Trump, reinforced in meetings with Mr. Mattis and Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson, to crack down on Iran's support of terrorism.

But the ship was in international waters in the Arabian Sea, according to two officials. Mr. Mattis ultimately decided to set the operation aside, at least for now. White House officials said that was because news of the impending operation leaked, a threat to security that has helped fuel the move for the insider threat program. But others doubt whether there was enough basis in international law, and wondered what would happen if, in the early days of an administration that has already seen one botched military action in Yemen, American forces were suddenly in a firefight with the Iranian Navy.

Yes, what indeed? In 2015, reports emerged that the Obama administration was considering doing precisely what Mattis had explored—a convoy of nine Iranian ships potentially carrying weapons to Yemen's Houthi rebels was traveling through international waters where some suspected they would be confronted and boarded by the USS Theodore Roosevelt and another American ship. Those reports were immediately shot down by the State Department. "I saw a lot of cable tickers today, 'Ships Going There to Intercept Iranian Ships,' that is blatantly untrue," then State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf told the press. The American ships had been moved, the Pentagon said, to "ensure maritime security"—in other words, to show force without the risks of doing what Mattis was evidently prepared to do last week: directly confront Iran in a way that could have set off a deadly military engagement.

[viper37]

Trump-Trudeau meeting.
Trudeau refused to comment on the refugee policy saying Canadians did not expect him to criticize the US.  Fair enough.  Then he added "my role is to reflect canadian values and be a positive example to the world".  And that got Trump furious, apparently.

Soft skin, you said?

Canadians don't expect him to criticize the US? Why the hell not?

Because it is an American issue for Americans to work out for themselves.  It has always been unacceptable for a PM or President to comment the other country's internal political issues and especially when they are visiting. 

I'm not sure that the refuge issue is entirely an internal issue.  Sure, ultimately, whether or not we take in refugees and how many and under what circumstances and conditions is up to us, but then, ultimately, American membership in NAFTA or NATO is up to us, and if Trump actually tries to take us of NAFTA or renegotiate the terms of the agreement, if I was Canadian or Mexican I'd sure as hell expect the head of my government to comment on it.

He did comment on NAFTA, in public and in private.  Our ex PM, Mulroney, the one who signed the first Free trade agreement, has been working non stop on dialing all his former contacts in the Republican party.  And he spoke to Trump a few times, with diplomatic language, I guess, because it isn't a SNL sketch

But as much as the refugee matter is, it's not for the PM to comment.  Policies that affect Canadians, yes.  Policies that does not affect us, not in public when there's so much at stake.