I'll openly criticize any democratic leader who is putting the interests of the few ahead of the interests of the many / all -- and any democratic leader who is only helping out "their" people, at the expense of everyone else. For example, I've openly expressed criticism of Harjit Saijan before, because of his clear prejudice when it came to directing Canadian special forces to assist non-Canadian Sikhs, and only targeting that demographic for additional assistance, during Canada's pull out from Kandahar. CSIS even called it out. Then the Liberals held a press conference declaring it racist to think of Harjit's actions as racist, because we wouldn't think him racist if he wasn't also a Sikh. Like no Shit Trudeau, but by that reasoning White supremacists aren't racists if they're white people -- it's an utterly batshit take.

And your approach to this conversation is just asinine. Basically in response to me pointing our things like her clear conflict of interest -- like it's practically a case book example of a conflict of interest, "My husband and I are also leaders on the other side of the negotiating table!", and the code of ethics she SUPPOSEDLY follows as an MLA -- you turn around and essentially imply I'm a racist because I'm not supporting her bullshit / the FN narrative.