SECRET Toronto War Council EXPOSED: Obama, Soros & Carney's Desperate Plan Against Trump

China urges Canada to break from US influence as PM Carney visits Beijing

The push by Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, who arrives Wednesday, is part of a major rethink as ties sour with the U.S. — the world’s No. 1 economy and long the largest trading partner for Canada by far.

By KEN MORITSUGU
Updated 7:17 AM EST, January 13, 2026

BEIJING (AP) — As Canadian leader Mark Carney arrives in China on Wednesday, his hosts see an opportunity to peel the longtime U.S. ally away from their rival, at least a bit.

China’s state media is calling on the Canadian government to set a foreign policy path independent of the United States — what it calls “strategic autonomy.”

Canada has long been one of America’s closest allies, geographically and otherwise. But Beijing is hoping that President Donald Trump’s economic aggression — and, now, military action — against other countries will erode that longstanding relationship.

The government bristled at former U.S. President Joe Biden’s efforts to strengthen relations with Europe, Australia, India, Canada and others to confront China. Now it sees an opportunity to try to loosen those ties, though it remains cautious about how far that will go.

Carney, for his part, has focused on trade, describing the trip to China as part of a move to forge new partnerships around the world to end Canada’s economic reliance on the American market. Trump has hit Canada with tariffs on its exports to the United States and suggested the vast, resource-rich country could become America’s 51st state.

Nationwide PROTESTS Shuts Down Canada - Carney FURIOUS As Austerity PLan...

The King and the Pope

We learn that in the last few days our King, Charles III, and his wife, paid a ‘surprise visit’ to see the Pope of Rome. This comes hard on the heels of the various favourable comments he has made regarding Islam – comments which have drawn a lot of criticism – particularly as they come from the man who promised to uphold the Protestant Reformed faith at his coronation. That is, therefore, an appointed task to make that particular effort. And so, for exactly the same reason as we criticized his favourable comments about Islam, we therefore criticize this visit to the Pope of Rome.

Now, as far as Rome is concerned, such a welcome is no surprise. After all, Karol Wojtyla, when Pope, held a ‘joint prayer session’ at Assisi with various Muslim leaders in 1986, joining with them in ‘prayer’. And recently the current Pope is reported by the Catholic News Agency to have had a brief, ‘unscheduled meeting’ with the imam of Perugia, Abdel Qader Mohammed. Even Ratzinger, when Pope, did not condemn the meeting. So it is clear that Rome is perfectly happy to hold hands with Islam, despite He whom they claim to worship not even being the same God as the false god of Islam.[1]

It is also clear that for all their ‘fiery words’ about various subjects, Rome has no intention of holding any of its high profile adherents to account for the positions they hold, especially so on morality – for example LifeSite News reports, “Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, a vocal proponent of abortion and euthanasia, was caught on camera receiving Holy Communion — just moments after a visiting priest condemned those very sins in a powerful homily.”[2]

Does America have a Government Controlled Media?

Well, I wouldn't say that we take a random sample to assess whether the country's media is biased.

I have a few 'journalists' in mind...

Let's take a look at 3 young turks of the news media, and analyze their political inclination (persuasion).

• Chuck Todd: Moderator of  NBC's weekly Sunday news program, Meet the Press. 

Before coming to the world of political reporting and analysis, Todd earned practical political experience on initiative campaigns in Florida and various national campaigns based in Washington, D.C.^[7] While in college, Todd worked for the 1992 presidential campaign of Senator Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and later started part-time at The Hotline.

Todd resides in Arlington, Virginia, with his wife, Kristian Denny Todd, daughter Margaret, and son Harrison.^[17] Kristian Denny Todd is a communications professional and cofounder of Maverick Strategies and Mail, which provides direct mail and consulting services for Democratic candidates and progressive causes;^[17][18][19] she was spokesperson for Senator candidate Jim Webb.^[20] He received the honorary degree Doctor of Humane Letters in recognition for his work in journalism from Marymount University during its sixty-second commencement ceremony.^[21]

• George Stephanopoulos:  Today he is chief anchor^[4] and chief political correspondent forABC News, co-anchor of ABC News' Good Morning America, and host of ABC's Sunday morning This Week.^[5]
  Stephanopoulos is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.^[6]

Stephanopoulos was, along with David Wilhelm and James Carville, a leading member of Clinton's 1992 U.S. presidential campaign. His role on the campaign is portrayed in the documentary film The War Room (1993).

At the outset of Clinton's presidency, Stephanopoulos served as the de facto press secretary, briefing the press even though Dee Dee Myers was officially the White House Press Secretary. Later, he was moved to Senior Advisor on Policy and Strategy, when Myers began personally conducting the briefings (following several verbal missteps by Stephanopoulos) and David Gergen was brought in as the new White House Communications Director. The move was largely viewed as a rebuke to Stephanopoulos's handling of public relations during the first six months of the Clinton administration.^{[by whom?][citation needed]}

• Jay Carney: After more than three years as President Obama's press secretary, Jay Carney, 49, joined CNN on Sept. 10. Personally recruited by CNN Worldwide president Jeff Zucker, whom Carney met during the 1990s when wife Claire Shipman was White House correspondent for NBC News, Carney says he's not thinking about a long-term TV career. Rather, the former Time magazine D.C. bureau chief is keeping his options open while sparring with the likes of John McCain.

Prior to his appointment as Press Secretary he was director of communications for Vice President Joe Biden. Carney previously served as Washington Bureau Chief for Time magazine, a post he held from September 2005 until December 2008, and as a regular contributor in the "roundtable" segment of ABC News' This Week with George Stephanopoulos. President Obama announced he had accepted Carney's resignation as press secretary on May 30, 2014.

The White House Press Corps noted that while President Obama promised a more transparent administration, CNN's Brianna Keilar notes, "anyone here can tell you there's less access than under the Bush administration".^[9] Carney proceeded to cite the rise of internet journalism for making photojournalists obsolete, but promised the White House would do everything it could to rectify this problem. ^[11]



Well, does my assertion that these youthful democrats manifest a distorted and biased opinion impress anyone?  It simply baffles me how they can get away with calling themselves journalists, when they should more appropriately be called political agents promoting a party's agenda. 

Well does America have a government controlled media?

Just in case you had any doubts; By simply examining these three newscasters, I hope that now you can see that it does not.

Arsenio.

Resources

Wikipedia
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/obama-alum-jay-carney-new-733404
.
.

White House faces an insurrection over metaphors

By Scott Wilson


October 10 at 2:40 pm




White House press secretary Jay Carney (Kevin Lamarque/Reuters)

It was bound to come.

After weeks of technical discussion over the budget and the debt ceiling, a debate both congressional Republicans and the White House have engaged in with no small measure of obfuscation, the media rebelled Thursday with a message: No more metaphors.

The shouts came in the White House briefing room as Press Secretary Jay Carney responded to questions about whether President Obama would sign a Republican proposal to extend the debt ceiling six weeks — but keep the government shut down.

Speaking a couple hours before congressional Republican leaders were due at the White House for a meeting on the matter, Carney said it remained to be seen whether the opposition would "put the matches and gasoline aside when it comes to threatening default."

He also said the proposed short-term extension of the debt ceiling, which would the government would hit next week without congressional action, was a way for Republicans to keep the "nuclear weapon" of undermining the economy in their "back pocket."

But it was "ransom" — a word Obama has used repeatedly to describe Republican negotiating tactics — that struck the last press corps nerve. The usual briefing room decorum, such as it is, broke down entirely when Carney said finally that Obama would sign a debt-ceiling extension but not if it meant "paying a ransom" to Republicans.

"The president will not pay ransom for ... " Carney began.

"You see it as a ransom, but it's a metaphor that doesn't serve our purposes ... " NPR correspondent Ari Shapiro shouted back with broad support from other confused reporters.

"You guys are just too literal then, right? Carney said.

"We just want to accurately report," Shapiro began before Carney interjected. "We're trying to be accurate in our description of what's going on."

The hot rhetoric from a consciously cool administration has not been the domain only of senior advisers. An exasperated Obama helped set the tone during his news conference last week when he used a torrent of metaphors and angry characterizations to describe the budget standoff and debt ceiling threat.

As Chris Cillizza pointed out last week, Obama used “ransom,” “extortion,” “deadbeat,” “hostage-taking," "blow the whole thing up” and “insane” in his hour-long news conference. Republicans have made clear they don't appreciate the metaphors, either.

But polls show Obama coming out better than House Republicans in this latest fiscal crisis, and White House allies have joined in with metaphors and labels of their own.

In a tweet Thursday sent after House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) announced the debt-extension proposal, David Plouffe, who managed Obama's first presidential campaign and advised him inside the White House during his first term, wrote:

"Maybe throw in a Special Counsel to investigate the President's birthplace and the House GOP will stop committing economic treason."

It's getting rough out there — metaphorically speaking.


Source
.

Tangled Web: Claire Shipman, ABC Reporter/Wife to Top Obama Aide, Headlines White House Events

By Scott Whitlock | June 27, 2013 | 15:36




ABC's Claire Shipman isn't just another pro-Obama journalist. She's also married to Jay Carney, the President's press secretary. If that wasn't enough of a conflict, Jeffrey Lord of the American Spectator recently revealed that Shipman has served on a White House panel in her official capacity as a journalist.

A series of 2010 videotapes shows Shipman's role in the "Council on Women and Girls" and its "Conversation on Workplace Flexibility." Lord explained, "On the stage where Ms. Jarrett was speaking was ABC senior correspondent Claire Shipman, who was about to serve that day as the moderator of the event’s initial panel." The event was closed to White House reporters.

According to Lord:

There is reporter Shipman sitting there in the flesh on stage at an official White House event, sharing the stage literally with Valerie Jarrett and First Lady Michelle Obama, then taking the controls to moderate an official White House event. Then she goes and participates in "Breakout Session 2," where she is yet again a participant in an official panel run by Obama GSA Administrator Johnson, sitting just down and across from the Obama Secretary of Labor. Then she heads back for the final session, sitting in the front row when the President himself comes in to conclude the forum.

But it wasn't just Shipman. Cokie Roberts, an ABC journalist and panelist on This Week, also participated:

But Shipman’s behavior pales with that of Roberts. Singled out by Jarrett at the beginning of the forum, Roberts says nothing until she appears in "Breakout Session 1." At which time, incredibly, the ABC News/NPR journalist says this, bold emphasis mine:

"In recent days I actually sort of showed up on Valerie Jarrett’s doorstep and said ‘We need to talk about this Council on Women and Girls and get it going and move it along. I feel very strongly that these issues are all about productivity and competition for the United States of America….’"

Lord marveld, "Here is a veteran Washington journalist for ABC and NPR saying flat-out that she, Cokie Roberts, 'showed up' on the doorstep of the senior advisor to the President of the United States and demanded that they 'talk about this Council on Women and Girls and get it going and move it along…'"

Even before her husband became Obama's chief spokesman, Shipman gushed over Obama. On October 31, 2008, the journalist wondered how the Democrat's wife dealt with her husband being "lusted after by all of these women out there." After all, according to Shipman, Obama is a "political rock star."

On January 18, 2007, Shipman gushed over the "fluid poetry" of the candidate.



Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/scott-whitlock/2013/06/27/tangled-web-claire-shipman-abc-reporterwife-top-obama-aide-headlines#ixzz2XVf2LKIs

.

White House Spokesman Throws State, CIA Under Bus

12:20 PM, MAY 10, 2013 • BY STEPHEN F. HAYES

At a White House press briefing on May 1, Barack Obama spokesman Jay Carney attempted to frame new reporting on the Benghazi attacks as old news by noting that the attacks had taken place "a long time ago." 

Just ten days have passed since he uttered that infelicitous phrase. But it feels like a long time ago.

National Journal’s Ron Fournier takes a close look at the Obama administration’s unraveling spin in a piece today headlined: “Scrubbing the Truth from Benghazi.”

He describes the process that led to the removal of very carefully phrased references to Ansar al Sharia, an al Qaeda linked group operating in Benghazi and responsible for several previous attacks against western targets, including diplomatic facilities. By the time the Obama administration removed those rather generic references to Ansar al Sharia, the original reporting of their involvement had been bolstered by new intelligence, in multiple streams and from a variety of sources.

And yet, as Fournier puts it: “The paragraph was deleted. The truth was scrubbed.”

That’s important. But Fournier, who covered the White House from the front row of the briefing room for years for the Associated Press, picked up on very carefully phrased language that White House spokesman Jay Carney has used in his most recent explanations of the revision of the talking points.

Fournier writes: “In a statement to ABC, Carney notably insulates the West Wing and not the State Department by saying ‘the only edits made by anyone here at the White House were stylistic and nonsubstantive.’”

It’s an important catch. And there’s more.

The White House is also still assigning responsibility for the talking points mess to the CIA and the intelligence community.

Back on October 10, Carney said: “Again, from the beginning, we have provided information based on the facts that we knew as they became available, based on assessments by the intelligence community — not opinions — assessments by the IC, by the intelligence community. And we have been clear all along that this was an ongoing investigation, that as more facts became available we would make you aware of them as appropriate, and we’ve done that.”

Carney said this week: “What we said and what remains true to this day is that the intelligence community drafted and redrafted these points.”

Is Carney’s claim technically true? Did the intelligence community draft and redraft the talking points? Perhaps. The intelligence community certainly drafted the talking points. And internal Obama administration emails suggest that Mike Morell, the deputy director of the CIA, may have been the official to physically make the changes to previous CIA drafts.

But if Carney is suggesting that the only substantive changes came after suggestions from the intelligence officials – and that seems to be the point of his statement – what he is saying is demonstrably untrue. The most significant and substantive changes came after policymakers at the State Department and White House suggested revisions.

The simple fact that reporters are now having to parse the carefully-phrased utterances of top Obama administration officials – including and especially the president’s chief spokesman – means that, yes, Benghazi is a real scandal.

But the problem isn’t primarily Carney. Here’s what Barack Obama said in an appearance on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart on October 18, 2012:

“When a tragic event like this happens on the other side of the world, immediately a whole bunch of intelligence starts coming in and people try to piece together exactly what happened,” he explained. “And what I have always tried to do is to make sure we just get all the facts, figure out what went wrong, and make sure it doesn’t happen again. And we’re still in that process now. But everything we get, every piece of information we get—as we got it—we laid it out for the American people.”

Every piece of information we get – as we got it – we laid out for the American people.

The opposite is closer to the truth. The evidence is clear that senior Obama administration officials, including top advisers to the president and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, participated in a coordinated effort to keep the real story of Benghazi from the American people.

The question is whether the president will do now what he promised he would do – “a long time ago.”

Jay Carney Gets Amnesia Over His 2008 Column Criticizing Obama [Video]

Don Irvine — September 19, 2012

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney came down with a sudden case of amnesia yesterday when he was asked by a reporter about a column he wrote in 2008 that was critical of comments the candidate made to donors at a private fundraiser.

In 2008 Obama told donors that people in rural, middle America “ they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion.”

Carney said in an interview in 2008 that Obama’s remarks show that he is “urban and urbane” and not particularly well connected to small town America.

But that was 2008, and yesterday after being asked about his column, he claimed that he didn’t remember it, ad declined a reporter’s offer to read it to him.

Carney dismissed any comparison to Obama’s remarks and those of Mitt Romney, who told donors several months ago that he was unlikely to get the support of the 47 percent of Americans who consider themselves victims and rely on the government for support.

I think the president, then candidate, addressed this at the time. This was four years ago. I think the broader point was that his message there and everyone in 2008, and going back to 2004 and every day since has been consistent.

About the only thing that has been consistent about the Obama administration is the 43 consecutive months of 8% plus unemployment. But that, like Carney’s reversal of his opinion of Obama’s 2008 remarks is just another inconvenient truth.

Source: http://www.aim.org/don-irvine-blog/jay-carney-gets-amnesia-over-his-2008-column-criticizing-obama-video/

.

President Obama loves the Olympics

Carney: Obama Attacking Supreme Court Is "The Reverse Of Intimidation"

Posted on April 4, 2012

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/04/04/carney_obama_attacking_the_supreme_court_is_the_reverse_of_intimidation.html

(Go to the Source above to watch the video included in this article)

White House press secretary Jay Carney is asked why President Obama is "putting pressure" on the Supreme Court ahead of their decision on the healthcare law.

Carney says what Obama is doing is actually "the reverse of intimidation." In fact, Carney says you could argue that judges in the Circuit Courts who ruled on the law were the ones intimidating or trying to influence the Supreme Court when they issued their opinions. Transcript below.

QUESTION: The president's remarks about the healthcare case in the Supreme Court has been interpreted as challenging or putting pressure on the Court ahead of their decision. Can you speak to that and why not just allow the Court to reach a decision?

JAY CARNEY: First of all, the president was asked a question and then responded to it. Secondly, as I just said, he made an observation about why he believes that -- well, first of all, he believes the Affordable Care Act is constitutional. Why he believes it is constitutional and why he believes that the Supreme Court will, in keeping with 80+ years of judicial precedent and Supreme Court precedent, will defer to Congress on its authority to pass regulation on issues of national economic importance like our healthcare system.

It's the reverse of intimidation. He's simply making an observation about precedent and the fact that he expects the Court to adhere to that precedent. It's obviously, as he made clear yesterday, up to the Court to make its determination and we will wait and see what the Court does.

But, you know, I guess you could argue that Circuit Court judges who ruled on this were trying to intimidate or influence the Court when they issued their opinions, including very prominent conservative judges on the Court of Appeals, rather, when they issued opinions that the Affordable Care Act was constitutional and that it is entirely constitutional in keeping with 80+ years of judicial precedent.

.

The Bible says ...?

Carney's misfire

By JENNIFER EPSTEIN | 11/02/11 4:47 PM Updated: 11/02/11 10:55 PM

Jay Carney quoted the Bible on Wednesday. Except he didn't. AP PhotoClose

From today’s briefing:

MR. CARNEY: Well, I believe the phrase from the Bible* is, “The Lord helps those who help themselves.” And I think the point the President is making is that we should -- we have it within our capacity to do the things to help the American people.

The White House adds in the official transcript:

* This common phrase does not appear in the Bible.

Source