Michael Schellenberger

Rank 40 of 47
|
Score -89
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
602d
Trudeau Government Used Faked Intelligence To Illegally Frame Protesting Truckers As Violent Extremists

Canadian government used disinformation to invoke the “Emergencies Act” in 2022, and then shared it with other “Five Eyes” nations

by @galexybrane and John Morrison
Justin…
1/6/2025, 4:30:38 PM
X
In reply to:
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
254d
Trudeau spread disinformation to persecute his critics. He froze their bank accounts. He demanded censorship. We have to talk about the malignant narcissism of Justin Trudeau:
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
722d
The Malignant Narcissism Of Justin Trudeau

On the psychopathology of a man who: spreads disinformation while demanding censorship; freezes the bank accounts of people who criticize him; and smears ordinary Canadians as Nazis

by @StephenMoore902

Last week, Canadian House of…
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
254d
Justin Trudeau has resigned. He framed himself as an honest, caring, and compassionate leader. He was not. He falsely smeared his critics as Nazis. He justified freezing bank accounts using faked intelligence. And he spread disinformation while demanding censorship. Let's dig in:

The statement criticizes Justin Trudeau for allegedly using false intelligence to justify freezing protesters' bank accounts, framing them as violent extremists. It accuses him of spreading disinformation and persecuting critics, suggesting a misuse of power.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement potentially causes harm by making serious accusations without providing evidence within the text. [-2]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    It does not respect the dignity of the accused, using strong language and labels without substantiation. [-2]
  3. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement engages in personal attacks rather than constructive criticism, focusing on character rather than actions. [-2]