SooToday received the following letter from reader Robert Nelly on the outcome of the Liberal leadership race.
Chrystia Freeland, who initiated the backstabbing against Prime Minister Justin Trudeau by writing a public letter to him refusing her "demotion" that would have put her in charge of U.S.-Canada trade relations in the face of tariffs, won only a tiny percentage of the vote during the recent Liberal Leadership race.
At the height of her arrogance and power as Canada's Finance Minister, she refused to leave her post that put her in charge of billions in government expenditures, to instead pursue her original calling in Foreign Affairs, where she could have been a tariff negotiator between Canada and the U.S.
Don't forget, Trump himself lamented in December that Freeland was a hardliner while probably considering Trudeau a lightweight. You will recall that Freeland publicly advised that Canada should not acquiesce to Trump, around the time Trudeau went to Mar-A-Lago and appeared like he was kissing the ring of the President.
So it would have only made sense that Trudeau would have wanted Freeland's expertise and diplomatic sense.
The appointment of Freeland at the time Trudeau wanted that appointment perhaps would have served as a deterrent for Trump's tariff plans, because it was Freeland who resisted the tariffs in the former Trump administration and helped negotiate the now-violated USMCA agreement.
Surprisingly, Freeland finally accepted a demotion from Mark Carney, although not in the realm of U.S.-Canada trade. So her betrayal landed her in a worse position, at the end of the day, than had she accepted her demotion.
It was Mark Carney who was slated to replace Freeland as Finance Minister, probably an attempt for Trudeau to appease the growing malcontents backing Carney.
Had he been appointed Finance Minister, maybe his pawns the Liberal MPs, backroom operators and big-time donors would have acquiesced to Trudeau's prime ministership, at least until the federal election.
Perhaps Trudeau would have lost and a real Leadership race would have ensued, where Freeland could have been able to show her experience and intellect, while Carney would have made more mistakes like the ones he made at the one French language debate.
Instead she impatiently stabbed Trudeau in the back without all her ducks in a row in terms of donors and supporters.
Her tremendous loss, her earning only 8.0 per cent of the vote, compared to Carney's 85.9 per cent, will surely not give her momentum should the Liberals lose the next election and Carney resigns.
Even Paul Martin, who would eventually become Prime Minister in 2003, was a decent second place at the 1990 Liberal Leadership race with 25.19 per cent of the vote.
Also, Jean Chretien had 31 per cent on the first ballot and 40.5 per cent on the second ballot at the 1984 Liberal Party of Canada leadership election, another decent second place finish.
Michael Ignatieff, who would later become the acclaimed Leader of the Liberal Party, also was a close second with 45.3 per cent at the 2006 Liberal race.
Those who had 12 per cent and 6 per cent at the 2013 leadership race that elected Trudeau were never heard from again in terms of the being contenders for the leadership.
Freeland has really caught herself in a bubble and stained any future prospects she may have had in the party.
Robert Nelly
North Bay