I reject the framing of DEI as a “right buzzword.” Don’t let them co-opt it.

Unless the story is completely fabricated, I don’t see an angle here. If anything, the slant of the article is pro-DEI, which is…not what I would expect from American propaganda in 2025.

I would imagine the devil’s in the details.

Who’s assessing the artifacts to make that determination?

Relevance to this story? What’s the grand conspiracy in this case?

It’s really not that complicated. If a typical organization is presented with two equally-qualified candidates, one of whom is a minority (of any kind, not just a racial minority), the organization will hire the non-minority candidate nearly every time. DEI policies exist to combat that sort of institutional bigotry.

I think the only path forward is for journalists to get serious about defining and protecting their job. No government is going to step in to do it because of the optics, but many sectors have colleges that define and enforce standards of behaviour.

It’s time for journalists to step up and do the same.

I don’t doubt that this is true on balance

I know the questions keep coming up (and it’s totally fair play), but…I don’t have the impression that it’s had any sort of impact on the electorate. Maybe I’m wrong.

I don’t doubt that this is true on balance, but the Danielle Smith jokes practically write themselves…

I guess it’s possible that it was a Liberal plant, but it has big “man vandalizes own house” energy.

Just the flexibility to get it done on your own terms, really.

I’m by no means defending this move (it’s dumb and bad, just like…everything else the US government does these days), but they seem to be delegating the inspections to individual states.

I assume at least some states will maintain good standards, and Canada will have to pay close attention to which states those are.

All told, I was in line for about 90(!) minutes yesterday. That was at least partly the luck of the draw, though - my polling place had two polling stations open, and the other one had a line the fraction of the length of mine.

I’m standing in line at the polls right now, and all I can say is to be prepared for long lines.

Is keep getting wrong the same as lying?

Probably. But no journalistic outlet is going to call it “lying” without proof that the leaders don’t sincerely believe what they’re saying.

And that sort of proof is hard to get.

From what I’m seeing on Mastodon, there was some kind of altercation between Ezra Levant and other reporters…

Pure, unsourced conjecture.

• In early April 2025, a rumor began to spread that U.S. President Donald Trump had backed down on tariffs because Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney forced his hand by orchestrating a collective sale of U.S. bonds.

• It is true that Trump paused tariffs after the price of U.S. Treasurys began to drop at the same time as the price of U.S. stocks plummeted, an event known as a synchronized sell-off. In fact, after he announced the pause, Trump said, “bond markets are tricky.”

• However, the claim that Carney had orchestrated the bond sell-off alongside the European Union and Japan was not confirmed. It came from the newsletter of Dean Blundell, a staunch supporter of Carney in Canada’s next federal election and a former “shock jock.”

• Snopes has contacted Blundell, asking him to explain how he came upon this story and to clarify some points from his allegations.

• Snopes also contacted Carney’s office asking for confirmation of Blundell’s claims. Lastly, we have reached out to several fixed income analysts to inquire about the plausibility of such a scheme.

Those requirements are designed to allow Quebec’s provincial party a seat at the table

Certainly, and I’ve already expressed how I feel about that. But I get it - they’re able to leverage the electoral system to their advantage, and have in fact been the Official Opposition at times.

I certainly agree that it’s very questionable to have an explicitly regional party in the federal debates, but for clarity’s sake, the criteria are 2/3 of the following:

• having at least one sitting MP who’s been elected as a member of that party

• having at least four per cent national support in opinion polls

• running candidates in at least 90 per cent of all ridings

After pulling the candidates, the Green Party only meets one of these criteria (the first).

Yeah, from what I’ve gathered from previous articles on the topic, CSIS does not have boots-on-the-ground spies, foreign assets, or the infrastructure to support them.