- Thread starter Monarch Butterfly
- Start date
lenaitch
Senior Member
In the waning days of the Roman Empire, they resorted to 'bread and circuses' to keep the masses distracted.
The US has simply forgot, or is ignoring, the 'bread' part.
The US has simply forgot, or is ignoring, the 'bread' part.
thettctransitfanatic
Senior Member
Trump calls journalist’s Iran reporting ‘treasonous’
Trump called New York Times journalist reporting on the Iran war as “treasonous” while claiming a 'victory'.
Trump calls journalist’s Iran reporting ‘treasonous’
US President Donald Trump called New York Times journalist David Sanger’s reporting on the Iran war as “treasonous” while claiming a “total military victory”
thettctransitfanatic
Senior Member
Trump ethics filing shows $220M in corporate securities trades in 3 months - National | Globalnews.ca
The purchases included securities linked to companies such as Microsoft, Meta Platforms, Oracle, Broadcom, Bank of America and Goldman Sachs, as well as trades in municipal bonds.
globalnews.ca
Trump ethics filing shows $220M in corporate securities trades in 3 months
U.S. President Donald Trump disclosed a flurry of at least $220 million in financial transactions earlier this year in the securities of major U.S. companies, according to two new financial disclosure forms released on Thursday by the U.S. Office of Government Ethics.
“President Trump’s investment holdings are maintained exclusively through fully discretionary accounts independently managed by third-party financial institutions with sole and exclusive authority over all investment decisions. Trades are executed and portfolios are balanced through automated investment processes and systems administered by those institutions,” a spokesperson for the Trump Organization wrote in an emailed statement.
“Neither President Trump, his family, nor The Trump Organization plays any role in selecting, directing, or approving specific investments. They receive no advance notice of trading activity and provide no input regarding investment decisions or portfolio management of any kind.”
Since returning to the White House last year, Donald Trump has repeatedly disclosed financial transactions through a series of public ethics filings, showing trades in both municipal debt and securities issued by major corporations.The president’s assets are held in a trust controlled by his children.
The disclosure forms are required under federal ethics rules and provide only a partial snapshot of an official’s financial activity because they list transactions above $1,000 in broad value bands and do not disclose exact prices, profits or whether assets were purchased directly or through managed accounts.
The president’s annual financial disclosure, a broader filing that includes business assets and income, such as golf resorts and crypto ventures, is expected in the coming months.
thettctransitfanatic
Senior Member
Trump returns to Washington after leaving Beijing summit with few clear wins
The president’s two-day summit with Chinese leader Xi Jinping saw praise and claims of progress from both sides, but also persistent differences on Taiwan and other key issues.
www.nbcnews.com
Trump wraps up ''warm'' China trip with few clear wins
The president’s two-day summit with Chinese leader Xi Jinping saw praise and claims of progress from both sides, but also persistent differences on Taiwan and other key issues.What to know about Trump's trip
- SUMMIT WRAPPED UP: President Donald Trump has left China after two days of talks with President Xi Jinping that saw both sides trade praise and tout progress in stabilizing what they agreed is the world's most important relationship.
- NO CLEAR BREAKTHROUGHS: The president hailed “fantastic” trade deals and said “a lot of different problems” were settled, though no major agreements or breakthroughs were announced before he departed Beijing.
- FOCUS ON TAIWAN: Xi warned Trump on Day 1 that mishandling China's claims on Taiwan could cause "clashes and even conflicts," with the disputed island central to Beijing's view of the talks. En route to Alaska after the summit, Trump said he has not made a decision on whether to proceed with a $14 billion arms sale to the democratic island.
- OPENING HORMUZ: The U.S. assessments focused on trade and Iran. Trump discussed the Iran war and the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz with Xi, Secretary of State Marco Rubio told NBC News, adding that Trump did not ask Xi for help in ending the monthslong war.
Monarch Butterfly
Superstar
The Other 98%
Bret Baier gave Trump every chance to walk back his "I don't think about Americans' finances" comment. Trump's response: "I'd make it again. That's a perfect statement." This isn't a gotcha quote...
www.facebook.com
thettctransitfanatic
Senior Member
Senate referee rules against some Trump ballroom funding, Democrats say | CNN Politics
The push to secure federal dollars for President Donald Trump’s ballroom security just got more difficult on Capitol Hill.
Senate Democrats said Saturday the provision that funds Trump’s ballroom in the GOP’s latest budget bill has been deemed out of order by the Senate parliamentarian, a major blow to the president’s priority.
A GOP leadership aide cautioned the process is ongoing and that Republicans are continuing to refine the provision to find a way that it can be included.
But the ruling is still a major turn in the future of Trump’s ballroom renovation project.
Top Republicans were already privately skeptical they’d have the votes for Trump’s ballroom push — which the White House has said would put money strictly toward security for the East Wing project and separate US Secret Service needs — at such an economically turbulent time for many Americans, according to multiple GOP leadership sources.
Saturday’s news forces Republican party leaders to go back to the drawing board to get the money through Congress without Democratic votes.
The ballroom funding totals about $220 million, according to a memo sent from the White House to members of Congress this week, but comes as part of a $1 billion security funding request.
Republicans, led by Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, had sought to include the funds in a package of immigration money that would be able to skirt the Senate’s 60-vote threshold as long as it follows a series of process rules. But Democrats say the Senate’s rules referee, parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough, informed lawmakers Saturday that the ballroom money does not, in fact, comply with those special rules.
Before the latest ruling, McDonough had already determined that a few other provisions would need to be altered in the broader package.
Even if GOP leaders can manage to successfully rewrite the ballroom-related language in compliance with Senate’s rules, it may be stripped out anyway.
There’s widespread consternation about the optics of the money for the East Wing project — even if it’s just for security — despite a fierce White House lobbying campaign. That sales pitch included a full briefing by the Secret Service chief to Senate Republicans, a briefing by the homeland security secretary to a large group of House Republicans, a briefing by acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and even some private meetings at the White House with lawmakers.
Part of the administration’s pitch was to clarify for lawmakers that only a fraction of the up to $1 billion would be used specifically on the ballroom, while the rest would be used by the Secret Service for other matters, according to two sources in the meetings.
But even with the full-court press, there are still plenty of Republicans who are skeptical about its price tag in an election year.
GOP Rep. Michael McCaul of Texas told CNN there has been “very vigorous debate” among House Republicans about whether to support money for Trump’s ballroom even though most agree with security funding.
“If you’re in a politically challenging district, that’s not an easy vote to take. I’m not running again so it doesn’t matter to me. … It’s hard to justify a billion dollars. Just the optics of a billion dollars for a ballroom,” McCaul, who has discussed the ballroom with Trump, told CNN.
GOP Rep. Rich McCormick of Georgia said he wished the administration had realized this funding was needed sooner.
“I think they miscalculated, obviously. Typical of a lot of things we do in the government, where you kind of start down a track, and it’s unfortunate, but what are you going to do? You can’t leave the White House unfinished,” he said.
But he argued that even with the war in Iran, record deficit spending and the high cost of living, approving this funding wouldn’t hurt Republicans politically in November. “It’s not the thing that people are going to focus on in the next election,” he told CNN.
Given the political calculations however, one Republican lawmaker, granted anonymity to speak freely, characterized the funding for Trump’s ballroom as “somewhere between dead and on life support.”
The push to secure federal dollars for President Donald Trump’s ballroom security just got more difficult on Capitol Hill.
Senate Democrats said Saturday the provision that funds Trump’s ballroom in the GOP’s latest budget bill has been deemed out of order by the Senate parliamentarian, a major blow to the president’s priority.
A GOP leadership aide cautioned the process is ongoing and that Republicans are continuing to refine the provision to find a way that it can be included.
But the ruling is still a major turn in the future of Trump’s ballroom renovation project.
Top Republicans were already privately skeptical they’d have the votes for Trump’s ballroom push — which the White House has said would put money strictly toward security for the East Wing project and separate US Secret Service needs — at such an economically turbulent time for many Americans, according to multiple GOP leadership sources.
Saturday’s news forces Republican party leaders to go back to the drawing board to get the money through Congress without Democratic votes.
The ballroom funding totals about $220 million, according to a memo sent from the White House to members of Congress this week, but comes as part of a $1 billion security funding request.
Republicans, led by Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, had sought to include the funds in a package of immigration money that would be able to skirt the Senate’s 60-vote threshold as long as it follows a series of process rules. But Democrats say the Senate’s rules referee, parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough, informed lawmakers Saturday that the ballroom money does not, in fact, comply with those special rules.
Before the latest ruling, McDonough had already determined that a few other provisions would need to be altered in the broader package.
Even if GOP leaders can manage to successfully rewrite the ballroom-related language in compliance with Senate’s rules, it may be stripped out anyway.
There’s widespread consternation about the optics of the money for the East Wing project — even if it’s just for security — despite a fierce White House lobbying campaign. That sales pitch included a full briefing by the Secret Service chief to Senate Republicans, a briefing by the homeland security secretary to a large group of House Republicans, a briefing by acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and even some private meetings at the White House with lawmakers.
Part of the administration’s pitch was to clarify for lawmakers that only a fraction of the up to $1 billion would be used specifically on the ballroom, while the rest would be used by the Secret Service for other matters, according to two sources in the meetings.
But even with the full-court press, there are still plenty of Republicans who are skeptical about its price tag in an election year.
GOP Rep. Michael McCaul of Texas told CNN there has been “very vigorous debate” among House Republicans about whether to support money for Trump’s ballroom even though most agree with security funding.
“If you’re in a politically challenging district, that’s not an easy vote to take. I’m not running again so it doesn’t matter to me. … It’s hard to justify a billion dollars. Just the optics of a billion dollars for a ballroom,” McCaul, who has discussed the ballroom with Trump, told CNN.
GOP Rep. Rich McCormick of Georgia said he wished the administration had realized this funding was needed sooner.
“I think they miscalculated, obviously. Typical of a lot of things we do in the government, where you kind of start down a track, and it’s unfortunate, but what are you going to do? You can’t leave the White House unfinished,” he said.
But he argued that even with the war in Iran, record deficit spending and the high cost of living, approving this funding wouldn’t hurt Republicans politically in November. “It’s not the thing that people are going to focus on in the next election,” he told CNN.
Given the political calculations however, one Republican lawmaker, granted anonymity to speak freely, characterized the funding for Trump’s ballroom as “somewhere between dead and on life support.”
Monarch Butterfly
Superstar
Monarch Butterfly
Superstar
PL1
Senior Member
It really is unbelievable how this naked theft from the American public is happening, along with the rampant insider trading. If/when the US comes through all that, they will have to ensure their checks and balances work in an adversarial environment, and with members of Congress actively abetting the grift.
thettctransitfanatic
Senior Member
US justice department ‘forever’ bars IRS from auditing Trump’s past tax returns | Donald Trump | The Guardian
The fund will be run by five people – all subject to be fired at will by the president – and does not have to make public who it awarded money to or its reason for doing so.
The Tuesday amendment was released shortly after Blanche testified in a Senate hearing in which Democrats harshly criticized the agreement. “This is an outrageous, unprecedented slush fund that you set up,” said Chris van Hollen, a Maryland senator.
Pressed by Democrats on whether those convicted of assaulting police officers on January 6 would be able to obtain money from the fund, Blanche said there were no limitations on who could seek a claim from the fund. He also said neither Trump personally nor his sons would receive compensation, though it is unclear from the agreement whether they could file a claim.
The text of the agreement released on Monday night says the fund will produce quarterly confidential reports to the attorney general on amounts paid out by the fund and to whom, despite that confidentiality provision, Blanche said on Tuesday.
“There’s accountability that the commission has, a quarterly report that has to come to the attorney general, which will certainly be public,” he said. “There’s a process that you all will get information, and there’s a Foia [Freedom of Information Act] process. So I very much anticipate that the claims that are awarded, the basis and the amount will for sure be made public along the way.”
US justice department ‘forever’ bars IRS from auditing Trump’s past tax returns
Addendum quietly slipped into widely criticized agreement creating a $1.7bn fund to compensate president’s alliesThe justice department quietly added a provision barring the IRS from auditing Donald Trump’s tax returns on Tuesday, amending a widely criticized agreement that creates a secretive and loosely controlled $1.776bn fund to compensate allies of the president. The addendum, signed by Todd Blanche, the acting attorney general, says the government is “forever barred” and “precluded” from examining the tax returns of Trump, his family, company and “related companies”. The agreement applies to anything filed before the agreement was reached. It was posted on the justice department website on Tuesday morning, a day after the department announced creation of the fund. The inclusion only adds to mounting scrutiny of the wider agreement reached on Tuesday. The arrangement was announced after Trump said he was dropping a $10bn lawsuit against the IRS and other specious claims against the government in exchange for creating the compensation fund. IRS officials recommended fighting Trump’s lawsuit, the New York Times reported on Tuesday, but the agency decided to settle it anyway, raising further questions about improper interference.
The fund will be run by five people – all subject to be fired at will by the president – and does not have to make public who it awarded money to or its reason for doing so.
The Tuesday amendment was released shortly after Blanche testified in a Senate hearing in which Democrats harshly criticized the agreement. “This is an outrageous, unprecedented slush fund that you set up,” said Chris van Hollen, a Maryland senator.
Pressed by Democrats on whether those convicted of assaulting police officers on January 6 would be able to obtain money from the fund, Blanche said there were no limitations on who could seek a claim from the fund. He also said neither Trump personally nor his sons would receive compensation, though it is unclear from the agreement whether they could file a claim.
The text of the agreement released on Monday night says the fund will produce quarterly confidential reports to the attorney general on amounts paid out by the fund and to whom, despite that confidentiality provision, Blanche said on Tuesday.
“There’s accountability that the commission has, a quarterly report that has to come to the attorney general, which will certainly be public,” he said. “There’s a process that you all will get information, and there’s a Foia [Freedom of Information Act] process. So I very much anticipate that the claims that are awarded, the basis and the amount will for sure be made public along the way.”
thettctransitfanatic
Senior Member
Todd Blanche grilled over Trump administration's $1.8B 'anti-weaponization' fund | CBC News
Todd Blanche, acting attorney general in Donald Trump's administration, faced intense scrutiny on Capitol Hill on Tuesday over Justice Department plans to create a $1.77-billion US fund to pay allies of the Republican president who believe they were targeted politically.
Trump said at the White House on Monday that he was only recently informed about the commission.
The fund, announced Monday, came after Trump and his two adult sons sued the IRS and the Treasury Department over a leak of confidential tax records.
Todd Blanche grilled over Trump administration's $1.8B 'anti-weaponization' fund
Watchdog groups calls fund 'one of the single most corrupt acts in American history'
Todd Blanche, acting attorney general in Donald Trump's administration, faced intense scrutiny on Capitol Hill on Tuesday over Justice Department plans to create a $1.77-billion US fund to pay allies of the Republican president who believe they were targeted politically.
Blanche's testimony before a Senate appropriations subcommittee was meant to address the department's annual budget request but it follows Monday's announcement about the creation of the "Anti-Weaponization Fund." Critics have decried it as an illegal abuse of power designed to line the pockets of Trump allies with taxpayer dollars.
Blanche on Tuesday admitted the fund, to be overseen by a commission, was "unusual," but denied that Trump directed him to create it, or that political affiliation will play any part in who receives compensation.
Blanche also said the effort wasn't unprecedented, referencing a fund established by Barack Obama's administration to compensate Native American farmers who said they had experienced racial discrimination.
Sen. Chris Van Hollen, a Maryland Democrat, called that comparison "incredibly deceptive," given that a federal judge signed off on that 2010 settlement.
Donald Sherman, the president of government watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), characterized the fund in a statement on Monday as "one of the single most corrupt acts in American history."
Trump pleads ignorance
Trump said at the White House on Monday that he was only recently informed about the commission.
"I didn't do this deal. It was told to me yesterday," he said.
The fund will be able to review claims of alleged government political targeting, issue formal apologies and award monetary compensation to approved applicants, the Justice Department said. A five-member commission appointed by Blanche will oversee the fund, with one member chosen in consultation with congressional leadership.
According to the Justice Department, the president can remove any member of the commission.
The Justice Department did not identify anyone by name who could theoretically benefit from the fund, but there were multiple investigations of Trump allies during predecessor Joe Biden's administration, including about 1,500 people charged in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol. Trump in his second term either pardoned them, commuted their prison sentences or ordered their cases dismissed.
More than 250 people were convicted of assault charges for attacks on law enforcement officers, with the attacks in many cases captured on surveillance or body camera footage.
Several Democrats asked Blanche if that group of individuals, or those convicted of assault, would be barred from participating. Blanche said being able to apply doesn't mean a rubberstamp or an approval is guaranteed.
"As was made plain yesterday, anybody in this country is eligible to apply if they believe they were a victim of weaponization," he said.
While most Republicans in the morning session shied away from the topic, Maine Sen. Susan Collins expressed concerns about the plan.
In the weeks since assuming control of the Justice Department after the departure of Pam Bondi, Blanche has also moved aggressively to advance the president's priorities — pushing forward cases against public figures who've raised the ire of Trump, including former FBI director James Comey.
Comey told CNN on Monday that "I guess I'll be in line" to apply to the commission.
"I hope I’ll be ahead of those who savagely beat police officers and sacked the Capitol," he said.
While Blanche forcefully pushed back against Democratic lawmakers on occasion, he attempted to answer most questions. That was a contrast to Bondi, who brought a binder to hearings and launched attacks on individual Democratic lawmakers.
Announced after Trump sued IRS
The fund, announced Monday, came after Trump and his two adult sons sued the IRS and the Treasury Department over a leak of confidential tax records.
Former IRS contract employee Charles Littlejohn was sentenced to five years in prison after pleading guilty to leaking tax information about Trump and others to two news outlets between 2018 and 2020.
The lawsuit faced possible legal headwinds, with the federal judge in the case referencing a potential conflict of interest for the president.
Blanche, Trump's personal lawyer between his presidential terms, seemed to indicate Tuesday that no Trump family members would be eligible for compensation.
Democratic Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island called the fund a travesty and pointed out that over 400,000 individuals had their tax records exposed in the leak.
Trump has insisted that the Justice Department during Biden's administration was weaponized against him and his allies. Blanche said Tuesday "what happened during the Biden administration was disgusting," earning a rebuke from Oregon Democratic Sen. Jeff Merkley, who called the comment "inappropriate."
Trump faced criminal indictments for both his efforts to prevent a peaceful transfer of power to Biden after his 2020 election loss, as well as handling of classified documents are leaving the White House. Those charges against Trump were cast aside after U.S. voters elected him president again in November 2024.
During Biden's term, a special counsel reporting to the attorney general brought tax and gun charges against Hunter Biden, the president's son, and congressional Democrats Bob Menendez and Henry Cueller were investigated for corruption.
The department in Trump's second term, meanwhile, declined to press charges against Republican House Rep. Cory Mills after a domestic violence allegation, or Tom Homan, the border czar who accepted $50,000 from undercover agents months before being appointed for a second stint with Trump's administration.
Blanche, meanwhile, said there was "no basis" for a civil rights investigation into the fatal shooting of Minnesota activist Renee Good by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent in January.
Van Hollen took Blanche to task for the lack of such a probe, and the fact that instead the department began a probe of Good's domestic partner, which reportedly led to a number of prosecutor resignations.
hw621
Senior Member
So there is nothing the Americans can do about this and him?
Full Metal Junkie
Senior Member
Huh, even Al Capone was eventually caught and jailed by the taxman.
It was Benjamin Franklin himself who famously stated: "Our new Constitution is now established, and has an appearance that promises permanency; but in this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes."
Trump and his lackeys have made a mockery of the Constitution, and now he has been freed from the certainty of taxes. We are left reliant on the last line of defense...
It was Benjamin Franklin himself who famously stated: "Our new Constitution is now established, and has an appearance that promises permanency; but in this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes."
Trump and his lackeys have made a mockery of the Constitution, and now he has been freed from the certainty of taxes. We are left reliant on the last line of defense...
thettctransitfanatic
Senior Member
Pentagon walks away from Canada-U.S. defence board | CBC News
U.S. Undersecretary of War Elbridge Colby announced Monday the Pentagon is "pausing" participation in the Permanent Joint Board on Defence, an advisory body on North American continental defence that was established in 1940.
"Only by investing in our own defense capabilities will Americans and Canadians be safe, secure, and prosperous," Colby wrote in a series of posts on X. "Unfortunately, Canada has failed to make credible progress on its defense commitments."
Colby's posts implicitly lay some blame for the U.S. move on Prime Minister Mark Carney's frequent statements about making alliances with countries other than the U.S., in the wake of U.S. President Donald Trump's trade war and his calls for making Canada the 51st state.
"We can no longer avoid the gaps between rhetoric and reality. Real powers must sustain our rhetoric with shared defense and security responsibilities," Colby wrote in a post linked to a transcript of Carney's headline-grabbing speech at this year's World Economic Forum in Davos.
Senior Canadian and U.S. defence and diplomatic officials make up the joint board.
It's an important symbol of the bilateral relationship between the two countries, said Imran Bayoumi, a former U.S. defence adviser who's now with the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, a Washington think-tank.
The board was created in 1940 by then-president Franklin D. Roosevelt and then-prime minister William Lyon Mackenzie King.
Although it's supposed to meet at least annually, the last readout published by Canada or the U.S. of a meeting was back in November 2024 in Ottawa. That suggests the body has not met since Trump returned to the White House in January 2025.
Colby's posts announcing the U.S. withdrawal from the board include one with an image of a map of North America.
"Delivering on shared continental defense begins by recognizing our shared geography," he wrote.
Asked by CBC News for comment, Defence Minister David McGuinty provided a list of new government spending commitments for the Canadian Armed Forces, including military investments across the North and procurement of new under-ice submarines.
"Canada will work with trusted partners who are ready to work with us, always remaining ready to come to the table for constructive discussions about the best ways to strengthen mutual defence and security,” McGuinty said.
The Trump administration has made no secret of its belief that Canada is not paying its fair share of continental defence.
The country finally hit that target last year, after a $9.3-billion boost to the defence budget, including raising the pay of troops and moving the Canadian Coast Guard under the umbrella of defence spending.
But in large part at the urging of Trump, NATO members have agreed to boost their defence spending to five per cent of GDP over the next decade — 3.5 per cent on direct military spending and 1.5 per cent on defence infrastructure.
Colby alluded to that NATO spending commitment in a separate social media post on Monday that included a photo with Pete Hoekstra, the U.S. ambassador to Canada.
"Great hosting @USAmbCanada Pete Hoekstra at the Pentagon recently. We're working closely to ensure every NATO partner, including Canada, reaches the Hague Summit's 3.5% GDP defense spending target, a vital investment for North American and Arctic defense."
The potential impact of the Trump administration's move to withdraw from the board was not immediately clear.
Bayoumi said the announcement could be a tactic to try to pressure Canada into buying more U.S. military equipment.
"In the grand scheme of things, I'm not sure how much it's actually going to change the defence relationship," he said.
"I'm disappointed. I think it's short-sighted. I think it's foolish, but I'm not surprised," McKay told CBC News.
McKay was asked whether the withdrawal could be a U.S. attempt at gaining leverage over Canada in trade talks or military procurement.
"I don't see how cancelling one of the most significant — if secret and unknown — organizations which manages the mutual defence of North America enhances trade negotiations or enhances our willingness to purchase F-35s, maybe in some devious mind of some official somewhere," he said.
The board's meetings are described by U.S. and Canadian briefing notes as being focused on bilateral defence co-operation at the strategic level, with such topics as NORAD modernization and Arctic security on the agenda.
McKay said he gained insight into the Americans' thinking through the conversations.
"Because they were at a top-secret location and level, you kind of got the real goods, which in this day and age, you don't often get," he said.
Artur Wilczynski, a former Canadian diplomat who attended the board's meetings while holding a senior post at Public Safety Canada, said in a post on X: "The lack of joint coordination will affect the US too. Bizarre decision by the Trump regime."
CBC News asked the Pentagon for further explanation about the withdrawal, but a public affairs officer said it had nothing to add beyond Colby's posts.
Sean Maloney, a professor of history at Royal Military College who has written about the board, says the Trump administration's move to pull out sends a strong signal because the board and its military cooperation committee do a lot of useful work on defence planning.
The U.S. withdrawal "basically generates more friction in the system than we need right now," Maloney told CBC News.
However, he doubts the move will have an impact on day-to-day military operations involving Canada and the U.S.
"Regardless of the acrimony that can exist at certain levels in between the two countries, we still have to have a functional relationship on the defence side," Maloney said.
Pentagon walks away from Canada-U.S. defence board
Canada 'failed to make credible progress' on military spending, says Trump administration official
The Trump administration is walking away from a long-running body that works on Canada-U.S. defence initiatives, claiming Canada has failed to meet its commitments on defence spending.U.S. Undersecretary of War Elbridge Colby announced Monday the Pentagon is "pausing" participation in the Permanent Joint Board on Defence, an advisory body on North American continental defence that was established in 1940.
"Only by investing in our own defense capabilities will Americans and Canadians be safe, secure, and prosperous," Colby wrote in a series of posts on X. "Unfortunately, Canada has failed to make credible progress on its defense commitments."
Colby's posts implicitly lay some blame for the U.S. move on Prime Minister Mark Carney's frequent statements about making alliances with countries other than the U.S., in the wake of U.S. President Donald Trump's trade war and his calls for making Canada the 51st state.
"We can no longer avoid the gaps between rhetoric and reality. Real powers must sustain our rhetoric with shared defense and security responsibilities," Colby wrote in a post linked to a transcript of Carney's headline-grabbing speech at this year's World Economic Forum in Davos.
Senior Canadian and U.S. defence and diplomatic officials make up the joint board.
It's an important symbol of the bilateral relationship between the two countries, said Imran Bayoumi, a former U.S. defence adviser who's now with the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, a Washington think-tank.
Cancelling board a 'needless provocation'
"Cancelling it is a needless provocation that sends the wrong message to Ottawa and other U.S. allies," Bayoumi told CBC News.The board was created in 1940 by then-president Franklin D. Roosevelt and then-prime minister William Lyon Mackenzie King.
Although it's supposed to meet at least annually, the last readout published by Canada or the U.S. of a meeting was back in November 2024 in Ottawa. That suggests the body has not met since Trump returned to the White House in January 2025.
Colby's posts announcing the U.S. withdrawal from the board include one with an image of a map of North America.
"Delivering on shared continental defense begins by recognizing our shared geography," he wrote.
Asked by CBC News for comment, Defence Minister David McGuinty provided a list of new government spending commitments for the Canadian Armed Forces, including military investments across the North and procurement of new under-ice submarines.
"Canada will work with trusted partners who are ready to work with us, always remaining ready to come to the table for constructive discussions about the best ways to strengthen mutual defence and security,” McGuinty said.
The Trump administration has made no secret of its belief that Canada is not paying its fair share of continental defence.
NATO members boost defence spending
For decades, Canada has lagged behind in reaching the NATO benchmark of spending two per cent of gross domestic product (GDP) on the military.The country finally hit that target last year, after a $9.3-billion boost to the defence budget, including raising the pay of troops and moving the Canadian Coast Guard under the umbrella of defence spending.
But in large part at the urging of Trump, NATO members have agreed to boost their defence spending to five per cent of GDP over the next decade — 3.5 per cent on direct military spending and 1.5 per cent on defence infrastructure.
Colby alluded to that NATO spending commitment in a separate social media post on Monday that included a photo with Pete Hoekstra, the U.S. ambassador to Canada.
"Great hosting @USAmbCanada Pete Hoekstra at the Pentagon recently. We're working closely to ensure every NATO partner, including Canada, reaches the Hague Summit's 3.5% GDP defense spending target, a vital investment for North American and Arctic defense."
The potential impact of the Trump administration's move to withdraw from the board was not immediately clear.
Bayoumi said the announcement could be a tactic to try to pressure Canada into buying more U.S. military equipment.
"In the grand scheme of things, I'm not sure how much it's actually going to change the defence relationship," he said.
'Foolish, but I'm not surprised'
John McKay, the former MP who served as the Canadian co-chair the last time the board met, said the decision casts doubt over such things as the renegotiation of the NORAD joint command agreement, military co-operation in the Arctic and Canada’s future purchases of U.S. F-35 fighter jets."I'm disappointed. I think it's short-sighted. I think it's foolish, but I'm not surprised," McKay told CBC News.
McKay was asked whether the withdrawal could be a U.S. attempt at gaining leverage over Canada in trade talks or military procurement.
"I don't see how cancelling one of the most significant — if secret and unknown — organizations which manages the mutual defence of North America enhances trade negotiations or enhances our willingness to purchase F-35s, maybe in some devious mind of some official somewhere," he said.
The board's meetings are described by U.S. and Canadian briefing notes as being focused on bilateral defence co-operation at the strategic level, with such topics as NORAD modernization and Arctic security on the agenda.
McKay said he gained insight into the Americans' thinking through the conversations.
"Because they were at a top-secret location and level, you kind of got the real goods, which in this day and age, you don't often get," he said.
Artur Wilczynski, a former Canadian diplomat who attended the board's meetings while holding a senior post at Public Safety Canada, said in a post on X: "The lack of joint coordination will affect the US too. Bizarre decision by the Trump regime."
CBC News asked the Pentagon for further explanation about the withdrawal, but a public affairs officer said it had nothing to add beyond Colby's posts.
Sean Maloney, a professor of history at Royal Military College who has written about the board, says the Trump administration's move to pull out sends a strong signal because the board and its military cooperation committee do a lot of useful work on defence planning.
The U.S. withdrawal "basically generates more friction in the system than we need right now," Maloney told CBC News.
However, he doubts the move will have an impact on day-to-day military operations involving Canada and the U.S.
"Regardless of the acrimony that can exist at certain levels in between the two countries, we still have to have a functional relationship on the defence side," Maloney said.