A Small Victory In A Much Larger Battle

While many see the victory of CUPE and Air Canada flight attendants as a major achievement (and it is), perhaps it is better to see  the win within the context of a much larger battle, one that will be fought on many fronts and over many years. There are several issues this labour conflict opened up, from the far too cosy relationship between government and corporations to corporate contempt for customers to massive efforts to undermine, perhaps even eliminate, the bargaining process.

There are many things to speak of in today's post, but I'll start with what we know thus far about the deal struck between Air Canada and its flight attendants. CBC reports the following:

... the tentative deal secures Air Canada flight attendants at least 60 minutes of ground pay, for their time before each flight, at a rate of 50 per cent of a flight attendant's hourly rate, with that rate increasing five per cent each year.

The airline is also proposing immediate pay increases of 12 per cent for flight attendants with five years or less of service with Air Canada, and eight per cent for those who have worked at the airline longer than that. Salaries would increase three per cent in the second year, 2.5 per cent in the third year and 2.75 per cent in the fourth year.

CBC News has learned that the only thing that the flight attendants will vote on are the proposed salary increases.

While not as generous as many would have hoped, the tentative deal at least represents a start on the road to wage redress. More intractable, however, are other issues, one of which this letter from The Star examines:

Make no mistake, Air Canada management was at fault

CUPE says Air Canada strike to continue, defying order, Aug. 18

I am a retired senior who is sick and tired of the manner that big business and big government get away with bullying ordinary folks and depriving them of their rights.

Air Canada had no intention of bargaining in good faith. They decided to precipitate a shut down by walking away from the table and locking out their employees to force the government to act. There seemed little attempt by the airline to address the most egregious aspects of their offer to their employees.

I think it’s time for our government to act more responsibly on labour issues instead of arbitrarily ordering workers back to work with mandatory arbitration as requested by an employer. What they have done is to try force workers to accept what the airline dictated until an arbitrated settlement is imposed; most of which have favored the employers position in almost every case over the last several years. Employers are using the government to avoid bargaining in good faith. This is not negotiating.

It’s time for the government to show some backbone and let employers know this is not a legitimate negotiating tactic. There should be penalties for either party that fails to negotiate in good faith, especially when arbitration is solicited by one of them. Employers like Air Canada and the government have both violated workers’ rights to a negotiated settlement under our Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Robert Holden, Keswick, Ont.

The letter-writer's observations are echoed in a Star editorial, which castigates the Carney government's response to the strike, which 

showed the folly of a federal government that not only overreached, but also showcased a callous disregard for those fighting the scourge of unpaid work, further inflaming an already volatile situation.

The editorial acknowledges there may be occasions for government intervention,  

 ]b]ut the threshold should be extremely high, and governments should be extremely reluctant. Ottawa’s haste here was both unseemly and counterproductive.

Hajdu invoked Section 107 of the Canadian Labour Code, directing the Canadian Industrial Relations Board to order the flight attendants back on the job and sending the dispute to binding arbitration in the name of “industrial peace.” In so doing, she made a mockery of the collective bargaining process in this country. Once again, a federally regulated employer could treat a labour dispute without any urgency knowing the federal government would jump in and provide them with cover. Why negotiate in good faith?  

There are ongoing challenges to Section 107 of the Canadian Labour Code, but they will take time to wend there way through the courts. The government's precipitous invocation of the section now guarantees a harsh spotlight on it. Canadians, as a rule, do value fairness.

I'll end this post with one final observation. The strike, and people's consequent efforts to book on other airlines, laid bare the nature of unfettered, predatory capitalism. There were numerous media reports of 'surge' pricing as demand for tickets on othe airlines grew. One expert I saw on television news said that is simply the market functioning as it should: it will charge whatever people are willing to pay.

I am not the only to find this practice offensive, the absence of any ethical/moral considerations deeply disturbing. A customer

shared photos of a one-way ticket on Aug. 22 from Edinburgh, Scotland to Toronto for over $2,500, while the same flight is usually available on WestJet and other Canadian airlines for under $1,000.

“Let’s never forget that when Air Canada was shut down, the other airlines didn’t help. They instead price gouged Air Canada’s customers. You could have gained customers for life, instead you price gouged them four–five times the fare value. WestJet, this is despicable and short sighted,” the customer said on X. 

As the post gained traction online, WestJet then responded in the comments, claiming that prices automatically go up with increasing demand, which is a standard practice for all airlines. 

A standard practice, eh? Maybe, but hardly a defensible one. But of course, it is only the average person who is most affected by such gouging, so I guess all is well in the world that corporations and their captured governments move in. 

NEW UPDATE: Is This The Solution?

I continue to be befuddled by the fact that airlines can mandate unpaid work for its flight attendants. A check of the Canadian Labour Code shed no light, as it would seem the only ones excluded from the payment are interns, who are not considered employees under the code.

The answer would seem to be to legislate whatever changes are necessary to eliminate this gross inequity. And if you clicked on the link in my previous post, you will know that David Climenhaga is advocating such. And given the attendants' adamant refusal to go back to work, despite a Canadian Industrial Relations Board order to do so, immediate action is required.

Let's be honest here. The Carney-led Liberal government has no one but itself to blame for the imbroglio. In a CBC report dated August 13, before the strike, 

flight attendants from a number of carriers have been calling on the federal government to make changes to the Canada Labour Code to address unpaid work.

"It's not a huge ask, really. All people are asking for is to be paid for their time on the job," CUPE spokesperson Hugh Pouliot told CBC News.

"It's a very problematic situation, not just for Air Canada flight attendants, but flight attendants across the board."

And I suspect that last sentence represents one of the sticking points for the government. As I wrote in the past many times, under Justin' Trudeau's leadership, there was nary a corporate entity the Liberals didn't love. If the same holds true of its current leadership, they will be loathe to do what must be done to end the dispute: promise to pass legislation as soon as Parliament resumes that will rectify the egregious exploitation of labour currently practised by all Canadian airlines, i.e., corporate entities, and make it retroactive to the time they return to work. Such a good-faith gesture, I think, would be well-received by the union, the CUPE leadership and, most importantly, the Canadian public, which strongly supports the attendants' cause. 

For their part, a majority of Canadians are calling on the airline to pay up before the planes tilt up and compensate service crew for the full breadth of their flight duties.

We also have to remember something.

Both the Conservatives and NDP introduced bills last parliamentary session that would have changed the Labour Code to ensure flight attendants are paid for pre- and post-flight duties. But both bills died when the House was dissolved earlier this year.

 Pouliot said it's encouraging to see opposition parties supporting the changes, but said it's "tragic and confounding" that the Liberals haven't backed the move.

"I think you would be looking at a fundamentally different situation at Air Canada right now if the Liberals — a year and a half ago — had decided to play ball with the other parties," he said.

However, there is evidence to suggest the government isn't that keen on ending airlines' modern slave practices. Again, before the strike actually began, 

When asked by CBC News, a spokesperson from Jobs Minister Patty Hajdu's office didn't comment on whether the Liberals would support changes to the Labour Code to address flight attendants' concerns. But they encouraged Air Canada and CUPE to reach an agreement.

The damage to the government's reputation cannot be minimized, especially given that the other parties see the present situation as iniquitous. 

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre and Conservative labour critic Kyle Seeback wrote a letter to Hajdu last week calling for the Liberals to make the Labour Code changes.

"No other federally regulated worker would accept being on the job without being paid and neither should flight attendants. It's time to end this outdated and unfair practice," their letter reads.

Speaking to reporters Wednesday, Conservative MP Michelle Rempel Garner reiterated her party's stance.

"As somebody who is a frequent flyer, I think they should be paid for [pre- and post-flight duties]," Rempel Garner told reporters on Parliament Hill.

"I hope that the union and management can come to an agreement on this, but certainly the principles that were contained in that bill last year are things we stand behind as a party."

Unless the Liberal government wants to continue to be schooled by the Conservatives and condemned by both the air attendants and the flying public, they must act with dispatch. 

UDATE: Is this the amateur hour? Is this really the best the Liberals can do here? Is it an admission of gross ministerial incompetence? Was Hadju absent from the last session of Parliament when two parties introduced bills to change the Labour Code? Or is it just another example of the contempt government has for the people it 'serves'?

 

Patti Hadju is planning to investigate allegations of unpaid work? Lord, save us from these duplicitous, benighted fools!

LATEST UPDATE: It appears, after negotiating throughout the night, that a tentative deal has been struck.

CUPE, which represents more than 10,000 Air Canada flight attendants, said that after nine hours of talks with the assistance of the chief mediator appointed by the federal government, the deal struck will be presented to its membership, who will have an opportunity to ratify it.

Among the sticking points for the union was the issue of pay for work performed while planes are on the ground. While not elaborating on the issue, the union said in a statement provided to CBC News that "unpaid work is over." 

 

UPDATED: A Craven Capitulation To Corporate Canada

To say I am beside myself with disgust and loathing for our 'new' Liberal government would be an understatement. That is not to say, however, that I am the least bit surprised, except perhaps by the speed with which it capitulated to its corporate overseers.

By now, I'm sure most know that the back to work/compulsory arbitration order came from Jobs Minister Patty Hadju a mere 12 hours after Air Canada flight attendants struck. This ensures that the employees will continue, for the time being, working for free for the carrier while on the ground until the arbitration process is complete. And that process will likely leave unpaid work, the major element of the strike, unresolved.

Cupe has responded by accusing the of Liberal Party of "violating our charter rights". They allege that forcing a bargain to end the strike will "ensure unresolved issues will continue to worsen by kicking them down the road".

Also noteworthy is the justification Hadju used for so precipitously ending the job action, a justification that eerily echoes the kind of rhetoric and rationale Trump uses to legitimize his illegal tariffs on the world. 

Trump, you may recall, justified his unilateral imposition of the import duties by declaring a national economic emergency. Hadju mimicked him in her own justification:

"This is not a decision that I have taken lightly but the potential for immediate negative impact on Canadians and our economy is simply too great," Hajdu said at a news conference in Ottawa Saturday. 

And reminiscent of the old Groucho Marx line,  "Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes," Hadju states:

"I absolutely reject the notion that our government is anti-union," she said.

"In a case like this, where multiple efforts have been made to conclude an agreement that satisfies both parties, and it is clear that they are at an impasse, it is very clear they need some help in arbitrating the final items."

Many are not buying this: 

"It really is a troubling development," said Barry Eidlin, an expert on labour and social movements at McGill University.

"Section 107 basically just allows the labour minister this unilateral power to intervene to order workers back to work against their will. And that is extremely concerning."

And the crux of the matter is this:

"We have a real concern that employers are getting the message that they can simply surface bargain, let the issues run to impasse and at that point the government will intervene," said Chris Roberts, director of social and economic policy at the Canadian Labour Congress.

So there we have it. Yet another iteration of the Liberals as Conservative Lite. If I were PP and his pals, I would be starting to despair about any hopes of early return to power.

BREAKING NEWS: Well, things are getting very interesting. 

Air Canada flight attendants will defy the back-to-work order and remain on strike after the federal government ordered binding arbitration to end the work stoppage, the Canadian Union of Public Employees told Radio-Canada on Sunday.

The union, which represents the 10,000 flight attendants, has accused federal Jobs Minister Patty Hajdu of caving to Air Canada's demands.

"I don't think anyone's in the mood to go back to work," Lillian Speedie, vice-president of CUPE Local 4092, told CBC's News Network at a picket line outside Toronto Pearson International Airport in Mississauga on Sunday.

"To legislate us back to work 12 hours after we started? I'm sorry, snowstorms have shut down Air Canada for longer than we were allowed to strike."

 CUPE maintained it opposed arbitration, instead preferring to solve the impasse through bargaining. It said her decision "sets a terrible precedent."

"The Liberal government is rewarding Air Canada's refusal to negotiate fairly by giving them exactly what they wanted," the union wrote...

Stay tuned for whatever happens next. 

UPDATE: David Climehaga does his usual excellent work at Alberta Politics. Take a look at his latest post to see his take on the entire issue.

 

UPDATED: Will They Or Won't They?

No doubt, the temptation is great. With a stroke of a pen, the Liberal government could curry massive favour from both powerful corporate forces and the flying public, ordering striking Air Canada flight attendants back to work pending binding arbitration, whereby the labour dispute is put before an arbitrator for final resolution.

Such a decision would be a massive mistake and a grave injustice to collective bargaining in general and the striking personnel in particular, yet I fear that is precisely what our 'new' government will do. 

Consider the powerful forces calling for arbitration: Air Canada itself, which estimates a revenue loss of $50-60 million dollars per day. As well, 

[b]usiness groups have meanwhile warned of the damage a protracted dispute will do to the economy and have called on the government to consider all its options for ending the dispute — including imposing binding arbitration.

The request for  arbitration was sent to Jobs Minister Patti Hadju, who, for now, wants the two sides to keep bargaining. But how much real bargaining can there be if the hope/expectation is for government intervention?

The previous government, led by Justin Trudeau, ordered binding arbitration for both striking railways and B.C. port workers; in both cases, it could be argued they did so in the national interest, given the role both play in the economy and. that they exist almost as essential services. The same, however, cannot be said about air travel, especially when alternatives to Air Canada exist.

Brock University labour professor Larry Savage has this to say about the threat of arbitration:

“Management at Air Canada is taking a strategic cue from employers in the ports and the railways,” said Savage. 

While he said there is “a long tradition” in Canada of government intervention in labour disputes, Savage said the increasing reliance on Section 107 of the labour code is “troublesome” because it allows the minister to take action without any parliamentary debate, as would be necessary for governments to pass back-to-work legislation. 

“It also highlights how easily collective bargaining rights can be trampled on,” said Savage. 

“When the government swoops in only at the behest of employers, it undermines our entire system of labour relations.” 

The response from CUPE, the flight attendants union, was unequivocal.

The Air Canada Component of CUPE has respectfully urged Employment Minister Patty Hajdu not to intervene pursuant to section 107 of the Canada Labour Code thereby permitting collective bargaining to continue and allowing the parties to negotiate a resolution.

The integrity of the collective bargaining process depends on allowing the parties to reach a resolution through free and fair negotiations, without undue interference.

Rather than continuing to negotiate in good faith, Air Canada appears to have anticipated government intervention and has opted to suspend meaningful discussions, contrary to its legal obligation to bargain in good faith.

On August 12, 2025, Air Canada unilaterally declared an impasse and withdrew from the bargaining table. It has not returned. On August 12, 2025, unbeknownst to the Union, the Company made an extraordinary and premature request to the Minister seeking the application of section 107 to prevent a strike or lockout.

It is clear from Air Canada’s submissions to the Minister that it had planned to withdraw from bargaining and ask the Minister to interfere with the bargaining process.

The mere prospect of ministerial intervention has had a chilling effect on Air Canada’s obligation to bargain in good faith. Air Canada’s request for intervention should be denied. Such a decision would reaffirm the principles of free collective bargaining and compel Air Canada to return to the bargaining table – where it ought to be – and engage meaningfully in negotiations, where it is likely that the Parties may be able to reach an agreement.

You can read the full statement at the link above.

Finally, I leave you with a satirical video, a link to which a commentator left on my previous post that perhaps puts things into their proper perspective:

UPDATE: Well, they did. Captured as they are by big business, the Carney government has announced the end of the strike by mandating binding arbitration. You can read this pathetic tale using the link.

We Condemn Slavery, But Also Kind Of Like It

No person in his or her right mind would favour slavery. Other than white supremacists and Christian nationalists (neither of who meet the criterion of the first sentence), no one sees anything benign about exploiting people's labour and paying them little to nothing in return.

Yet many also kind of like it. Consider how we so readily will summon Doordash, UberEats, etc., likely with the full knowledge that the couriers of such are living on subsistence wages. Of course, that is not really slavery, since some remuneration is granted, however paltry.

There is, however, one field of endeavour that comes pretty close to meeting the definition of slavery. Who is being held in bondage? Air flight attendants.

On my last flight, there was a 3:40 delay taking off. Despite my efforts, thanks to an Air Passenger Bill of Rights as porous as Swiss cheese, we received no compensation. The true victims of this delay, however, were the Air Canada flight attendants. During this protracted delay, they had to deal with cranky passengers and try to meet their needs, all while receiving absolutely no compensation. As you probably know by now, attendants are paid only for their time in the air. Passenger seating, safety demonstrations, etc, are duties conducted gratis.

And it is this iniquitous inequity the Air Canada attendants, represented by, CUPE, are prepared to strike over.

Air Canada says it will begin cancelling flights on Thursday ahead of a potential strike that could see more than 10,000 flight attendants walk off the job this weekend.

The country's largest airline said the gradual suspension of flights — which would see more cancellations on Friday, before a complete cessation of flying by Air Canada and Air Canada Rouge by the weekend — would allow for an orderly shutdown.

About 130,000 customers a day could be affected by a disruption, according to Air Canada.

Air Canada, like many other major airlines, doesn't currently compensate its flight attendants for the work they do before boarding and after deplaning, according to CUPE. Ground tasks include things like safety protocols and assisting passengers.

The starting salary for the attendants could most charitably described as abysmal, and their paid work, on average, amounts to 75-80 hours per month.

According to the union, entry level pay for a flight attendant is about $1,950 a month.

And the 'free labour they provide is extensive: 

They are not reimbursed for assisting people who have mobility problems, running the boarding process, helping with deplaning, or even pre-flight safety checks, work the union estimates comes out to an average of 35 hours a week for which the average flight attendants is not paid.

Now much is being made about how the carrier has requested arbitration which the union refused. As well, they are being offered a 38% increase over four years, which is misleading, as that figure includes improvements to pensions and benefits. The real sticking point in all of this, however, is the issue of unpaid work, for which the carrier has offered an anemic response:

The carrier has proposed paying flight attendants 50 per cent of their wage for work done on the ground, but the union is asking for 100 per cent.

"Air Canada is not an anomaly in this, but coming out of a 10-year deal, this is something that we're trying to correct," said [Wesley] Lesosky [president of the Air Canada component of CUPE], adding there's been a "big push globally" for this kind of compensation to become the standard.

The literalist may say there is no slavery here, since all cabin attendants are there by choice. That's one way to look at it. But on the other hand, one could say that about many workplaces where people toil but have little influence over their conditions. For the sake of survival, they labour there. After all, almost everyone needs to work. If we are lucky, we land in a congenial company, but that is not the case for many. 

Is it really such a revolutionary thing to suggest all, including cabin attendants, are entitled to both fairness and dignity in their place of work?

The American Taliban

 I'm not a white nationalist; I'm not a fascist;  I'm not a racist; I'm not a misogynist.

- Doug Wilson, senior pastor of Christ Church in Idaho

None of what follows should be at all surprising to those who regularly follow the devolution of the United States into an autocratic/theocratic state. Also not surprising is that Pastor Doug is a favourite of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who has gone on record as saying that women have no place in military combat roles. As it turns out, he sees little place for women in any role outside of housewife and baby-maker, as evidenced by his full-throated endorsement of Wilson.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has reposted and praised a video interview of a self-described Christian nationalist pastor whose church doesn't believe women should be allowed to vote.

Doug Wilson, senior pastor of Christ Church in Idaho, said during the interview with CNN that, "Women are the kind of people that people come out of."

"The wife and mother, who is the chief executive of the home, is entrusted with three or four or five eternal souls," he continued.

 In the CNN interview, Wilson also defended previous comments where he had said there was mutual affection between slaves and their masters. He also said that sodomy should be recriminalized. The Supreme Court invalidated sodomy laws in 2003.

In his repost of the interview on the platform X, Hegseth added, "All of Christ for All of Life."

Chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell told NPR in an emailed statement on Saturday that Hegseth is a "proud member of a church affiliated with the Congregation of Reformed Evangelical Churches," which was founded by Wilson.

"The Secretary very much appreciates many of Mr. Wilson's writings and teachings," Parnell also wrote.

Should you have the inclination and the stomach, you can watch the CNN interview here. 

In response to this, Hillary Clinton responded:

You know how people called women hysterical for predicting the right wing would take down Roe v. Wade (which they've done) and then attack access to birth control (which they're doing)? Hear me when I say that women's very right to vote is next.

I've always held the view that everyone is entitled to his or her perspectives and opinions, as long as they don't infringe upon others. Clearly, however, the Christian nationalist movement has its forceful designs on all of America; indeed, they ape the Taliban in their fervour to suppress women, and they see it as their holy mission to convert the nation to that retrograde position. 

One cannot help but remember another holy mission of an earlier time. It was called the Crusades.

It's a Double-Edged Sword

With artificial intelligence now able to generate convincing fake news, decreasing numbers of people will be able to differentiate between it and a reality defined by knowledge, wide reading and critical thinking. For many, one picture has become worth a thousand words of 'truth'.

The tool is now frequently used by the far-right, but it occurs to me that a.i. generated imagery is a double-edged sword, one that can be wielded as a weapon against the Amerika's fanatics. What follows is not so much fake as it is predictive of the near future under Trump's land of the 'free' and home of the 'brave'.

When that future arrives, will enough Americans have the cognition to recognize the true source of their misery? Expect much resistance from the far-right, and substantial counter offensives.

On Binary Thinking And The Gaza Genocide

I read an interesting column the other day. In it, Janice Kennedy reflects on our tribal natures, natures that promote binary thinking. 

... one side or the other, black or white. Shades of grey are forbidden.

Condemn the Israeli government for the catastrophe in Gaza, and you’re antisemitic. Don’t condemn it, and you’re Islamophobic. Our capacity to understand nuance, make distinctions and accept complexity seems increasingly like a dying intellectual art.

Kennedy observes that in this age of rabid social media, the propensity for bifurcated thinking has deepened and spread. The internet has much to answer for in this regard.

As a teacher, I always felt it was part of my job to help cultivate critical thinking skills, skills that can only gradually develop through thought, analysis, and reflection. The world badly needs those skills today.

The latest announcements by Israel to occupy Gaza are an opportunity for the world in general, and Canada in particular, to break free of the stigma of criticizing the Jewish state and take concrete action that morality demands. No one should believe Netanyahu's claim that it will only be a temporary measure; past practices suggest it will ultimately be annexed by Israel.

Given the history of the Holocaust and it prior unstinting support of Israel, Germany is taking a bold move in reprisal.

The German government will not approve any exports of military equipment that could be used in the Gaza Strip until further notice, chancellor Friedrich Merz said on Friday in response to Israel’s plan to expand its military operations there.

Merz said it was Israel’s right to disarm Hamas and to seek the release of the Israeli hostages but “the German government believes that the even tougher military action in the Gaza Strip decided upon by the Israeli cabinet last night makes it increasingly difficult to see how these goals can be achieved”.

Under these circumstances, the German government will not approve any exports of military equipment that could be used in the Gaza Strip until further notice.

The release of the hostages and negotiations for a ceasefire are Germany’s top priorities, Merz said, expressing deep concern over the suffering of civilians in the Gaza Strip.

Germany’s parliament said in June that export licences for military equipment to Israel worth €485m ($564m) were granted between 7 October 2023 and 13 May 2025, reports Reuters.

Canada, despite its stout denials of  sending such equipment, needs to immediately cease its military exports to Israel. However, that should only be for the first step. It also, in my view, needs to suspend its free trade agreement with the Jewish state. It would send a powerful message of condemnation over the ongoing genocide in Gaza, as well as Netanyahu's annexation plans. 

Canada could take a page from Ireland's recent actions.

 On June 25, the Irish government introduced the Occupied Territories Bill, a landmark piece of legislation aimed at aligning Ireland’s trade policy with international law.

The bill prohibits the import and export of goods and services to and from Israeli settlements located in occupied Palestinian territory, outposts deemed illegal under international law by the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

The issue of Israeli settlements is not merely a political or moral concern; it is fundamentally a matter of international law. In July 2023, the ICJ issued an advisory opinion reaffirming the illegality of Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The Court urged states to refrain from any support—whether through trade or other means—that could sustain these unlawful settlements.

While Ireland's actions deal only with the occupied territories, Canada should go further, leading the world in expressing its revulsion at Israel's ignoring of international law, law that is supposed to protect all.

We live in fraught times, times when  public and political morality often exist only as passing whims. For the sake of all, including our collective soul, we need to act with resolution and dispatch.

Like A Minimally Skilled Magician

Like a minimally-skilled magician, Don Trump is directing his demonic disciples to engage in a form of clumsy misdirection only those with minimal cognitive skills would be fooled by. Such desperate attempts are necessary, presumably because The Boss has much to divert public attention from: the Epstein files which, despite prior promises, he is refusing to release, fueling all kinds of speculation about his own involvement with the late pedophie. Then there was his transparently bad decision to fire the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Erika McEntarfer, because he didn't like the less-than-flattering job numbers released. 

The raging tyrant has turned to his disciples for relief, most notably  deputy chief of staff, Stephen Miller, and attorney general, Pam Bondi, working in tandem to create a new 'reality', one asserting criminal culpability in the 'Russiagate hoax'.  Out of deference to those of delicate constitution, here is but a brief clip of Herr Miller:

"The Russia collusion hoax against President Trump remains the single greatest hoax and the greatest assault on our democracy in the history of this country," says @StephenM. "It was a coup, and I'm using that term literally ... One egregious felony after another."

Now that the talking points have been established, which the MAGATS will likely see as an indisputable truth, Pam Bondi is preparing for 'legal' action against the foul perpetrators, no doubt paving the way for future show trials.

Attorney General Pam Bondi convened a grand jury investigation centered around the “Russiagate” probe on Monday, the latest bid by Donald Trump to wage war against Barack Obama for the FBI investigation of his first presidential campaign.

The direction by Bondi does not mean that charges for Obama or members of his team are imminent. Instead, the move allows prosecutors to issue embarrassing subpoenas and gather testimony, while launching a fishing expedition. Attorney General Pam Bondi convened a grand jury investigation centered around the “Russiagate” probe on Monday, the latest bid by Donald Trump to wage war against Barack Obama for the FBI investigation of his first presidential campaign. 

This action is entirely at odds with the truth, as earlier investigation showed.

According to Gabbard, the Democratic administration’s top intelligence chiefs, at the behest of the president and his team, changed those conclusions to insinuate Russia’s support for Donald Trump.

But in reality, the intelligence assessments released by the ODNI at the time were backed up by the verifiable facts of the matter: Russian-backed hackers targeted the Democratic National Committee’s servers and published information in an effort to sabotage Hillary Clinton’s campaign and sow discord while performing no similar feats against Republicans or Trump’s campaign. 

Trump and other members of his administration have suggested that Obama and others are guilty of “treason” over the supposed doctoring of reports. Gabbard claimed that a “coup” was launched by the 44th president, whose successor went on to gather his supporters in Washington where they attacked the United States Capitol in 2021 after he lost the election.

In the Benighted States of America, truth, justice and morality are under constant attack. Export more, and much worse, in the upcoming months.