CTV National News: Man who stole Cessna charged with hijacking and terrorism
Norad scrambled Canadian and U.S. fighter jets to Vancouver airport to intercept a stolen small plane. Andrew Johnson has the latest.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Globe and Mail
21 minutes ago
- Globe and Mail
An open letter to President Trump: Your threats against Powell are unbecoming, dangerous and must stop
Dear President Trump: At this stage, I feel compelled to send you a letter regarding the constant badgering and pressure you are applying openly to the Fed Chairman. First, it was all the verbal pressure to cut interest rates, and not by a little, but by a full -300 basis points. That would be a case of being careful what you wish for — because taking the funds rate to, or below, 1.5% would surely only occur in the context of a financial market calamity or an outright economic recession. But somehow, this is no longer about business. It has become personal for you — a crusade to destroy Jay Powell. Now, I have had issues with the Fed Chairman's policies too, and I respect your view that he has been 'too slow' to ease policy. But I was also critical about how far he tightened policy in the rate-hiking cycle during the Biden tenure. So, my comments here are completely apolitical — just to set the record straight. The fact that everyone is now talking about Jay Powell either being fired or pressured to resign early, to me, is an undesirable and unwarranted distraction. And it is dangerous. The insults and name-calling are totally unnecessary and are better left to kids in the schoolyard. And, I must say, that putting the blame on cost overruns for the Fed building renovations is more than a little over the top, but reportedly a means for you to fire the Chairman with 'cause.' As I watch all the political pundits and market types wax on about how other past Presidents, from LBJ (on Martin) to Nixon (on Burns) to Reagan (on Volcker), did their utmost to pressure the Fed Chairmen of the day to cut interest rates (what President doesn't want lower rates?), they did so privately. People didn't find out about these episodes until many years after the fact (only Burns ended up caving, but not before he suffered a nervous breakdown). Your current strategy of attacking Powell out in the open to such an acrimonious degree is unbecoming and tarnishes America's reputation as being the world's primary source of stability. I would hazard to say that this open warfare has been at the root of the steep decline in the U.S. dollar this year, which has completely wiped out the gains made in the stock market (at least for a typical European investor). I do appreciate your desire to have the Fed cut rates sooner, and by a whole lot, to help contain or even reverse the rising tide of interest expense on the incredibly bloated level of public debt. I have two things to say about this. First, it is dangerous to use the Fed as a tool to cut the deficit in such a manner. Second, having the Fed ease policy and then cause a loss of confidence in the bond market will be self-defeating. You see, the Fed only really controls the overnight rate, and the impact of monetary policy extends out to one-year T-bills at most. If the bond market thinks the Fed has made a mistake, yields beyond the one-year maturity could become unhinged and could rise, and that would end up lifting debt-servicing charges. After all, nearly $16 trillion of the $24 trillion of privately-held marketable debt has a maturity profile beyond one year. This is not a distinction without a difference, and it is critical to understand that the Fed does NOT control the bond market — instead, as we saw last September with the jumbo rate cut and the ensuing rise in longer-term rates, the bond market controls the Fed! In Jay Powell's defense, he never said he was not going to cut rates. He only said not right away. He wants to make sure that he doesn't make the same inflationary misstep that he made in 2021 and early 2022 when he left rates too low for too long. Ironically, it was the inflation genie he let out of the bottle at that time that caused the cost-of-living to emerge as the number-one issue for voters in last November's election — the same issue that caused the demise of Joe Biden's presidency long before his horrific performance at the debate. I actually think that instead of berating Powell and continuously threatening to fire him, perhaps a dose of gratitude should be in store instead. After all, the Fed's role in perpetuating that 2021-2023 inflation cycle is one of the primary reasons you are President today. And now Powell is doing his best to ensure that inflation does not flare up again, which again deserves praise rather than criticism. If the central bank cuts rates prematurely and we get another inflation cycle, the results for the GOP in next year's mid-terms won't be that favorable. This is what goes unsaid. By being prudent and patient, Powell is actually doing you a big favor, sir. Instead, the Fed Chairman gets excoriated. I recommend that this rancor and threat of dismissal stop. Making matters worse is that everyone in your Administration is piling on. Congressional Republicans are so intimidated that they have gone silent. We have Kevin Warsh, who I understand is on your short list for the next Chairman appointment, who said this week that the Fed has gone beyond the standards of traditional central banking. He was the most ardent hawk at the Fed during his tenure as Governor from 2006 to 2011, a time when the central bank expanded its balance sheet by +$2 trillion. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. As for all the criticism about Jay Powell being 'political,' dare I say that he is a Republican but during your first term as President, he both raised (2018) and cut (2019) rates; as he did in Biden's four-year term — cutting in 2020 and expanding the balance sheet dramatically into 2022; to only then embark on the most radical tightening in monetary policy since the early 1980s. Yes, Mr. Powell has made mistakes, but every central bank chief in the past has. That is the price of being human. I am trying to convince you, Mr. President, that what Jay Powell is doing is trying to fulfill your election promise to the public to ensure that inflation stays low. Cutting rates -300 basis points now, with the unemployment rate a snick above 4%, the effect of the tariffs still unknown, the stock market on wheels, industrial commodities on an uptrend, credit spreads uber-tight, and the dollar on a visible downtrend will do the opposite of what you want. If what you want is low and stable price inflation. I seriously think you should reconsider your strategy and approach, because Powell actually has your back. Instead of accepting that premise, you are stabbing him in the back. If you do end up creating the conditions for Powell's early departure and select a new Fed Chairman, that will cause the FOMC to shift gears before the time is right. What is going to be most at risk (over and beyond financial and economic stability) will be your legacy. Please give that some careful thought, sir. Remember what inflation did to Jimmy Carter and to Joe Biden, due at least in part to irresponsible Fed policy. Also, remember that it was Jay Powell who did everything he did to help get you re-elected back in November 2020. After cutting rates three times in late 2019, he went on to slice them to zero in the immediate aftermath of the pandemic and embarked on a $3 trillion quantitative easing program to help save the economy. Mr. President, that was all done on your watch. My friend and your Special Assistant, Joe Lavorgna, was on CNBC last week lambasting the Fed and itemizing how wrong it has been on so many forecasts in the past. It is not advised for one economist with a track record of his own to attack other economists, but so be it. This is the environment we are in. Replete with rancor. Joe's major point is that the Fed is understating the downward push on inflation coming from the AI-induced productivity boom. Now, he said that the productivity benefits are already here but, in fact, the four-quarter trend in nonfarm business productivity is only running at +1.3%. And forecasting what the new trend growth rate is going to be in terms of productivity is pure guesswork. Monetary policy must be as precise as possible and not based on throwing darts at the board. Moreover, Joe didn't mention this, but he surely must know it being a reputable economist, that there is an offset from productivity shifts due to a technological shift in terms of a higher real or natural rate of interest. I won't bore you with an economic dissertation, but this increase in what is called R-star will offset at least part of the dampening impact on inflation expectations when it comes time to determining where 'nominal' yields should be going. Everybody talks about how Alan Greenspan got this right, except for the fact that the bond market figured this out from mid-1998 to early 2000, when the yield on the 10-year T-note shot up more than +200 basis points. You are entitled to your opinion — I am talking about Joe, Mr. President, not you — but you can't have your own facts. Mr. President, I fully admit from afar that I am truly worried about the economic advice you are receiving from your inner circle. The truth can often be uncomfortable, but I don't sense they are being altogether that truthful, especially when they espouse a premature cut in the funds rate. The risk of a bond market backlash — and the dollar too — is not trivial. I also heard from former St. Louis Fed President Jim Bullard, who stated this week that the president should be able to pick and choose who leads the Fed at any time, to the effect that the May retirement date should be a relic of the past. Well, from my lens, it was you, President Trump, who chose Jay Powell for this job eight years ago. And while I have had my disagreements with Mr. Powell time and again, he really has not done that bad of a job. Yes, he bungled the 'transitory' file in 2021 and into 2022. But think of the bright side, Mr. President. That mistake helped get you elected! If Powell makes the same mistake twice, you may well get 'Bidened' yourself, and that is the last thing you want to have happen prior to the November 2026 mid-term elections. Please take this advice in the respectful manner it is intended. Nobody else in your inner circle is going to tell you the truth for fear of recrimination. But I would pivot if I were in your shoes, sir, from so sharply criticizing Jay Powell to praising him. And please do not fire him or encourage him to resign. So, consider this to be an 'awareness' letter — and when you get the chance, as a point of emphasis, be sure to thank Jay Powell in your next comment on Truth Social because he is at least partly responsible for you having the keys to the White House. Imagine the benefits that accrue either later this year or in 2026 when BOTH interest rates and underlying inflation will be falling in tandem. Chances are that, at that time, you will have wished Powell was still at the helm. Respectfully yours, David Rosenberg, founder of Rosenberg Research.
National Post
21 minutes ago
- National Post
Terry Newman: Hockey Canada acquittals a reckoning for MeToo excess
Everyone in Canada seems to be living in the upside-down when it comes to the results of the Hockey Canada sexual assault trial. Headlines call the outcome everything from a ' crushing day ' to ' absolutely gutting for sexual assault survivors.' Megan Savard, a female lawyer representing one of the players, was criticized for even taking the case solely on the basis of being female. Article content Article content After seven long years, not only did Justice Maria Carroccia deliver verdicts of not guilty on all counts, she went much further, concluding that the complainant in the case had consented. Thursday's ruling is a reckoning — not for Hockey Canada, but for North American society, and the excesses of the MeToo movement. Article content Article content The years leading up to this point included a shady settlement paid out by Hockey Canada without the knowledge of the then junior hockey players who were eventually charged, a mistrial, and two dismissed juries. Article content And after it all, Carroccia found all five accused, Michael McLeod, Carter Hart, Alex Formenton, Dillon Dubé, and Cal Foote, not guilty. Article content 'I do not find the evidence of E.M. credible or reliable. The Crown did not meet the onus on any of the counts before me,' she said when delivering her verdict in London, Ont. Thursday morning. Article content 'Much has been made in this case about the concept of consent. This case, on its facts, does not raise issues of the reformulation of the legal concept of consent. In this case, I have found actual consent not vitiated by fear.' Article content Article content In other words, based on inconsistencies in testimony and the evidence provided, Justice Carroccia did not believe sexual assault had taken place. Article content Article content E.M., the complainant, claimed during the trial she had been coerced into non-consensual sexual acts by multiple players in a hotel room, feeling intimidated and unable to leave. The defence, on the other hand, maintained that the acts performed that night were consensual, based on her willingness to engage in the acts and two recorded videos, one in which she said that she was 'okay with this,' and 'it was all consensual.' Article content In her version of the story, E.M. only consented to sex with one of the men, McLeod, who later texted the other men in a group chat to ask if they wanted to join them for group sex. Article content In McLeod's version, when more men arrived in the room, E.M. asked them to have sex with her, was upset when they would not, and offered them oral sex instead. Article content The judge, though, pointed to the inconsistencies between E.M.'s initial 2018 police statement and her 2022 civil suit against the players and Hockey Canada. In the first statement 'she did not describe being scared in the room.' Fear was not mentioned until the civil suit.
CTV News
21 minutes ago
- CTV News
Case of Montreal father accused of killing 9-year-old daughter moves to grand jury
This undated booking photo provided by the New York State Police shows Luciano Frattolin, who is charged with murder and concealing of a corpse in the death of his daughter, Melina Frattolin. (New York State Police via AP) The court appearance for the Montreal man accused of killing his nine-year-old daughter in the United States has been cancelled. Luciano Frattolin, 45, was set to appear at the town courthouse in Ticonderoga, N.Y., Friday afternoon, but the court said the appearance will no longer take place. 'The felony hearing for Friday at 1 o'clock is cancelled. The case is being held for grand jury action,' stated the courthouse's voicemail. 'The court has no further information.' 9-year-old daughter of Luciano Fratollin died from drowning, autopsy finds 9-year-old daughter of Luciano Fratollin died from drowning, autopsy finds Grand juries in the United States are groups of citizens called by the court to determine whether there's probable cause for a case to proceed to trial. They do not determine guilt or innocence, and are usually composed of 16 to 23 people. Prosecutors present their evidence during grand jury hearings, which are private, and can include court documents and witness testimony. Frattolin's daughter, Melina Frattolin, was found dead on July 20 in a shallow pond in Ticonderoga, about 50 kilometres northeast of Lake George near the New York-Vermont boundary. The father and daughter entered the U.S. on July 11 for a vacation and were supposed to return the day her body was found. On Tuesday, New York State police revealed preliminary autopsy results into her death, revealing that Melina died of asphyxia due to drowning and ruling her death a homicide. Her father was charged a day earlier with second-degree murder and the concealment of a human corpse. The Associated Press reported that a plea of not guilty was entered on Frattolin's behalf Monday morning.
