The Media is the Message > IDF - Most moral army in history, but you would never know it by legacy media

 

High Level Military Group Concludes That the IDF is

‘the Most Moral Army in History’

Aug 10, 2024 4:00 pm By Hugh Fitzgerald

We have already heard this conclusion — that the IDF is “the most moral army in history” — from both Colonel Richard Kemp, who commanded British forces in Afghanistan, and from West Point Professor of Urban Warfare John Spencer. 

Now the High Level Military Group, which is made up of retired chiefs of staff, senior generals, and cabinet ministers from NATO countries, have issued their own report on how the IDF has been conducting its war in Gaza, and they too, have concluded that the IDF is “the most moral army in history.” 

The description of their study, and their conclusions, can be found here: 

Israel’s army is not only moral. It is the most moral army in history.

Elder of Ziyon, August 9, 2024:

The High Level Military Group is “an independent body of former chiefs of staff, senior military officers and cabinet ministers from NATO countries with many decades of expertise at the highest level of land, air and sea conflict and the legality thereof,”  that includes members  from the United States, United Kingdom, Italy, France, Spain, Finland, and the Netherlands.

The HLMG has filed an amicus curiae brief to the International Criminal Court, describing why the ICC charges against Israel of intentional starvation and unlawful killing in Gaza are false.

Not just false, but egregiously and absurdly false.

Within the report, the experts list no less than three ways that Israel conducts itself in war that are unmatched by any other military in history.

On the “starvation” charge, they describe in detail Israel’s efforts to bring aid into Gaza and then conclude:

It is our considered military opinion that the State of Israel and the IDF are and have been since the inception of this operation complying in good faith with all international legal obligations to facilitate the provision of humanitarian aid into Gaza. Based on our experience and knowledge, Israel is facilitating aid to a level we have not seen in our own militaries and we are not aware of our forces’ efforts or even capabilities to conduct similar operations. We do not believe any other armed forces have ever made such efforts, or achieved such success, in facilitating aid delivery to civilians in enemy territory while still engaged in active hostilities in that same operational environment. It is our professional view that accusations of an intent to starve civilians by the Israeli Prime Minister and Minister of Defence are unsupported by all available evidence, most importantly by the actual conduct of IDF operations in and around Gaza.

On the unlawful killing charge, they add another example where Israel does things to protect civilians above and beyond every military in recorded history:

One of the most pertinent examples of innovative civilian risk mitigation is the Civilian Harm Mitigation Cell (CHMC), established prior to the conflict and in operation during every phase. The CHMC integrates digital map technology, updated hourly, and intelligence to show population density in each area of Gaza. Every IDF operations centre has access to this map which is cross-checked with real-time air surveillance to verify civilian presence.

IDF targeting of air strikes is made in conjunction with the CHMC and influenced by civilian population density in a particular area. Selection of munition size is based on the nature of the military target, intelligence regarding enemy presence and the proximity of civilians.

It is our professional opinion that such a unit is extremely unusual and we are not aware of any other military with a comparable risk mitigation methodology. We assess this is an unprecedented measure, along with millions of leaflet drops, phone calls, text and voice messages, to help commanders prevent or minimise risk to civilian life. How such innovative efforts align with an allegation of the defendants in this matter directing the IDF to intentionally attack civilians is perplexing.

Finally, they note how Israel’s internal investigations of incidents during wartime also operate at a speed and efficiency never before seen by any other army, ever:

During our assessment we visited the IDF Fact Finding and Assessment Mechanism which examines any incident that could raise a charge of possible illegal conduct or military procedural misconduct (except for incidents that immediately raise suspicion of criminal misconduct, which are sent directly for criminal investigation). There are currently approximately 300 incidents being actively investigated by the FFAM, with many more which they have received initial information about. To our knowledge no other armed forces have established such a permanent system but would benefit from doing so.

In respect to the speed of the FFAM’s processes, Australia’s Special Advisor, Air Chief Marshal Binskin, reporting on the World Central Kitchen strike, stated: ‘…the ADF [Australian Defence Force] could not have imposed equivalent reprimands as quickly as the IDF CGS [Chief of General Staff] was able to.’

By way of comparison, we draw your attention to war crimes investigations by comparable armed forces in Australia and the UK. The Brereton report was commissioned by the Inspector-General of the ADF to investigate war crimes by Australian forces committed between 2005 and 2016 . The investigation began in 2016 and reported in 2020. Charges were not brought until 2023.

The Haddon-Cave Independent Inquiry was commissioned by the UK Ministry of Defence to investigate alleged special forces war crimes in Afghanistan committed between 2010 and 2013. It was established in 2022 and is ongoing. These two inquiries give a clear parallel to Israeli investigations of war crimes and demonstrate the length of time required to give an equitable, legal outcome in such investigations….

It will be fascinating to see how the president of the Israel-bashing International Criminal Court deals with this report from the High Level Military Group that methodically contradicts every one of the charges leveled at Israel by the South Africans before the ICC. This report by the HLMG is being filed as an amicus brief, and coming from such a distinguished group, cannot be ignored. It will be fascinating to see how the ICC, consumed as it is with anti-Israel animus, tries to deny the HLMG’s conclusion, that the IDF “is the most moral army in the history of warfare.”

===============================================================================================

Corruption is Everywhere > What is Harvard teaching our kids? Not moral values, that's for sure.

 

Top Harvard official accused of ethics breach

over $42M paid to his own law firm

By 

Social Links forIsabel Vincent

Published March 7, 2024

 Updated March 7, 2024, 9:09 a.m. ET

One of Harvard’s former top officials was named in two ethics complaints over the Ivy League college paying his law firm nearly $42 million while he served on the school’s governing board.

William Lee and Harvard University could face an investigation by the Massachusetts attorney general over whether the school was right to pay his firm, Wilmer Hale, between 2011 and 2022, when he was serving as one of the school’s most senior leaders.

The Post has learned that the Massachusetts Board of Bar Overseers and the state’s attorney general have been sent formal complaints accusing Lee of “possible conflict of interest by trustee/director with pecuniary interest in service provider to Harvard.”

And it took 13 years for someone to speak up about this. Surely, the other governors knew what was happening, or are Harvard graduates complete idiots?

6

A law firm connected to William Lee, a former chair of the Harvard Corporation, billed the school nearly $42 million while Lee was on the school’s governing board.Wilmer Hale LLP

Both complaints have been obtained by The Post.

Lee’s most recent known work for Harvard included helping former president Claudine Gay prepare for her disastrous appearance before a Congressional committee probing antisemitism on campus in December when she said that whether calling for the death of Jews broke college rules depended on “context,” according to the Harvard Crimson.

The embattled Gay, the school’s first black president, resigned in January amid allegations of plagiarism, after less than six months in the top job.

Lee, who graduated from Harvard in 1972, served on the university’s board of directors from July 2010 to June 2022, and was senior fellow of the Harvard Corporation from 2014 to 2022.

During the time that he served on the Harvard Corporation board, Lee was also a partner at the powerhouse law firm. He was co-managing partner between 2004 and 2011.

Wilmer Hale served as Harvard’s outside counsel in the landmark affirmative action case “Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard,” which was filed in 2014.

Lee served as Harvard’s outside counsel during the trial court phase of the case, until the initial verdict in 2019.

The case was decided by the US Supreme Court in June 2023 in the plaintiff’s favor.

During the 2019 fiscal year alone, Wilmer Hale billed Harvard more than $11 million, according to the complaint to the AG.

As of June 2023, Harvard had paid out more than $27 million in legal fees related to the case, Bloomberg reported, in which the high court held that race-based affirmative action programs in college admissions violates the Fourteenth Amendment.

“Considering the vast resources entrusted to Harvard as a Massachusetts nonprofit corporation, do the circumstances with Bill Lee and Wilmer Hale raise questions about whether Harvard and its board have the necessary corporate governance procedures to avoid conflicts of interest, conflicts of duty or similar issues,” the complaint, which is anonymous, to the Massachusetts attorney general says.

The complaint alleges that “as a member/chairperson of the board, Bill Lee oversaw the Harvard officers and departments that normally manage relationships with outside law firms, such as the university’s general counsel.”

Lee stepped down from the Harvard board in May 2022 and in an interview with the Harvard Gazette, said the things he will miss most are “the personal relationships” with a host of the school’s leaders, including its general counsel.

Despite billing Wilmer Hale millions for legal work between 2011 and 2019, Harvard’s board of directors consistently answered “No” to a question on its annual disclosures to the state about whether a trustee had “a material financial interest” that was not reported as compensation, public documents show.

Harvard answered “No” to a question on an annual form required by the Attorney General in 2019 on whether a trustee or director had “a material financial interest” that was not reported as compensation despite paying William Lee’s firm $11 million that year.Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Office of the Attorney General

The Massachusetts Board of Bar Overseers told The Post Wednesday that they could neither confirm nor deny whether a complaint against an attorney had been received.

“It’s confidential,” the spokesperson said.

A spokesman for the Massachusetts AG said their office had received the complaint “but cannot comment on, confirm, or deny an investigation.”

Neither Lee nor Harvard returned requests for comment Wednesday.

Ozzone 9-8 > Moral Choices. Are you happy to be of no Account in the Kingdom of God, or will you let Jesus bring you to glory?

 

Military Madness > Will Russia send troops to Latin America? Ben & Jerry's - Prepare for peace, not war; General explains moral responsibility for war; USAF paying for massacre

..

Russia comments on possibility of sending troops

to Latin America

The remarks come after Putin agreed to increase military cooperation

with Nicaragua, Cuba, and Venezuela

By Layla Guest

Venezuela's airborne combat vehicle during the Airborne Platoon contest at the 2016 International Army Games.

© Sputnik / Georgiy Zimarev

Russian soldiers could be sent to Nicaragua under laws already in place in the Central American nation, Moscow’s ambassador in Managua has argued amid a new standoff with Washington over the prospect of the Kremlin stepping up its military presence in the region.

Speaking to RIA Novosti on Friday, Alexander Khokholikov, who also serves as the envoy to Honduras and El Salvador, commented on the possibility of hosting overseas forces within Nicaragua's borders.

“The government passes a law annually on the foreign military presence in Nicaraguan territory,” he explained. “It provides for the possibility of the transit and presence of servicemen, as well as military equipment from a number of countries, including Russia and, incidentally, the US, for the exchange of experience in the field of military cooperation, joint exercises, and activities in the fight against drug trafficking and organized crime.”

According to the diplomat, military cooperation between Moscow and Managua “is not directed against third countries,” despite a worsening row with the US over the potential deployments.

Khokholikov added that “regardless of the current political situation in the world and the opportunistic outbursts of tension by the West in relations with Moscow, an increase in Russian-Nicaraguan cooperation in trade, economic, cultural, and humanitarian spheres, as well as in the military field is envisaged.”

His remarks come after Russian President Vladimir Putin agreed last month to strengthen partnerships with the leaders of Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua in a range of spheres, including stepping up military cooperation.

Earlier that month, Moscow’s Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov refused to rule out sending troops to Latin America, saying only that “it’s the American style to have several options for its foreign and military policy.”

“The president of Russia has spoken multiple times on the subject of what the measures could be, for example involving the Russian Navy, if things are set on the course of provoking Russia, and further increasing the military pressure on us by the US,” he added.

Washington, however, hit out at the suggestion that Moscow’s troops could be stationed in Venezuela and Cuba, which is barely 100 miles off the US coast. In mid-January, United States National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan warned that “If Russia were to move in that direction, we would deal with it decisively.”

Oh! The hypocrisy!

Tensions between the US and Russia have been strained in recent months, with Western leaders sounding the alarm that Moscow’s armed forces are gearing up to invade Ukraine. The Kremlin, however, has repeatedly stated that it has no intention of attacking its neighbor, and has instead looked to gain written guarantees ruling out NATO expansion closer to the country’s borders - a request which has since been turned down.

============================================================================================

God forgive me for agreeing with Ben and Jerry's on anything other than their ice cream.

Ben & Jerry's issues Russia warning

The ice cream maker decried NATO’s buildup in Eastern Europe, pointing out to the US president that one “cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war”

Ice cream is for sale in a Ben & Jerry's store in Miami. © AFP / Joe Raedle

Politically-charged ice cream company Ben & Jerry’s has decided to make its stance on the ongoing tensions over Ukraine known, slamming an apparent lack of logic in US President Joe Biden’s approach to the crisis.

“You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war,” the makers of ice cream, frozen yogurt, sorbet and non-dairy products tweeted on Friday.

Logic is not the strong suit for left-leaning people, but this makes good sense. Go figure!

Ben & Jerry’s addressed Biden directly, calling on him to “de-escalate tensions and work for peace rather than prepare for war.”

“Sending thousands more US troops to Europe in response to Russia’s threats against Ukraine only fans the flame of war,” the left-leaning company insisted.

Earlier this week, the White House authorized the deployment of an additional 2,000 American troops to Eastern Europe in order to reassure its allies in the face of a claimed Russian ‘invasion’ of Ukraine. The first cargo planes with American soldiers and hardware began arriving in Germany on Saturday.

Contrary to what Ben & Jerry’s has said, Moscow hasn’t been making any actual threats towards Ukraine, and has denied all allegations that it’s planning to attack its neighbor as groundless attempts to provoke “hysteria.”

According to Russia, Washington and its allies are to blame for the escalation as their deliveries of arms to Ukraine, and NATO’s continued eastward expansion, have only encouraged Kiev to search for a military way out of its ‘frozen’ conflict with the secessionist Republics of Donetsk and Lugansk in the country’s south-east.

The new deployments of US troops to Eastern Europe is a “destructive step” that would only “delight” the government in Kiev and “reduce the margin for political solutions,” Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko said.

On Sunday, Israel’s Justice Minister Gideon Sa’ar said he’d decided to use the country’s boycott law to sanction Ben & Jerry's and its parent company, Unilever, amid a growing row with the ice cream producer.

The move, which still needs approval from the Knesset, is mooted as a response to Ben & Jerry's decision last year to stop selling its ice cream in the ‘Occupied Palestinian Territories’ of the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

“The State of Israel must fight against boycott attempts, which are part of a broader strategy to delegitimize the Jewish state,” Sa’ar declared.

The 2011 legislation allows Israeli authorities to deny benefits, including tax exemptions or participation in government contracts, to individuals and organizations responsible for boycotting Israel or for urging others to do so.

============================================================================================

There is no such thing as a moral war, when the purpose of that war is to move war inventories.

US explains ‘moral responsibility’ of weapons producers

General blames Iran for Yemeni drones striking UAE

General Kenneth McKenzie, head of the US Central Command, has accused Iran of being “morally responsible” for drone and missile strikes by the Houthi militia of Yemen against the UAE and Saudi Arabia.

McKenzie is currently visiting the United Arab Emirates to give Abu Dhabi “assurance” that the US stands with the Gulf country against what he described as a threat from Tehran.

The US ordered a squadron of F-22 fighters and the guided-missile destroyer USS Cole to the Emirates last week, after a series of strikes by drones and missiles launched by the Houthis.

“The equipment they are firing is certainly Iranian,” McKenzie said, referring to the Houthis. “If Iran didn’t approve this specific attack, they’re certainly morally responsible for it.”

The Houthis have taken responsibility for the strikes, calling them reprisals for the bombing of Yemen conducted by Saudi Arabia and the UAE since March 2015 and saying they will continue until the invaders withdraw.

The US has backed the Saudi-led coalition, echoing its allegation that the Houthis – who are Shia Muslims, just like Iranians – are a “proxy” of Tehran. McKenzie’s choice of words opened him up to criticism of the US role in the Yemen conflict, however.

“Logically then, the US is also morally responsible for the [tens of thousands] killed with US weapons, since the US sells +$60 [billion] of weapons to the UAE and Saudi,” tweeted Trita Parsi of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, an anti-interventionist think tank in Washington.

In the minds of American war oligarchs, what're a few tens of thousands of lives compared to the billions of dollars weapons manufacturers profit?

Bombs and missiles supplied by the US have been repeatedly used by the Saudi-led coalition to bomb Yemen. A video filmed after the January 21 attack that killed dozens, including children, showed a munition fragment bearing the manufacturer code for Raytheon, a major US missile-maker. The current US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin took a seat on Raytheon’s board after retiring from Central Command in 2016.

Lloyd Austin - from Raytheon's Board to Secretary of Defence!!!??? Seriously??? Shouldn't he be Secretary of Offence?

McKenzie’s theory about the Houthi attacks was that Iran was blaming the UAE for losing influence in Iraq after the recent elections. “Iran thought they had a political way forward to eject the United States from Iraq … now I think they’re grasping at alternatives, and some of those alternatives may be kinetic and violent,” he said, according to the Washington Post.

However, the Post also described blaming Iran as a way of bypassing objections in the US Congress to supporting the Saudi-led war in Yemen, saying there was “greater acceptance” among lawmakers of deploying US troops, ships and airplanes to “monitor and stave off Iranian aggression.”

Beijing responds to $100mn US-Taiwan arms deal

Taiwan missile upgrades pose a threat to China’s “sovereignty and security,”

officials say

FILE PHOTO. © AP Photo/Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Jeremy Graham

Beijing strongly condemned a possible $100mn deal between the US and Taiwan, aimed at improving and sustaining its missile system.

During a Tuesday press conference, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said the US government should immediately ditch its plans to sell military equipment and services to Taiwan.

He urged Washington to respect the “one China” principle and stressed that an arms deal between the US and Taiwan is a threat to China’s sovereignty and security interests, as well as ties between China and the US.

“China will take appropriate and forceful measures to firmly safeguard its sovereignty and security interests,” he stated, as quoted by Reuters. While asked about concrete measures China could take, he told the reporters to “wait and see.”

On Monday, the US Defense Security Cooperation Agency said it had approved and delivered the required certification for a sale of $100mn worth of equipment and services to Taiwan in order to “sustain, maintain, and improve” its Patriot Air Defense System. The agency said the sale would “help improve the security of the recipient and assist in maintaining political stability” in the region.

Taiwan’s Foreign Ministry highly welcomed the decision, saying that the island would strengthen its national security and deepen its cooperation with the United States “in the face of China’s continued military expansion and provocative actions.”

China considers Taiwan to be part of its territory and has repeatedly accused ‘secessionists’ of ramping up tensions by receiving military aid from abroad. Like most countries, the US has no official diplomatic relations with Taiwan, but acts as its biggest backer, and provides the island nation with various means of defense.

The US sold weapons systems, including missiles, sensors, and artillery with a total value of $1.8 billion, to Taiwan in 2020. As a response, Chinese officials sanctioned US weapons companies, including Lockheed Martin, Boeing Defense, and Raytheon. However, what form these sanctions had taken was not disclosed to the media.

US military ordered to pay $230 million to mass shooting victims

A judge has accused the US government of trying to eschew responsibility

for a mass shooting in a church perpetrated by an ex-airman

FILE PHOTO: A makeshift memorial for those who were killed in the Sutherland Springs

Baptist Church shooting in Sutherland Springs, Texas. ©  AP / Eric Gay

A judge has ordered the US military to hand over more than $230 million to survivors and family members of those killed in a 2017 mass shooting in Texas, in which a former Air Force member took the lives of 26 people. The incident became the deadliest mass shooting in the state’s history.

In a Monday ruling, US District Judge Xavier Rodriguez said the government must pay out the sum over its failure to report prior domestic violence charges for ex-airman Devin Patrick Kelley, adding that this allowed him to go on to purchase firearms and commit the lethal shooting spree in the First Baptist Church of Sutherland Springs in November 2017 without tipping off a violent offenders database.

“The losses and pain these families have experienced is immeasurable,” Rodriguez said in the decision, accusing the government of attempting to “obfuscate its responsibility.”

The same judge previously ruled in July that the Air Force was 60% responsible for the shooting and Kelley only 40%, arguing the service branch did not enter the man’s charge into the database, which is used for background checks for firearms buyers and could have prevented him from obtaining a weapon. 

Military records show Kelley was court-martialed for domestic violence – including striking and choking his wife, as well as abusing his stepson using “force likely to produce death or grievous bodily harm” – to which he pleaded guilty in 2012. He was later admitted to a mental health facility in New Mexico and briefly escaped before he was finally convicted and sentenced, ultimately being discharged from the military in 2014.

Kelley killed 26 people and injured another 22 in the shooting, which erupted during a Sunday church service in a town outside San Antonio, Texas. Following a police chase, he later took his own life.

A 2018 Defense Department Inspector General’s report concluded that the Air Force missed no fewer than six separate opportunities to alert authorities to Kelley’s history of violence, acknowledging that the military’s “failures had drastic consequences and should not have occurred.”

Failed State Made in the USA: Ex-President of Honduras and Coup Victim Zelaya Tells All

I have complained many times about how US corporations have raped Central Americans and many South Americans of their natural resources. And instead of making them wealthy, they are made poorer. Anyone who attempts to change the situation for the betterment of the people is liable to be removed by any means, often being replaced by autocrats completely devoid of conscience. 

I thought I was referring to well in the past, but, it appears that it is still going on in the 21st century. In fact, we can easily blame much of the current migrant crisis on America's southern border on America's political and financial interference in Central America. 

If the USA is going to be the moral leader of the world, it first has to present itself a moral.

Zelaya at a protest against the US-backed Hernandez government © Reuters / Jorge Cabrera

President Jose Manuel Zelaya of Honduras was deposed from power in a military coup after joining a progressive alliance of Latin American leaders and he has “absolutely no doubts” the US was behind his ouster, he tells RT America.

“The US warned me: If you sign the Bolivarian Alternative to the Americas (ALBA), you’re going to have problems with the US. I signed it, and six months later, I had problems,” Zelaya told RT America’s Rick Sanchez.

They kicked me out.

Washington “wave[s] their flags of human rights abroad, but they only apply those concepts to those they consider to be adversaries,” Zelaya says, pointing to his record of poverty reduction and economic growth – “I had the best indicators of human development in Honduran history!”

Because of the company he kept – working with Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, Bolivia’s Evo Morales, Ecuador’s Rafael Correa, and other progressive US bogeymen to further Honduras’ economic development – the US “had an allergic reaction” and moved to take him out, he says.

“I didn’t have problems with the US,” Zelaya insists. “They simply didn’t accept the competition, because these transnational companies live off monopoly, they live off concessions. When you give them competition in the free market, they stop being capitalist. They become retrograde, authoritarian, and they play coups, wars, invasions.”

Zelaya was removed from power in 2009, deposed by heavily armed soldiers who came to his home while he was in his pajamas, in a coup Hillary Clinton’s State Department refused to call a coup.

Honduras has been sinking into chaos ever since. His progressive reforms such as building schools, adopting a pension system for the elderly and raising the minimum wage have been rolled back, and homicide rates had soared 50 percent by 2011. Trade unionists, journalists, judges, human rights and environmental activists have been targeted for extrajudicial killings.

His efforts to return to power have also been thwarted, once again by the US, he says. After his party won the 2017 election with nearly three quarters of the votes counted, it was the US ambassador who appeared with 5,000 boxes of ballots to declare another candidate the winner. Even the pro-US Organization of American States called for a new round of elections. Instead, the government suspended the constitution and imposed 10 days of martial law, after which the US recognized the rigged results.

“And with that, they impose a dictatorship in Honduras… that’s what we’re protesting against.”

Zelaya says the US sees Honduras “not as a colony or a province. They see us as an empty landscape where they invest and where they impose their rules.”

He does not blame only the Americans for the suffering of Honduras, however.

The Hondurans are guilty, the ones that bow down and kiss the boots of the US, the US military, or kiss up to the capitalist chiefs of Wall Street.

Corruption is Everywhere - Certainly in the Canadian Prime Minister's Office

A Prime Minister's Office drunk on its own arrogance: Robyn Urback

Six months ago, Trudeau told Canadians that a report his office pressured the AG was 'false.' He lied

Robyn Urback · for CBC News Opinion 

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said a report that his office tried to pressure Jody Wilson-Raybould into intervening

in the SNC-Lavalin case was 'false.' It was not. (Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press)

It's hard to fathom what Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was thinking on the morning of Feb. 7, when he stood before reporters and categorically declared, 

"The allegations in the Globe story are false."

The Globe and Mail was the first to report that Trudeau's office attempted to pressure his justice minister and attorney general, Jody Wilson-Raybould, into intervening in the corruption and fraud case of SNC-Lavalin.

That day, he knew that Wilson-Raybould, who he'd shuffled out of the Justice Ministry three weeks earlier, had been repeatedly approached by members of the Prime Minister's Office about her reluctance to get involved.

He was told by Wilson-Raybould herself at a meeting in September 2018 of her concerns about his staff attempting to interfere in a criminal matter (though he would later say he couldn't specifically recall the remark).

And surely he knew, or should have known, that repeatedly reminding the attorney general of the potentially cataclysmic political and economic costs of failing to secure a remediation agreement for an important Quebec company constituted inappropriate pressure. 

Nevertheless, there was clearly a concerted effort to see her reconsider her position. That much was fact, and Trudeau knew it on February 7. 

Power & Politics✔

@PnPCBC

 Trudeau:  "The allegations in the Globe story are false. Neither the current nor the previous attorney general was ever directed by me or by anyone in my office to take a decision in this matter." #cdnpoli

Yet he stood before reporters that morning and called the report "false."

Not "misleading." Not "unfair." Not "half the story." 

"False." Wrong. Fake news. 

How 4 ex-Supreme Court justices got caught up in SNC-Lavalin affair

Trudeau vs. Dion: How the PM and ethics commissioner differ on the SNC-Lavalin affair

That was, in fact, a lie. The PMO did press Wilson-Raybould to seek a remediation agreement for SNC-Lavalin, and that pressure was inappropriate and contrary to the Conflict of Interest Act, as Ethics Commissioner Mario Dion concluded in his report on the affair, published Wednesday.

Trudeau knew that the Globe's reporting couldn't reasonably be called "false," even if perhaps he believed it somewhat skewed. But he lied and told Canadians it was wrong anyway. 

Cozy relationship

With hindsight, it seems silly to make such an unequivocal statement about something easily verified. But a belief in one's own righteousness, along with a record of previous political infallibility, can make a prime minister and his staff do some very silly things. 

To wit: For months, the prime minister insisted that actions taken by his office were always in the interest of Canadians; it wasn't about currying favour with powerful Quebec company but simply about keeping good jobs in Canada.

Dion's report, however, chronicles an awfully cozy relationship between the PMO and SNC-Lavalin in which the two seem less like government-and-lobbyist than players on the same team.

Remediation agreement SNC-Lavalin's idea

In fact, it was SNC-Lavalin that suggested, back in February 2018, that a new remediation agreement regime — one that could benefit them — be included in the upcoming budget, in the interest of expediency. The government obliged: an amendment to the Criminal Code was included in the budget implementation bill and received royal assent within months.

Is Trudeau in for another hit in the polls because of the SNC-Lavalin ethics report?

5 things we learned from Ethics Commissioner Mario Dion's report on Justin Trudeau

That summer, Ben Chin, the chief of staff to the minister of finance, reportedly tried to get an update on the status of a remediation agreement on behalf of an anxious SNC-Lavalin. Chin was told by Wilson-Raybould's office that an inquiry itself could be perceived as improper interference on the independent nature of the prosecution service. 

And in December 2018, PMO senior adviser Mathieu Bouchard exchanged text messages with an SNC-Lavalin representative who wanted an update on a dinner conversation between Wilson-Raybould and then-principal secretary Gerald Butts — the one in which Wilson-Raybould said she told the PMO to stop pressuring her office about SNC-Lavalin. Bouchard reported to the rep that the door was still open to a remediation agreement (it was not). 

'Someone like' Beverley McLachlin

Dion's report also revealed that while Trudeau and Butts had been imploring Wilson-Raybould to seek an opinion from "someone like" former Supreme Court chief justice Beverley McLachlin, discussions had already taken place between McLachlin, SNC-Lavalin's lawyer and the PMO (as well as another retired Supreme Court justice). 

Butts failed to mention that fact during his testimony before the justice committee back in March. Instead, he testified that, "All we ever asked the attorney general to do was consider a second opinion." Perhaps if he had more time he would have added: "And we already vetted and approved those second opinions on her behalf."

'I take responsibility,' Trudeau says in wake of damning report on SNC-Lavalin ethics violation

Timeline: SNC-Lavalin and Jody Wilson-Raybould

Trudeau welcomes ethics probe but won't cooperate

(Trudeau always says what people want to hear, and then does what he wants. He said yesterday that he accepted responsibility, but then refused to admit that he did anything wrong and refused to apologize).

On top of it all, we learned that despite the "welcome" Trudeau publicly offered Dion's probe, the ethics commissioner, in fact, encountered some trouble accessing relevant information and testimonies.

Call these lies-by-omission. Or maybe half-truths. Together, they're a chronicle of a PMO drunk on its own arrogance, so convinced of it own moral virtue that it can rationalize trading text messages with a criminally charged organization over a pressure campaign on the attorney general.

Liberals block new SNC-Lavalin ethics probe as Trudeau insists his team is 'more united than ever'

This is a leadership, as we have since learned, that will kick members out of caucus for having the audacity to speak out against the prime minister, and will lie to Canadians about the veracity of a news report that has since proven true.

And it's a prime minister who, when asked if he will apologize for it all, chooses to respond with an answer to a question no one asked: "I can't apologize for defending Canadian jobs." As if, six months later, anyone is buying those lines anymore.

A quick summary

So, SNC-Lavalin, a major engineering and construction company, a global player, got caught paying graft to the son of Muammar Qaddafi for a Libyan project. Being convicted would mean SNC could not bid on federal Canadian projects for up to 10 years, although they could still bid on provincial projects. They have already been blacklisted by the World Bank.

So, SNC lobbies the Trudeau government to pass a new law to allow SNC to pay a fine without being held criminally responsible, and therefore not losing its ability to bid on federal Canadian projects. The Liberal government thought this was a great idea and immediately implemented the new law by hiding it in the back pages of the 2018 spring budget. A law which would allow wealthy and powerful people and corporations to avoid facing justice.

All is good in SNC's world until they heard that Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Reybould was not onboard with the plan. SNC was unhappy; Trudeau was unhappy - many of SNC's employees lived in his own riding in Montreal. If Trudeau was unhappy, everyone in the PMO and the Finance Minister's office was unhappy. The law they snuck through Parliament was for nothing if JWR didn't play along.

Consequently, Trudeau shuffled JWR out of the Justice portfolio. He needed a minister to retire in order to do that and his old friend, Scott Brison, took the bait. It's hard to say what Brison got out of the deal, but if the timing seems too coincidental to be coincidence, that's because it is. That resulted in the JWR shuffle. Maybe I should put that to music.

Robyn's column details the rest of the story very well.

Pride and arrogance and a typical Liberal attitude that 'the end justifies the means', should spell the end of this government. But I fear there are too many Trudeau supporters who also believe 'the end justifies the means', that he will finish, at least, in second place in the October elections. If so, he will form the next government as all parties in the House besides Conservatives are far-left and will not coalesce with a Conservative Prime Minister. The only other party that might cooperate with the Conservatives is the fledgling People's Party - a party that just might bring honesty and integrity to the House.