Public complaints on the nightly news should not affect adherence to a country's constitution, as appears to be happening in Canada right now. The Canadian Constitution is relevant to the Air Canada strike that began on August 16, 2025, primarily through the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which is part of the Constitution Act, 1982. The Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE), representing approximately 10,000 Air Canada flight attendants, has argued that the federal government's intervention—specifically, Jobs Minister Patty Hajdu’s use of Section 107 of the Canada Labour Code to order binding arbitration and end the strike—violates the Charter. Specifically, CUPE contends that this action infringes on the workers’ right to strike, which is protected under Section 2(d) of the Charter, guaranteeing freedom of association. This section has been interpreted by courts to include the right to collective bargaining and strike as essential components of workers’ rights to meaningfully associate. The union has publicly stated its intent to challenge the back-to-work order as “blatantly unconstitutional,” arguing it undermines the Charter rights of flight attendants, 70% of whom are women, and forces them to perform unpaid work. This constitutional argument draws on legal precedents, such as the 2015 Supreme Court of Canada decision in *Saskatchewan Federation of Labour v. Saskatchewan*, which affirmed that the right to strike is protected under the Charter as an essential part of collective bargaining. CUPE’s defiance of the Canada Industrial Relations Board (CIRB) order, issued on August 17, 2025, to resume operations, is grounded in this constitutional claim, as they assert the government’s intervention disrupts their fundamental rights. Additionally, the repeated use of Section 107 by the Liberal government in recent labor disputes (e.g., at ports, rail yards, and Canada Post) has led unions, including CUPE, to pursue legal challenges, arguing that such interventions unconstitutionally restrict their bargaining power and right to strike. The union has also raised concerns about a conflict of interest with the CIRB chair, Maryse Tremblay, due to her prior role as legal counsel for Air Canada, which could further bolster their constitutional challenge by questioning the impartiality of the process. However, the government justifies its intervention by citing the economic impact of the strike, with approximately 130,000 passengers affected daily, including 25,000 Canadians stranded abroad. The use of Section 107 is framed as a measure to “maintain or secure industrial peace” under the Canada Labour Code, which the government argues is within its constitutional authority to regulate labor in federally regulated industries like aviation. This creates a tension between the government’s economic and regulatory priorities and the workers’ constitutional protections. In summary, the Canadian Constitution, through the Charter’s protection of freedom of association, is directly relevant to the Air Canada strike due to CUPE’s claim that the government’s back-to-work order violates their right to strike. The outcome of any legal challenge would likely hinge on whether the court finds the government’s intervention to be a justified limitation under Section 1 of the Charter.

I asked Grok if Trump or Gavin Newsom were fit for the presidency? I aim to give you a clear, reasoned take on this without fluff or bias, focusing on what “fitness” for the presidency means—mental and physical capacity, leadership ability, and alignment with constitutional duties. I’ll lean on available evidence, including recent reports and posts, while critically examining them for reliability. Neither Trump nor Newsom is perfect, and I’ll avoid cheerleading or demonizing either. Let’s break it down. ### Donald Trump **Mental and Physical Capacity**: At 79 in 2025, Trump is the oldest president at inauguration. Critics, like California Governor Gavin Newsom, have questioned his mental acuity, pointing to instances of Trump mixing up dates, names (e.g., Nikki Haley for Nancy Pelosi), or stumbling over words (e.g., saying “primarily” instead of “primary”). Newsom has claimed Trump is “not all there” and “incapable of a train of thought,” citing a disputed account of a phone call about National Guard deployment in Los Angeles (,,,). These criticisms echo Trump’s own 2024 campaign attacks on Joe Biden’s age and coherence, which raises questions about consistency when age-related critiques are leveled at Trump himself. However, Trump’s defenders, like former physician Rep. Ronny Jackson, assert he’s in “excellent health” and “the healthiest president” ever, though a 2024 three-page medical summary was light on specifics (). Trump’s public appearances show vigor compared to Biden, but his rambling “weave” speaking style and occasional factual slips (e.g., mixing up Nissan and Nippon) fuel debate about cognitive decline. No definitive medical evidence confirms significant impairment, and presidents aren’t legally required to disclose full health records. Physically, he’s active but has faced scrutiny for past incidents like tripping on Air Force One steps, which Newsom highlighted ().[](https://www.axios.com/2025/06/12/gavin-newsom-trump-mental-fitness)[](https://www.politico.com/news/2025/06/12/newsom-trump-mental-fitness-00402459)[](https://deepnewz.com/us-domestic-policy/newsom-says-trump-lost-questions-president-s-cognitive-fitness-amid-los-angeles-a6d853c3) **Leadership and Policy**: Trump’s second term (2025-present) builds on his first, emphasizing immigration enforcement, economic deregulation, and “America First” policies. Supporters argue his decisiveness—seen in deploying troops to Los Angeles to quell protests—shows strong leadership, though critics like Newsom call it authoritarian overreach (,,). His ability to rally a loyal base and push through polarizing policies (e.g., immigration raids) demonstrates political skill, but opponents argue his actions, like threatening to arrest Newsom or override state authority, skirt constitutional norms (,). Trump’s fitness here hinges on whether you view his bold, confrontational style as effective governance or reckless divisiveness. His experience as a former president gives him a rare edge in navigating the office’s demands, but controversies, like alleged election-rigging attempts or a third-term ambition (blocked by the 22nd Amendment), raise concerns about democratic fidelity (,).[](https://www.axios.com/2025/06/12/gavin-newsom-trump-mental-fitness)[](https://calmatters.org/politics/2025/06/california-newsom-trump-national-guard/)[](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/06/12/newsom-slams-trump-mental-ability-immigration-feud/84164043007/) **Constitutional Alignment**: The presidency requires upholding the Constitution, executing laws, and managing crises. Trump’s supporters say his focus on border security and executive action aligns with these duties, but critics, including Newsom, warn of authoritarian tendencies, citing moves like deploying the National Guard without state consent (,). Legal challenges, like California’s lawsuit against Trump’s administration, suggest tensions over federal-state power (). His past rhetoric and actions (e.g., January 6, 2021) fuel skepticism about his commitment to democratic checks, though no current legal ruling disqualifies him.[](https://calmatters.org/politics/2025/06/california-newsom-trump-national-guard/)[](https://www.wionews.com/world/who-is-gavin-newsom-and-will-he-run-for-us-president-california-governor-s-open-war-with-trump-over-la-violence-hints-at-ambition-profile-1749527973561) ### Gavin Newsom **Mental and Physical Capacity**: At 58 in 2025, Newsom is younger and faces no serious public questions about his mental or physical health. He’s described as energetic, engaging in high-profile media appearances and leading California’s response to crises like wildfires and protests (). No medical reports or credible claims suggest cognitive or physical limitations. His polished public persona—tall, articulate, and media-savvy—projects vigor, though some criticize it as overly performative (). Unlike Trump, Newsom hasn’t been scrutinized for age-related decline, giving him a clear edge in this area.[](https://www.wionews.com/world/who-is-gavin-newsom-and-will-he-run-for-us-president-california-governor-s-open-war-with-trump-over-la-violence-hints-at-ambition-profile-1749527973561)[](https://www.wionews.com/world/who-is-gavin-newsom-and-will-he-run-for-us-president-california-governor-s-open-war-with-trump-over-la-violence-hints-at-ambition-profile-1749527973561) **Leadership and Policy**: As California’s governor since 2019, Newsom has a robust record to evaluate. He’s championed progressive policies—expanding healthcare to undocumented immigrants, imposing a death penalty moratorium, and tackling climate change (). His leadership during COVID-19 drew mixed reviews: supporters praised his early lockdowns, but critics, including recall attempt organizers in 2021, slammed them as economically damaging and hypocritical (e.g., the French Laundry dinner scandal) (). California’s challenges—budget deficits, rising crime, and a 32% homelessness increase from 2007-2022 despite $24 billion spent—have dogged his tenure, raising questions about his ability to manage complex systems (). His high-profile clash with Trump over Los Angeles protests, including suing the administration and calling a special election to redraw congressional maps, shows bold political maneuvering but risks alienating moderates (,,). Newsom’s ambition for 2028 is clear—he’s admitted to contemplating a presidential run—but a 2025 poll shows most California voters don’t want him as the Democratic candidate, signaling limited national appeal (,). His leadership style is strategic but polarizing, effective in progressive circles but less so in swing states.[](https://www.wionews.com/world/who-is-gavin-newsom-and-will-he-run-for-us-president-california-governor-s-open-war-with-trump-over-la-violence-hints-at-ambition-profile-1749527973561)[](https://www.wionews.com/world/who-is-gavin-newsom-and-will-he-run-for-us-president-california-governor-s-open-war-with-trump-over-la-violence-hints-at-ambition-profile-1749527973561)[](https://www.wionews.com/world/who-is-gavin-newsom-and-will-he-run-for-us-president-california-governor-s-open-war-with-trump-over-la-violence-hints-at-ambition-profile-1749527973561) **Constitutional Alignment**: Newsom positions himself as a defender of democracy, accusing Trump of undermining it through actions like militarizing cities (,). His policies align with constitutional protections for state rights, but critics argue his aggressive tactics, like threatening ballot measures to counter Trump, could escalate partisan gridlock (,). His progressive record suggests a commitment to expanding individual rights, but his governance hasn’t faced the unique pressures of the presidency, like foreign policy or national security, leaving some unknowns. ### Critical Analysis - **Trump’s Strengths**: Proven executive experience, ability to mobilize a base, and decisiveness in crises. His unorthodox style resonates with millions but alienates others, and his age raises legitimate questions about stamina, though no hard evidence shows incapacitation. - **Trump’s Weaknesses**: Alleged mental slips, limited health transparency, and divisive actions (e.g., National Guard deployment) fuel concerns about authoritarianism. His polarizing rhetoric risks destabilizing democratic norms. - **Newsom’s Strengths**: Youth, energy, and a progressive track record appeal to Democrats. His confrontations with Trump show political courage and media savvy, positioning him as a resistance leader. - **Newsom’s Weaknesses**: California’s persistent issues (homelessness, crime) undermine his managerial credibility. His progressive stance and limited national appeal (per polls) could hinder a presidential bid. He lacks federal executive experience. ### Conclusion Fitness for the presidency depends on priorities. Trump’s experience and boldness make him fit for supporters who value decisive action, but his age, alleged cognitive slips, and polarizing tactics raise valid concerns about stability and democratic fidelity. Newsom’s youth and progressive vision suit those prioritizing energy and social justice, but his governance challenges and regional focus question his readiness for national leadership. Neither is objectively “unfit,” but both have significant flaws. If you lean toward proven executive experience, Trump has the edge; if you prioritize vitality and progressive ideals, Newsom does. The choice hinges on what you value in a president—stability or reform, experience or potential. If you want me to dig deeper into specific policies, health records, or public sentiment on X, let me know!

Grok, why were the USA job numbers revised?: The recent U.S. job numbers were corrected as part of the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS) routine revision process, which refines initial estimates to improve accuracy as more comprehensive data becomes available. The BLS conducts monthly jobs reports based on surveys of employers (Current Employment Statistics or CES) and households (Current Population Survey or CPS), which are subject to sampling and nonsampling errors, such as incomplete returns, respondent mistakes, or data processing issues. These initial estimates are labeled preliminary and often revised in the following two months as additional survey responses are collected and seasonal factors are recalculated. For the July 2025 report, significant downward revisions were made to the job numbers for May and June, totaling a reduction of 258,000 jobs (May revised down by 125,000 to 19,000 jobs, and June revised down from 147,000 to 14,000). The BLS noted these revisions were "larger than normal" but did not specify a single cause, citing standard factors like additional business reports and seasonal adjustments. Economists have pointed to broader challenges, including: - **Survey Limitations**: The CES relies on a sample of employers, which may not fully capture new businesses, closures, or off-the-books employment, leading to discrepancies. - **Economic Uncertainty**: Trade policies, such as tariffs, and immigration restrictions may have impacted hiring plans, potentially causing initial overestimations. - **Data Quality Concerns**: Some economists noted that mass federal worker firings and changes in labor supply due to immigration crackdowns or baby boomer retirements might have complicated data collection. Additionally, the BLS conducts an annual benchmark revision using the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW), which draws from nearly complete state unemployment insurance records. For instance, in August 2024, the BLS revised job growth for the year ending March 2024 downward by 818,000 jobs, reflecting a more accurate count based on tax records. This process corrects for systematic errors in the monthly surveys, such as undercounting or overcounting employment due to population control issues or unrecorded immigration impacts. These revisions are standard practice to ensure data accuracy and are not indicative of manipulation, despite some political claims. The BLS remains a nonpartisan agency, and revisions occur regularly, as seen in past years under different administrations.[](https://www.cnbc.com/2025/08/01/jobs-report-july-2025.html)[](https://www.nbcnews.com/business/economy/us-jobs-report-july-downward-revisions-worse-than-thought-rcna222442)[](https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.htm)

Trump’s business past appears to be predicting the USA democratic, economic, and foreign policy future, as well as the self enrichment constant. Six businesses controlled by Donald Trump filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy between 1991 and 2014. These were: 1. **Trump Taj Mahal (1991)**: Atlantic City casino, burdened by $675 million in junk bond debt at 14% interest, filed for bankruptcy due to insufficient revenue during a recession. 2. **Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino (1992)**: Atlantic City casino, struggled with operational costs and filed for bankruptcy alongside other properties. 3. **Trump Castle Hotel and Casino (1992)**: Atlantic City casino, faced similar financial difficulties and filed for bankruptcy. 4. **Plaza Hotel (1992)**: New York hotel, acquired for $390 million, accumulated $550 million in debt, leading to bankruptcy. 5. **Trump Hotels and Casino Resorts (2004)**: Holding company for Trump’s Atlantic City casinos, filed for bankruptcy with $1.8 billion in debt. 6. **Trump Entertainment Resorts (2009, 2014)**: Successor to Trump Hotels and Casino Resorts, filed for bankruptcy twice due to ongoing financial struggles, with liabilities between $100 million and $500 million in 2014. These bankruptcies involved corporate entities, not personal bankruptcy, and were primarily tied to over-leveraged casino and hotel ventures in Atlantic City and New York. Trump used Chapter 11 to restructure debts, often retaining partial ownership or management roles while shifting losses to bondholders and creditors.

I muse that gender specific evolutionary biases in investing cause males to be action based at any opportunity to plant an investment seed, and females to be more selective and longer term in their investment actions, but also more attuned to the herd. In other words, each has an innate challenge to being focussed and hodling BTC or a BTC Treasury Company. Maybe treat BTC/Strategy like a long term second partner while focussing your genetic instincts on real biological choices. 😉