Trump threatens to block opening of new bridge between Detroit and Windsor (www.cbc.ca)
from Quilotoa@lemmy.ca to world@lemmy.world on 10 Feb 01:46
https://lemmy.ca/post/60187731

#world

threaded - newest

givesomefucks@lemmy.world on 10 Feb 01:57 next collapse

U.S. President Donald Trump is threatening to block the opening of the Gordie Howe Bridge, poised to become the newest border crossing between Windsor, Ont., and Detroit.

The only thing I know about Gordie Howe is a “Gordie Howe hat trick” and it’s the perfect name for a bridge to America these days.

Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca on 10 Feb 03:47 next collapse

Also “Elbows Up”

CircaV@lemmy.ca on 10 Feb 08:47 collapse

Gordie Howe, a Canadian from Saskatchewan, played for the Detroit Redwings for 25 years.

SomethingWentWrong@lemmy.ca on 10 Feb 02:08 next collapse

The CBC is sane-washing this word salad post:

trumpstruth.org/statuses/36617

As everyone knows, the Country of Canada has treated the United States very unfairly for decades. Now, things are turning around for the U.S.A., and FAST! But imagine, Canada is building a massive bridge between Ontario and Michigan. They own both the Canada and the United States side and, of course, built it with virtually no U.S. content. President Barack Hussein Obama stupidly gave them a waiver so they could get around the BUY AMERICAN Act, and not use any American products, including our Steel. Now, the Canadian Government expects me, as President of the United States, to PERMIT them to just “take advantage of America!” What does the United States of America get — Absolutely NOTHING! Ontario won’t even put U.S. spirits, beverages, and other alcoholic products, on their shelves, they are absolutely prohibited from doing so and now, on top of everything else, Prime Minister Carney wants to make a deal with China — which will eat Canada alive. We’ll just get the leftovers! I don’t think so. The first thing China will do is terminate ALL Ice Hockey being played in Canada, and permanently eliminate The Stanley Cup. The Tariffs Canada charges us for our Dairy products have, for many years, been unacceptable, putting our Farmers at great financial risk. I will not allow this bridge to open until the United States is fully compensated for everything we have given them, and also, importantly, Canada treats the United States with the Fairness and Respect that we deserve. We will start negotiations, IMMEDIATELY. With all that we have given them, we should own, perhaps, at least one half of this asset. The revenues generated because of the U.S. Market will be astronomical. Thank you for your attention to this matter!

PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP

He thinks Canadians are so concerned about the threat that China has for “ICE Hockey” that we must surrender to his demands!?

SGforce@lemmy.ca on 10 Feb 02:45 next collapse

It’s time we talk nonsense back. There is no bridge Mr President.

loonmusic@piefed.ca on 10 Feb 03:02 collapse

Just don’t tell him about the other bridges and land crossings.

lividweasel@lemmy.world on 10 Feb 02:58 next collapse

…and also, importantly, Canada treats the United States with the Fairness and Respect that we deserve.

Oh don’t worry, we are…

Witchfire@lemmy.world on 10 Feb 04:52 collapse

I think it could get a bit more 1814 still

floofloof@lemmy.ca on 10 Feb 03:05 next collapse

Lies and insanity. President Pedo is losing what little mind he ever had.

Handily, he has made the USA so toxic to visit that we may not be needing that second bridge after all.

Smeagol666@crazypeople.online on 10 Feb 09:07 collapse

Jesus fucking Christ. I read 3/4 of this before I realized it was an actual quote instead of an Onion-style mock-up. FFS we are in the most ridiculous timeline.

Graymouzer@lemmy.world on 10 Feb 02:26 next collapse

So, they built a bridge and paid for the whole thing? And we are mad about that? I’m not sure I understand.

kescusay@lemmy.world on 10 Feb 02:49 next collapse

Neither does Trump.

FerretyFever0@fedia.io on 10 Feb 03:04 next collapse

Oh no, they built a free bridge! The horror! This is monstrous, China is going to ban maple syrup and kindness!

justOnePersistentKbinPlease@fedia.io on 10 Feb 04:38 collapse

As I understand it:

The existing bridge is a toll bridge that was sold by Michigan/Detroit to some fuckwit billionaire. He collects all of the tolls, spends nothing on upkeep.

Ontario and Detroit/Michigan notice the existing bridge isnt enough for the traffic, and forces all of the traffic through residential areas.

Detroit and Windsor worked together on plans for the new bridge that connects directly to Ontario's 401 highway system. Fuckwit went to extreme lengths to block the new bridge, even buying the votes to block it at the state level.

The Canadian side works with various US interests to secure a US side of the new bridge, then later gets an exemption from the Fuckwit's state law from the Obama era government.

The agreement reached says that Canada pays for the entire bridge, with the caveat that Canada will see 100% of the toll money until they recover the money spent building it. After that I am not sure what was planned with the toll money. Edit: 50/50 split to Michigan and Canada.

The fuckwit and Trump clearly want to steal the bridge and keep the toll money.

deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz on 10 Feb 04:42 collapse

Nice summary.

Doesn’t take many assumptions to reach that conclusion either. Occam would concur.

tal@lemmy.today on 10 Feb 02:26 next collapse

Windsor Mayor Drew Dilkens says parts of Trump’s post are factually incorrect, as U.S. steel was used in the construction from the Michigan side of the river.

“It’s just insane,” Dilkens told CBC Power & Politics host David Cochrane on Monday evening.

“I really can’t believe what I’m reading,” Dilkens said. “The faster we can get to the midterms and hopefully see a change, the better for all of us.”

The midterms are the nearest big inflection point, and the Democrats will most likely take the House. However, unless there are angles that I don’t know about, the most important thing that the Democrats will be able to likely directly do in terms of Trump doing a lot of Executive Branch things after the midterms is threaten a government shutdown when the next budget rolls around (and it won’t be on a limited “hopefully the Republicans don’t just decide to end the fillibuster and take away our power to block the budget” basis a la last time). That’s a big gun, but it’s got limited usability, and they probably have a lot of things that they want to horse-trade on it already.

They can block more legislation from being passed, but that won’t really change the status quo, not unless something new and unexpected comes up in the second half of the term that the Trump administration really wants legislation on. The Republicans have a trifecta now, so they’ll try to pass whatever they want prior to the midterms.

The biggest politically-useful thing that I’m aware of that the Democrats get is that in both houses of Congress, investigations require a simple majority, and they’ll probably have at least the House. Trump has done about a zillion things that probably would be a pretty solid case for Congress to start investigations — that’s a big part of Congress’s job, to oversee the Executive Branch — and if you get a simple majority in either house of Congress, you can compel the Executive Branch to turn over a lot of information on what it’s been doing. So Trump and a number of other people from the administration might be spending a lot of the second half of Trump’s term sitting in front of Congressional investigations.

en.wikipedia.org/…/United_States_congressional_he…

Oversight hearings

Oversight hearings review or study a law, issue, or an activity, often focusing on the quality of federal programs and the performance of government officials. Hearings also ensure that the executive branch’s execution goes with legislative intent, while administrative policies reflect the public interest. Oversight hearings often seek to improve the efficiency, economy, and effectiveness of government operations. A significant part of a committee’s hearings workload is dedicated to oversight. For example, on a single day, May 8, 1996, the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources held an oversight hearing to look into a recent increase in gasoline prices; the Committee on Governmental Affairs held an oversight hearing on the Internal Revenue Service; the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions held an oversight hearing on the implementation of the Family and Medical Leave Act; and the Committee on Indian Affairs held an oversight hearing on the impact of a recent Supreme Court case involving Indian gaming. Many committees oversee existing programs in the context of hearings on related legislation, or routinely perform oversight when it is time to reauthorize a program, so oversight hearings may be combined with legislative hearings.

Investigative hearings

Investigative hearings share some of the characteristics of legislative and oversight hearings. The difference lies in Congress’s stated determination to investigate, usually when there is a suspicion of wrongdoing on the part of public officials acting in their official capacity, or private citizens whose activities suggest the need for a legislative remedy. Congress’s authority to investigate is broad and it has exercised this authority since the earliest days of the republic. The first such hearings were held by the House of Representatives in 1792 following St. Clair’s Defeat in the Battle of the Wabash.[11] Its most famous inquiries are benchmarks in American history: Credit Mobilier, Teapot Dome, Army-McCarthy, Watergate, and Iran-Contra. Investigative hearings often lead to legislation to address the problems uncovered. Judicial activities in the same area of Congress’s investigation may precede, run simultaneously with, or follow such inquiries.

Congress can pretty much shut down the President, or even remove him from office if he breaks a law, but it requires hefty supermajorities to do so, and unless the Democra

aaaa@piefed.world on 10 Feb 06:50 collapse

And this really requires a law to be broken; it’s a not a recall vote or a “you’re doing a bad job” remedy something like that, but to deal with lawbreaking.

This is not technically true. Impeachment is a 100% political process, and doesn’t require a law to be broken, only for enough of Congress to agree that the President needs to be removed.

Incidentally, this was the defense for Trump’s first two impeachments, with his lawyers arguing that since impeachment is a political process, the legal accusations should be brought to court. And at the same time his lawyers were arguing in court that if the President does it, it’s not illegal, and it can only be handled by impeachment.

mlg@lemmy.world on 10 Feb 04:14 next collapse

25% of trade with Canada by the way lol. It would be flames if they closed Windsor to Detroit.

Not that they will, but they could.

k0e3@lemmy.ca on 10 Feb 07:08 collapse

Rename it Trump bridge and invite him to the grand opening. Then just push him off the bridge and rename it to something with class.