Unsure of the source, but literally not a single one of these is remotely palatable politically.
this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2026
68 points (91.5% liked)
CanadaPolitics
3356 readers
156 users here now
Placeholder for any r/CanadaPolitics refugees
Rules
- Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.
- Has to be relevant to Canadian politics.
Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
There were other sources for the changing of French rules, otherwise not sure
Which is heavy evidence to their authenticity unfortunately.
Could the Trump admin please stop doing the plot to Infinite Jest, I hate that book and I know they never read it because they don't read and also noone has read it
I cant find any actual sources for these claims. I'm going to hold off on jumping onto the wagon until we get it from a source that's willing to stand by it.
Negotiation details are intentionally kept private about what concessions and what was tentatively agreed to.
Here's a video from the Saturday morning Aug 22 press conference from Mark Carney the day after the negotiations were suspended:
At @23:07 he was asked What specific last minute changes made the deal untenable? Paraphrasing his response was:
- level and scope of the tariffs for the auto industry with no tariff rollback for medium and heavy duty trucks
- veto over Canada’s ability to make trade deals with other nations
- restrict protections on language and culture
Kind of says it all that you can't immediately discount that Trump demanded Canada officially becomes a vassal state.
Oh I wouldn't be surprised if its true, but propaganda cuts all sorts of ways, and I don't like jumping onto things before I can confirm they're actually true.
You can't objectively verify Trump. That's a major part of his MO.
It's irrelevant anyways cuz TACO trump always chickens out.
Is there a better source for this?
They're just reacting to a Twitter post in the blog post you linked.
- Restrictions on Canada's right to pursue independent global trade deals (veto power).
- Changes to French-language rules in Quebec.
- Demands to eliminate Canadian cultural content quotas (Online Streaming Act).
- Exclusion of heavy vehicles (Ford/GM projects) from tariff relief.
- Opening up procurement for public projects to American companies.
- Dismantling Canadian dairy supply management entirely.
- Demands for Canada to align domestic tariffs automatically with US trade policy.
- Full elimination of provincial liquor board restrictions on US alcohol imports.
- Forced synchronization of pesticide and agricultural chemical regulations.
- New US intellectual property rules extending drug patent protections.
- Demands for shared management or full US control over critical mineral extraction and export.
- Direct pressure to increase defense spending to meet strict US targets.
- Reductions to the "de minimis" threshold for tax-free US cross-border purchases.
The Quebec bit has me tasting onions.
Is that an actual turn of phrase?
When you mistake an onion article (satire) for something real we say the person ate the onion.
It's only "eating the onion" if the claim was obviously intended as a joke. When a fictional claim is plausible, and plainly taken as sincere by most audiences... that's just lying.
It's lying only if that was the intent of said satirical publication to imply veracity —but what kind of fuc– oh.
I disagree with the premise. Bad satire can have the same effect as deliberate misinformation, and more people sharing it.
Some of whom apparently think believability is a feature. 'Ooh, this one got me!' when the appropriate reaction is blunt criticism.
Culpability is not the issue, intent is. Lying by accident isn't lying. Someone failing to pick up on your widely recognized status as a satire rag and choosing instead to believe whatever the fuck they come across is also not lying —or said rag's fault. 🤷🏼♂️
Many sources of bad satire have no reputation, or have a reputation for missing a lot of easy swings. Failure to correct for that becomes knowingly pushing false claims that people will believe - possibly well within reason. Some of these motherfuckers do not understand what satire is. They just make shit up and assume everyone's gonna 'get the joke.' But if the joke just that they're making shit up, then it's alarmingly easy for made-up shit to be less stupid than real life.
I feel that you're missing some points here and skating very close to a number of logical fallacies, but I'm simply way too knackered rn to argue for its own sake.
We're not talking about The Onion, famed source of high-quality bullshit.
We're talking about rando Twitter accounts and fly-by-night "comedy" blogs utterly whiffing it.
If this widely-reported list of demands turns out to be simple bullshit, then the people who bought it weren't being silly and misinterpreting visible absurdity. They were misled by a sadly believable extension of the hellscape we inhabit. The Idiot has been openly talking about annexing Canada. Nothing on this list is out-there enough that anyone should be expected to go, oh I see, ha ha, what a funny.
Who is the "Albert Pinto" the article is quoting?
The only person I can find by that name is a Spanish movie director, and I doubt that's who is posting on Twitter about Canada/USA trade negotiations...