this post was submitted on 04 Mar 2025
878 points (99.3% liked)

World News

41715 readers
4299 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced retaliatory tariffs after Donald Trump confirmed 25% tariffs on Canadian goods and 10% on energy, set to take effect at 12:01 a.m. Tuesday.

Trump justified the move by linking it to fentanyl smuggling concerns.

Trudeau called the tariffs "unjustified" and imposed 25% tariffs on $155 billion in U.S. goods, with $30 billion effective immediately and the rest in 21 days.

He warned of price hikes and job losses in the U.S., arguing the move violates Trump’s own trade agreement from his last term.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] leadore@lemmy.world 8 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Plus McConnell as leader could have gotten R's to convict, at least in the second impeachment after Jan 6th, which was a short window when they would probably have gone along with him. It would have made trump ineligible to run again. So I place a large part of the blame on McConnell.

The SCOTUS ruling is just icing on the cake for trump, because once he got into power again, SCOTUS isn't going to be much of a problem for him no matter how much they might rule against him. He'll just ignore it and no one will do anything about it because the entire repub party supports him--they are the ones who would have had to check his power but they're completely on board with him and they have the trifecta, total control.

That's why I'm worried about the midterms--they aren't going to give up that power willingly which means they're more than prepared to do whatever it takes to stop a free and fair election in 2026.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 1 points 1 minute ago

McConnell basically stated that Trump deserved conviction, but didn't want congress to be the ones to do it. He wagered that it's a problem that would take care of itself without having to be the ones to piss off the MAGA people he hoped to keep energized and aligned to the GOP even as Trump went away.

Then the SC basically said it's the job of congress, and not the courts (although they reserved the power to specifically declare something as not a duty of the president, so the courts could proceed if and only if the supreme court signs off on it).

To the extent that it could have maybe had the SC ultimately rule that January 6th was not an official duty, DOJ slow walked the process so that it was way too late before the SC would have even had the chance.