Note: Transcripts may contain errors. If you wish to re-use all, or part of, a transcript, please contact CBC for permission. Please check the corresponding audio before quoting in print. Copyright © CBC 2025

The AIH transcript for April 03, 2025

For more episodes of this podcast, please click this link.

NIL KÖKSAL: Hello, I'm Nil Köksal.

CHRIS HOWDEN: Good evening, I'm Chris Howden. This is As It Happens.

[theme]

CH: Tonight:

NK: Levy lifting. For Brian Pannebecker, yesterday really did feel like "Liberation Day." The Auto Workers for Trump founder explains why he’s supporting the U.S. president’s tariff plans, in his words, "100 per cent."

CH: Math hysteria. We’ll hear from an American journalist who has tried to make sense of the many, many numbers that were on Donald Trump's charts yesterday -- as the U.S. blew up global trade from the comfort of the Rose Garden.

NK: United front. Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Andrew Furey once again warns that the U.S. tariffs are bad news for Canada -- but the silver lining, he says, this time is that the provinces and territories are largely standing together to fight the threat.

CH: A second chance for a first impressionist. An art curator says paintings by Blanche Hoschedé Monet have been stuck in the shadow of her famous step-father's famous work for far too long.

NK: Postage with the mostage. A pair of friends push the envelope by mailing each other the very same birthday card, back and forth, since they were teenagers -- and it's in remarkably good shape considering they're in their 90s.

CH: And...a story with a lot of layers. Researchers at Dalhousie are using AI to interpret the language of chickens -- because they've got a lot of time on their hens.

CH: As It Happens, the Thursday Edition. Radio that stresses: these scientists are working around the cluck.

[theme]

Part 1: U.S. Tariff Supporter, Tariffs: Furey, 95th Birthday Card

U.S. Tariff Supporter

Guest: Brian Pannebecker

CH: If you were thinking about buying a new car, you might want to sit down. And buckle up. Today, U.S. President Donald Trump's 25 per cent tariffs on imported vehicles kicked in. Which means the price of a car could quickly skyrocket by thousands of dollars. In response, Stellantis has announced that the company is closing its Windsor Assembly Plant for two weeks, and that its Toluca Assembly Plant in Mexico will idle in April. It also temporarily laid off 900 workers at plants in Michigan and Indiana. And if that isn't enough, tariffs on auto parts are on the way next month -- which will make even domestically assembled cars more expensive. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney announced today that Canada will respond by matching the US tariffs on autos. Brian Pannebecker is a retired autoworker and the founder of the Auto Workers for Trump group. He spoke at the president's "Liberation Day" event at the White House Rose Garden yesterday. We reached him in Fort Myers, Florida.

NK: Brian, it's Day One, as you know, of these auto tariffs. From your perspective, how are things going so far?

BRIAN PANNEBECKER: It's day one, we're only 24 hours into this, or less than 24 hours, but I would say this, they were having an effect even before yesterday when President Trump announced them. We've got Stellantis bringing a new product into a plant that had been idled for a couple of years in Belvedere, Illinois. They're going to put a new EV pickup truck in there. We've had an announcement, I believe it was from Hyundai, but it was one of the South Korean automakers who announced a multi-billion dollar investment in one of southern states to build a new plant to produce automobiles. So, they were having an effect just by the mere fact that President Trump had, I don't like to use the word threatened, but maybe promised to implement the tariffs. So, I think they're going to continue to have a positive effect. It's going to spur more plants to bring their production back to the United States, where a lot of it originally was.

NK: What's the time frame for those two examples that you mentioned? Because it certainly won't be quick, that shift.

BP: So, the auto companies now are very good at doing changeovers. They used to have to shut the plants down for a couple of weeks to remove existing tooling and put new tooling in for the model changeover from year to year, but they, they're able, they're so good at it now they're able to do model changeovers on the fly without even stopping production. So, I think we're talking months, maybe a year or two tops. And I think...go ahead.

NK: You know, I was going to say your view on that, your timeline is considerably more optimistic than some other experts who are looking at it. But in terms of the other news that we're hearing, including from Stellantis, which you mentioned, a temporary layoff of 900 workers in plants across the United States. There's also an impact on thousands of workers in Ontario as well, in Canada, as you know. Specifically with the workers in the U.S. though, because I know you're concerned with them. You used to be one of them. How do those layoffs sit with you?

BP: Well, the key word is temporary, and I'd like to take issue with what you said, the experts differing on how long they say this is going to take. We've listened to the so-called experts for years, decades, as a matter of fact, and they told us, oh, NAFTA wasn't going to hurt us. You know, we're a service-oriented economy in the United States now. We don't need manufacturing. We don't need to be able to build cars, and trucks, and tanks, and military equipment here. That was all nonsense that was all coming from so-called experts.

NK: You've been laid off in the past, I know. You have experience with it. You're retired now. What would you say, though, to those Stellantis workers, who even if it's temporary, their families, they're worried about their personal future and the future of the industry. They might say it's easier for you to say that because you're out of it now. They're still in it, and there's still a lot of uncertainty.

BP: No, there's two types of layoff, Nil, temporary and indefinite. These are temporary layoffs. And yes, I have been laid off temporarily, and I've been laid off indefinitely before, so I know how it feels. And I'm not unsympathetic towards those people, but listen, we've watched our auto industry get decimated. And dozens of auto plants have closed, and those buildings are sitting as, like, monuments around Detroit, and falling into decay. This has been going on for decades as we tried the same old thing, and we allowed our jobs to leave our country for lower cost labour countries. So, Donald Trump has said enough. We're running huge trade deficits. We, we've lost our manufacturing base, and he's doing something about it. He's standing up and fighting for us, and he is going to turn this around. I'm not going to pass any judgment for the first six months or a year. And I think a year to two years into his administration, a lot of the critics are going to have to eat their words.

NK: In terms of the Stellantis plant -- the assembly plant in Windsor, as we talked about for that temporary pause -- we spoke last week, I spoke last week, to John D'Agnolo, he's the president of Unifor Local 200 in Windsor, and the auto council chair at Unifor. He and a lot of workers felt confused and betrayed by fellow auto workers in the U.S. because he says there's just a river that separates Windsor and Detroit. He sounds like he loves Detroit as much as you do. He also loves Windsor. I'll just play you a little bit of what he had to say about, at that time, the threat of these tariffs.

SOUNDCLIP

JOHN D'Agnolo: I represent just under 2,000 workers at Ford Motor Company that makes the engines for the trucks. What we supply is a Kentucky truck that has 9,200 workers, and a Dearborn truck that has close to 4,000, and Ohio. So, when you, when you hear the president telling it's unfair trade, it's not. And to hear those words come out of his mouth, he's lying to the people in the U.S. And he's going to ruin people's lives.

NK: How do you respond, Brian?

BP: That's fear-mongering, and I wonder if he felt that same kind of rage when our jobs were going over to Canada? We've had some fantastic engine plants here in the United States, two of them in Macomb County. One was called the Mount Road engine plant, that was a Chrysler plant. The other one is a Romeo engine plant that had previously been a tractor plant. And this guy's crying the blues. And believe me, my heart goes out to people who may lose their jobs or may be laid off, but it's not a one-way street. This is a two-way street, and we've been watching our jobs disappear and move to other countries, not just for years, decades. Drive over from Windsor, come across the bridge, drive through Detroit, and look at the abandoned auto plants, one after another, up and down these industrial corridors along the railroad tracks They're sitting like sad monuments to what was once the Motor City, the, the power of full production centre during World War Two, the arsenal of democracy. It's, it's like a, a war zone now because all of our manufacturing has left. The tariff is zero if the product is produced here in the United States. So, you know, it goes two ways. So, really, I'm not gonna shed any tears for the guys who are seeing jobs move back to the United States if they're over in Canada because we sat here and watched the same thing happen to our jobs for decades.

NK: I appreciate your time, Brian. Thank you.

BP: Thank you very much.

CH: Brian Pannebecker is a retired autoworker and the founder of the Auto Workers for Trump group. We reached him in Fort Myers, Florida.

[hip-hop]

Tariffs: Furey

Guest: Andrew Furey

CH: As you heard, U.S. President Donald Trump and his supporters are really pushing those new tariffs -- and today, Canada is pushing back. In response to the tariffs on Canadian vehicles that came into force today, Prime Minister and Liberal leader Mark Carney imposed 25 per cent countertariffs on American-made automobiles. But he held back from broader retaliation. Here's what he had to say after a call with the premiers.

SOUNDCLIP

MARK CARNEY: Yesterday's actions by the U.S. administration -- while not specifically targeting Canada -- will rupture the global economy and adversely affect global economic growth. The global economy is fundamentally different today than it was yesterday. The system of global trade anchored on the United States that Canada has relied on since the end of the Second World War, a system that -- while not perfect -- has helped to deliver prosperity for our country for decades is over.

CH: Mark Carney talking to reporters in Ottawa. Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Andrew Furey was part of the huddle with Mr. Carney. We reached him in St. John's.

NK: Premier Furey, do you agree with what we just heard there? Is today fundamentally different than yesterday in terms of our economy?

ANDREW FUREY: I do indeed. Yesterday, you saw the president of the United States try to recraft and reshape the global trade marketplace. As you saw, he singled out not one country, but many different countries. And there is no way that the scale of his actions, the scope of his actions cannot have a material impact on marketplaces around the world. Investors, by the way, the anxiety and the uncertainty in them will definitely lead to a different approach, perhaps a more cautious approach around the world, and specifically in North America.

NK: These tariffs, as you know, are going to hit certain parts of this country quite hard. Ontario, the auto hub of the country, will be very hard hit. We know a car plant in Windsor is set to shut down for two weeks -- the Stellantis plant. That will affect workers there. Do you see this potentially creating divisions across the country? You know, when certain provinces, certain areas are very hard-hit and others might not be?

AF: No, in fact, the opposite. I think this is a moment of national unity where, despite our regional differences, we need to be strongly united in supporting families, workers, and the industry at large, no matter what area of the country you come from. From Day One in this national crisis, I was acutely aware and voiced my opinion that regardless of regional specific interests or sensitivities, the response had to be a united Canadian front. And my heart breaks for those in the auto sector today, but it could be the seafood industry tomorrow. And I know the people of Ontario would be there to support the people in Newfoundland and Labrador, and the people of Newfoundland and Labradour will be there to support the people of Ontario, the people of Saskatchewan, the people of Quebec. Because this is not a Quebec problem, an Ontario problem, this is a Canadian problem.

NK: What could that support look like if we're talking about Newfoundland and Labrador supporting Ontario, for example? Beyond, you know, you're going out speaking to American media as well, being vocal about your concerns. What else could that support look like?

AF: So, as you suggest, the support can be there in our lobby efforts south of the border. But in Newfoundland and Labrador, we are looking to refine our procurement process, moving away from the United States where possible. And Ontario is a great source of manufacturing, and we are looking to secure and procure different items from Ontario that perhaps we would have normally sourced from the United States. Premier Ford and I are good friends. We've been there to support the people of Ontario in the past, by the way, including sending medical teams to the stressed-out and burnt-out ICUs in downtown Toronto during the COVID pandemic, and we'll be there to support them in any way, shape, or form we can now because I know Premier Ford would be there to support people of Newfoundland and Labrador as well.

NK: Mark Carney also spoke about wanting to open trade negotiations with the Trump administration after the election here. At that meeting today -- that huddle -- did you get assurances that those talks are in fact going to happen? I mean, how did you feel leaving that meeting about the state of things?

AF: If I was looking for a silver lining in the last few months, it came in the change of tone from the president of the United States. For the first time since the president of the United States was elected, he did not refer to Canada as the 51st State. He referred to us as a country. For the 1st time since he was elected he referred to our democratically elected prime minister as the prime minister. And while that may seem small in the acute attempt to resolve the, the fiscal issues with respect to the tariffs, that is a definitive change in posture. And I took that as a positive, constructive move in what had otherwise been a destructive dialog. And full credit to the prime minister and his leadership to get us to that point. I think that that relationship in resetting the table with respect to our sovereignty and the respect for our country will enable, therefore, discussions with respect to trade.

NK: The White House press secretary, Carolyn Leavitt, was speaking about the tariffs and Trump's determination, as she suggested, to stay with them. Let's listen to a bit of that.

SOUNDCLIP

CAROLYN LEAVITT: The president made it clear yesterday, this is not a negotiation. This is a national emergency. He's always willing to pick up the phone to answer calls, but he laid out the case yesterday for why we are doing this. And these countries around the world have had 70 years to do the right thing by the American people, and they have chosen not to. They have ripped off American workers. They have taken our jobs overseas. The president is putting an end to that yesterday.

NK: So, when you hear that, how long do you think this might drag on? Do you think we're going to see a further softening? And that these other tariffs might go away?

AF: I think that should be the principal goal and objective. But as the prime minister said, this trade relationship doesn't exist in a vacuum. This trade relationship exists in a global context. And while we want them, and we'll strive for immediate resolution that is favourable to Canadians, the global trade marketplace has been entirely disrupted. And that won't change with a new CUSMA. It may soften the blow. Uh, but the economics of the world did change yesterday. But hopefully, you know, this doesn't trigger or deepen a depression, and, and calmer, rational, more mature, uh, logical thought processes are able to resolve, not just the Canadian issue, but that the global the global trade, uh, context

NK: Premier, I appreciate your time. Thank you.

AF: Thank you so much, Nil.

CH: That was Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Andrew Furey in St. John's.

[newsy theme]

95th Birthday Card

Guests: Pat DeReamer, Mary Wheaton-Kroger

CH: We all have birthday traditions -- a favourite kind of cake, favourite meal, a favourite restaurant. And if we're really lucky, a card from a favourite person, via snail mail. There's nothing quite like a good old-fashioned birthday card arriving in the mailbox. From someone who not only thought of you, but thought of you early enough, and fondly enough, to get you a card, and sign it, and send it -- well ahead of your actual birthday. Which I guess makes Pat DeReamer and Mary Wheaton-Kroger really, really lucky. Because they've been exchanging the very same birthday card -- sending it back and forth -- since Pat turned 14. And this week, she turned 95. We reached Pat DeReamer in St. Matthews, Kentucky and Mary Wheaton-Kroger in Carmel, Indiana.

NK: Pat, happy birthday to you, first of all.

PAT DEREAMER: Thank you, thank you, thank you.

NK: [chuckling] You're welcome, you're welcome, you're welcome. I wanna see if you could just, I was looking at a photograph of this very special birthday card that you've had for all these years between the two of you. Can you describe what it looks like?

PD: Well, it says, "here's wishing you a birthday that is really, really colossal".

NK: And it has a dog on the front, and the dog has, like, this lovely polka dot sort of bow tie.

PT: He does.

NK: And there are these two, there are these two blue circles. I couldn't make out, are they the dog's sunglasses? What's happening?

PD: Mary, do you remember?

MARY WHEATON-KROGER: No, I don't remember. [NK chuckles]

PD: The dog has two, like, fuzzy balls, and they're kind of in his ears. And over the years, they have flattened out and become just flat balls. But they're really soft when you touch them. [NK chuckles]

MWK: Well, that's right.

PD: And the inside of the card -- when you open it up -- has this huge dinosaur. And it has all these bones. And so, over the years, we've put the year and our name in the dinosaur's bones.

NK: Amazing!

MWK: Because it had all the spaces to put all this information, [chuckling] and the year and everything.

NK: Yeah. Decades -- decades -- this card has been going back and forth. It looks to be in great shape. You guys have taken very good care of it. Pat, if you think back to the first time that you met Mary, what do you remember about it?

PD: Well, I had just moved to Indianapolis, and it was just at the beginning of the war, and I was kind of the lone duck in our Eighth Grade class -- Seventh or Eighth Grade class. And Mary was very kind. She lived close to the school, and she asked me over to her house after school, and I went many times afterwards because I discovered they had a total, complete soda fountain bar with ice cream in their basement.

NK: You hit the jackpot, a new friend and a soda fountain bar?

PD: Yes. And Mary and I started going to church together, and we would ride the bus. And we weren't what you would call really good girls in church, I don't think. We both, I think, drew on the program, you know, how they used to give what was going to happen, and the songs, and so forth? And I think we probably scribbled on those.

NK: Oh?! Does that ring a bell for you, Mary? Do you remember that?

MWK: Maybe. I can't remember all that.

[NK and PD chuckle] Do you remember meeting Pat, though? And why do you think you've stayed friends so long?

MWK: Oh yes, we got along fine. She didn't live far away, and we could walk to each other's house. And I lived across the street from school. So, that made the soda fountain handy.

NK: I bet. You had to be selective with your friends to make sure they appreciated that. Why did you, Mary, do you think, keep up this tradition of sending it back and forth -- the card?

MWK: Well, that's the thing, neither one of us remembers who did it first.

PD: [chuckling] And we just kept going. And then, it got to be that our children kind of, well, is a birthday card still going back and forth? And I thought it was interesting. I looked inside because the inside of the card has a million names. Some of them, you know, it would say Mary Wheaton. And then, it went from Mary Wheaton to Mary Wheaton-Kroger. And then, there was Pat Shardlow, and then there was Pat shardlow-DeReamer, and there was Pat Shardslow-DeReamer-Surgeoner. And so, through our lives, our names changed all the time. And the inside of the card reads, because you're going to have this colossal birthday, you see. And then inside it says, "it's all for a long, long time before you all are going to be old fossils. [NK chuckles] And here we sit as old fossils [everyone laughs].

MWK: And now, we're there.

NK: [chuckle] You're younger than most people, I think, in spirits, you ladies, as I read about your story. So, your birthday is coming up in May, Mary, so you're going to get the card back. But Pat, that means you only get to keep the card for a month at any one time. Mary gets to keep it longer.

MWK: I kept it for a year.

NK: [PD chuckles] And where do you display it, Mary?

MWK: Oh, I had it in a special envelope. But since I've gotten older, I let my son keep it. So, he's, he's the keeper of the card.

PD: And we have done it for 60 years, and have a record in Guinness. But then we've gone another 20 years, which we never really thought we would. And so, we're now trying to get into the Guinness as the longest birthday card at 80 years.

MWK: I thought it was 70.

PD: Well, I won't argue because my math is not good.

MWK: Or 80 years. Obviously, I can't count. [PD laughs]

NK: I can barely count. I'm in the same boat, Mary. I get it. Pat, Mary, let me, let me just ask you before we let you both go. I know you have birthday celebrations, Pat. What do you think is the secret to a long friendship, with all of those life changes, and, and moves, you don't live in the same place, what's the secret?

MWK: Oh, I think it's, it's like we have a competition [NK chuckles] with the world, and no one else is doing it. And we love this still getting, keeping in touch.

PD: I think the secret to everything in life is love, showing and sharing love in any way you can. Whether it's just a hug, or whether it's stopping somebody with a smile, or whether it's shaking a firm hand, and, or even saying to one of your children, gee, I love you, or that was wonderful, or even to a stranger. Because there are people that you run into every day that you feel close to. And I think giving a hug when you leave is very special.

MWK: Love each other.

NK: Pat, Mary, this has been such a joy to speak with you both. Thank you so much for your time.

PD: Thank you, Nil, so much.

MWK: As to us.

CH: Pat DeReamer and Mary Wheaton-Kroger have been exchanging the same birthday card for eight decades. We reached Ms. DeReamer in St. Matthews, Kentucky and Ms. Wheaton-Kroger in Carmel, Indiana.

[pop]

Chicken Cluck App

CH: Welcome back, Cheryl. How are we doing today.

[happy chicken cluck?]

CH: Hm, I'm glad to hear you're content. Last week, you were having a little trouble with one of your work colleagues.

[what the cluck is this?]

CH: I’m sorry. I didn't mean to upset you. I was just wondering if you'd forgiven Allan. He is a rooster, after all -- he is going to wake you up by yelling.

[the kind of cluck that I imagine is made when laying a “Man of the Match” egg. You know that’s an AAA egg!]

CH: Cheryl, we've discussed this. If this is to be a safe space, I simply cannot have you laying eggs on my couch. I hope you agree.

[the happy cluck again]

CH: Not long ago, the idea of a chicken psychologist who could tell how chickens were feeling seemed like science fiction. Now, it's science fact -- thanks in part to the work of Suresh Neethirajan and his colleagues at Dalhousie University. Now, to laypeople like you and me, chicken sounds are hard to differentiate. But to lay-ing people like the chickens themselves…how did you like that? [NK laughs] As I was saying, yet, I questioned it, as to the lay-ing people. I’m saying it again like the chickens themselves, those sounds are communication. And to decipher this language, the researchers are using AI -- which Dr. Neethirajan describes as "a universal translator for chicken speech". And if you're a chicken farmer, or are, you know, just interested in picking up another language, you can download their new app, Cluckify, which was released on Monday. It has a collection of audio samples grouped under headings like "Distress Calls", "Hunger and Feeding Calls", and "Mating Calls", so you can listen and figure out whether your hen is trying to get busy laying eggs, or just get busy. Really listening to what chickens are saying will ideally improve chicken-farming practices, and, you know, the lives of the chickens themselves. So, we need to get all the chickens involved -- it's all hens on deck.

[dancehall]

Part 2: Tariff Math, Monet Stepdaughter Exhibit

Tariff Math

Guest: James Surowiecki

CH: On the surface it seems simple enough: Donald Trump says the tariffs he's imposing are payback -- that they're all reciprocal.

SOUNDCLIP

DONALD TRUMP: Reciprocal. That means they do it to us, and we do it to them. Very simple. Can't get any simpler than that. [clapping].

CH: Right. So, the tariffs the U.S. president announced yesterday are -- generally -- supposed to be 50 per cent of what other countries charge the States. That must mean that Vietnam was hit with a 46 per cent tariff because Vietnam is imposing double that -- 92 per cent -- on U.S. imports. You see? Simple! Except, of course, it isn't. It turns out the administration's tariff numbers aren't based on other countries' tariff rates at all. They're pegged to gaps between imports and exports, and calculated by dividing the trade deficit by a country's exports to the U.S. -- a fact that did not come up in the Liberation Day announcements yesterday. One of the first to crack this formula was journalist and Yale professor James Surowiecki, who posted his findings to X last night. We reached him today in New Haven, Connecticut.

NK: Professor, if we think back to last night, you're watching all of this unfold, and then you realize how the White House came up with these numbers. Was it a eureka moment, a light bulb moment for you?

JAMES SUROWIECKI: When I first saw the chart -- the chart that Trump was holding up -- I think anyone who knew anything about foreign trade looked at those numbers and said, wait, that those numbers do not make sense. So, I thought they had just kind of really fudged the definition of non-tariff trade barriers, and how they had measured it. And I thought, okay, well, they've probably just done that. So, then I just kind of started messing around with some of the numbers. And I didn't really, I mean, there weren't really that many options. And then, I was like, oh, okay. This is what it must be. It's just, they just took the trade deficit with a country, divided it by the imports we buy from that country and the percentage, they convert into a percentage, and that is the supposed tariff rate, which it's essentially a made-up number. But that's essentially how they got it.

NK: And you posted that to your social media. A White House spokesperson responded. What did they say?

JS: So, yeah, so that was actually kind of odd. So, I posted it, and for whatever reason it got a lot of traction. A deputy press secretary for the White House retweeted my tweet and basically said I was wrong. In order to show this, he posted a screenshot of a page that the government trade office for the United States had posted where they explained the formula they used. And this formula had some, like, Greek symbols in it as economic formulas often do. But if you did the math -- if you worked it out -- what it said was that the formula was exactly what I said it was. It was trade deficit divided by imports. I'm sure he just didn't understand it. I'm just sure he didn't know what the formula was. It was a very Twitter moment, I will say. It was just a very twitter moment.

NK: But it's the reality. They told you you were wrong, but gave a formula that proved exactly what you were saying, that you were right.

JS: [chuckling] Yeah, yeah.

NK: There's a spectacle always -- and we've spoken about this before -- with the U.S. president's presentations, press conferences. It's about creating a moment, and things that will live in people's heads -- usually supporters' heads. But what do you think is really behind the U.S. president's thinking on this?

JS: I actually think it's pretty simple. And it's that it's just going to sound sort of maybe too simplistic, but I really think it is this. I think Trump just really, really hates trade deficits and loves tariffs. And he's really interested, as you said, in spectacle, he's interested in being on TV, kind of drama, and being the centre of attention. But one of the exceptions to that is tariffs so, really, at this point, it's almost 40 years, he has consistently been an advocate of tariffs, has been obsessed with trade deficits. In the '80s, it was with Japan. And then, over time, it morphed into China. And China is obviously still important, but nowadays it's with anybody. And so, I think if you actually look at the formula that they're using, the underlying assumption of that formula is that if the United States has a trade deficit with a country, it has to be the result of that country doing something shady or unfair with its trade practices. That's basically what that using that formula's predicated on. And then, the second thing is Trump's goal in this -- I mean, it's an impossible goal -- But I think his goal is I think he wants to eliminate every single trade deficit the United States has with every single country.

NK: Yeah. The official statement released by the president's office said that, drive bilateral trade deficits to zero. Is that possible?

JS: Exactly! Yeah, no, it's not possible, and it's not even desirable. I mean, different countries have different, you know, specializations. In some cases, they have more stuff we want to buy than of ours that they want to or maybe even can afford to buy. There's no reason to expect that in a multilateral world, every single trade deficit will sum to zero. But I really think, you know, he basically -- Trump basically -- views every trade deficit as the United States getting ripped off. And he hates getting ripped off. And, you know, he sees the world in very, in very zero-sum terms. So, you know, I think most of, most economists think of trade as win-win. Like, I give you money, you give me something I want, we both end up better off because we both got what we wanted and so on. Trump, I think, really sees things in zero-some terms. It's like there's a winner and a loser, and if you are buying more than you are getting back -- especially if doing it without, like, driving a hard bargain -- then you're a loser. And he doesn't want to be a loser.

NK: Who do you think is going to be the winner and the loser ultimately in this?

JS: I mean, I think the obvious loser right from the start is going to be the American consumer, and American businesses that, you know, import goods from abroad as part of their supply chains, or obviously if they're retailers. I mean, you saw that today in the stock market. American retailers just got demolished even more than everybody else did. So, I think that they're the obvious losers. I do think this is obviously bad for exporting countries, a country like Vietnam that exports a lot of clothing and shoes to the United States, usually for American companies. But it will obviously have an impact on them. But I think the real loser is the world economy. I mean, trade wars are bad, and even if it doesn't morph into a complete war, just the existence of these massive tariffs -- and they are massive -- let's not, like, hide from that. You know, a tariff is a tax, and taxes reduce economic activity. There's just, people buy less when things are more expensive. That's pretty basic. And that's really what we're looking at. So, I don't know. You know, he wants to restructure the entire US economy or whatever it is, or the global economy, I guess. But I really think the global economy is a big loser in this.

NK: Professor, I appreciate your time. Thank you for this.

JS: Sure. Thanks for having me on. I appreciate it.

CH: James Surowiecki is an economics journalist, a Professor with the English department at Yale, and the author of the book The Wisdom of Crowds. We reached him in New Haven, Connecticut.

SOD: Myanmar Rescue

CH: It's been another day of heartbreak in Myanmar -- like every day since the earthquake on Friday. The death toll has now surpassed 2,700 people. But there have been rare glimmers of hope, too. Like the moment a team of rescuers from Myanmar and Turkey managed to extract a 26-year-old survivor from the rubble yesterday -- five days after he became trapped.

SOUNDCLIP

[speaking in Burmese, followed by clapping]

CH: It took them nine hours to complete the rescue. And it's one of very few good-news stories emerging from Myanmar right now -- where the recent earthquake is far from the only crisis residents have to contend with. The country has been engulfed in a civil war since 2021 -- and even before the quake, food, medicine and safety were in short supply. The situation has prompted UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres to dispatch Emergency Relief Coordinator Tom Fletcher to the country -- as well as his special envoy, Julie Bishop. And speaking to reporters today, Mr. Guterres made it clear their missions extend well beyond earthquake relief.

SOUNDCLIP

ANTONIO GUTERRES: Nearly 20 million people -- or one in every three in Myanmar -- required already humanitarian aid. And millions have fled their homes from conflict and violence. The earthquake has supercharged the suffering, with the monsoon season just around the corner. We need rapid action on several fronts. I appeal in particular to the international community to immediately step up vitally needed funding to match the scale of this crisis. I appeal for rapid, safe, sustained, and unimpeded humanitarian access to reach those most in need across the country. And I appeal to every effort to transform this tragic moment into an opportunity for the people of Myanmar. I welcome the announcement of temporary ceasefires. This is essential to help aid flow, and let rescuers do their jobs. But an end of fighting must quickly lead to a beginning of a serious political dialog, and the release of political prisoners.

Monet Stepdaughter Exhibit

Guest: Haley Pierce

CH: The great French impressionist Monet is considered to be one of the most influential artists of all time. A guy who overshadowed -- and continues to overshadow -- the vast majority of his contemporaries and successors, including Monet. In fact, sadly, Monet has been all but totally eclipsed by Monet! I mean, have you ever heard of Blanche Hoschedé-Monet? An incredible Impressionist painter in her own right, who happened to be the stepdaughter of Claude Monet? A new exhibition at the Eskenazi Museum of Art at Indiana University would like to introduce us all to her -- by putting her work on display in the U.S. for the first time. The goal is to put her oeuvre in the spotlight on its own, where it can stand independently of her stepfather's work. Haley Pierce is the curator of the exhibition, entitled Blanche Hoschedé-Monet in the Light. We reached her in New York City.

NK: Haley, how would you describe Blanche Hoschedé-Monet's work for those who've never seen one of her paintings or even heard her name?

HALEY PIERCE: Sure. So, that's definitely a common occurrence. It's very rare to be able to see her paintings in person. And I would say that right off the bat, you might be able to compare them to paintings by Monet -- Claude Monet. But after closer observation -- and especially seeing them up close and in person -- you'll start to notice slight differences. So, for example, her paint handling is more unique. She tends to have, you know, highly thought out compositions, and very solidly painted subjects, perhaps as in contrast to Monet, who is more focused on atmospheric qualities.

NK: Her younger brother, Jean-Pierre, wrote a biography in 1960, as I understand it. She came from a prominent family, knew Claude Monet. Why is it that people don't really know about her or her work?

HP: That's actually one of the reasons why I believe that she's lesser known today. So one, there's really not much of her own words that exist, and there's really very little written on her to begin with. And before our exhibition catalog, it was mostly written in French. So, most of what we know from her comes from her younger brother, Jean-Pierre Hoschedé's biography. And then, a lot of the work that has come after has really stemmed from that biography. But also, a lot the paintings are in private collections, so it's actually very difficult to see her work in person.

NK: What was it that drew you to her work? I mean, when you're standing in front of her paintings, well, why was it important for you to bring attention to her work?

HP: I think it's because -- you know, to be honest -- whenever I started this project, I was shocked -- as I think many of our visitors are to the exhibition -- that not much is known about Hoschedé Monet. And that many people don't realize, even to begin with, that Claude Monet had a stepdaughter or a member of his family that was also a well-renowned painter. And I think it's a timely exhibition. Work has been needed to be done on her for years. And it's pretty fascinating that she's been hiding almost in plain sight. Because beyond her own career, her own ambitions, which were, you know, she was very successful in her lifetime. She had four solo exhibitions after Monet's death. She also was the primary caretaker of Monet in his later years. And that was also the main reason why she seemed to have taken a break of about 14 years from her own career to take care of her aging stepfather. Uh, but in that role, she also, um, helped with the negotiations at the Musée de l'Orangerie in Paris to permanently install his large-scale Water Lilies, which are of course very well known and famous today. However, her name is very rarely -- if at all -- mentioned in connection with that. And then, what I also found very fascinating in researching her and the show is that she was the main behind the protection of Giverny during World War II. So, she's a large part of why Claude Monet's own legacy has existed to this day. But she also has her own legacy, which is extremely extensive, and which we're hoping this exhibition will help, I guess, bring further to light.

NK: The story of how these families came together is quite interesting. As you well know, Hayley, Blanche's parents are art collectors. They have some of his work, but eventually they fall on hard times and move into Claude Monet's house. His wife dies. Blanche's father becomes estranged from the family. And then, her mother and Claude Monet develop some sort of domestic partnership, as you put it in the coverage. But she later also not only becomes his mentee, but much later his daughter-in-law as well.

HP: Yes. [chuckling] So, to further kind of complicate this, in 1897, she marries Jean Monet, which was Claude Monet's eldest son. But the earliest known paintings that we have, I guess kind of going back to this question of Hoschedé-Monet and Monet and their painting relationship. The earliest works we have of Hoschedé-Monet are dated to 1878. So, that's the year when the two families first combined. And then, our exhibition specifically starts in 1882, whenever the two families vacationed in Port-au-Vie, which is a small village on the Normandy coast. And in the exhibition, we compare two works. One is a painting by Claude Monet from the Art Institute of Chicago, which shows the cliffs at Port-au-Vie, and there are two young girls depicted in the painting, which we believe one is Blanche Hoschedé-Monet, and the other is her older sister, Marte. So, that's interesting. But then -- right next to it -- we compare that to Hoschedé-Monet's own sketchbook, and a drawing that she did at the time of that trip, which also depicts the same coastline, but on a different point of view. So, we have evidence that they were likely working near or alongside each other, or certainly thatHoschedé-Monet was accompanying Monet on his early painting expeditions.

NK: Haley, a pleasure speaking with you. Thank you.

HP: Thank you so much.

CH: Haley Pierce is assistant curator of European Art at the Eskenazi Museum of Art at Indiana University. We reached her in New York City. Blanche Hoschedé-Monet in the Light, runs until June 15th.

[indie rock]

Air North

CH: We've all tried to get the odd weird thing into our luggage. But passengers on Air North may try the oddest weird things. When people in Yukon head home, they often pack things they just can't get in the territory. Or that they can't easily ship. Things like an albino corn snake. Or bits of lilac trees. Or 100 Big Macs. That's what CBC Whitehorse reporter Isabel Ruitenbeek found out recently when she asked Yukoners to tell her what they've carried on Air North flights.

SOUNDCLIP

WOMAN: And I brought with me 48 egg rolls, plus two 500 millilitre containers of homemade plum sauce. Those were from the Golden Palace restaurant in Ottawa. I have never found an egg roll comparable to them anywhere. And certainly not in the Yukon. The egg rolls up here are terrible. [reporter laughs]

MAN: This is a duffel bag with over 100 jars of peanut butter. I had a pandemic project to eat as many unique varieties of peanut butter to get to my height in jars. And that went by really quickly. It took, like, three months. And so, the next step was to make a three-dimensional version of myself with them. And I just stopped after four years, which coincided just with moving up here. And so, instead of leaving them in Vancouver, I brought them up on a flight.

WOMAN #2: and my mother brought back a elephant foot that her granddad had killed when he was in India or somewhere like that. Well, he had it made into an umbrella holder is what it was. And he just had it in his house. And then, it went to my granddad. And then, to my mom. So, she flew from England with it. She did it as carry-on with it wheel of Stilton cheese underneath.

CH: And then there was the animal-related baggage.

SOUNDCLIP

WOMAN: And back in the fall of 2011, um, I brought my pet goat, uh, on Air North.

ISABEL RUITENBEEK: What's your goat's name?

WOMAN: Marshall. Uh, definitely a lot of questions when I went to pick him up at cargo. [chuckling] I think they thought he was a dog at first, and then kind of clued in that he was the goat. So, I think he kind of shocked a few people.

WOMAN #2: splash silky chicken on Air North flight. Once the plane landed, she was allowed to come out of a carrier and get a couple of pictures with people.

IR: She was like a chicken celebrity for a day.

WOMAN #2: Yeah! It's kind of funny.

CH: In fact, Chicken Baby was such a frequent flyer that Air North issued her a pet passport. We're wondering if you can top that. If you have a story about something unusual you've brought on a flight, let us know -- you can call us at 416-205-5687, or email us at aih@cbc.ca.

[jaunty instrumental]

Part 3: Charlie Angus, Marine Le Pen Barred

Charlie Angus

Guest: Charlie Angus

CH: He announced his retirement from politics last summer. And he won't be seeking re-election this time around. But NDP veteran MP Charlie Angus is arguably more influential than ever. He's been fierce in his criticisms of the Trump administration's tariffs, and talk of making Canada the 51st state. He made his case at the Elbows Up Resistance Rally in Sudbury, Ontario last night, alongside two NDP candidates running in the area. But his tough talk comes at a time when the NDP are struggling in the polls. We reached the MP for Timmins-James Bay today in Timmins, Ontario.

NK: Charlie Angus, how were people in Sudbury reacting to the announcement from the U.S. president -- that display last night?

CHARLIE ANGUS: I think what was pretty clear is that we're watching an unhinged narcissist plunge his economy down the toilet. What I'm sensing -- and I sense this in Sudbury, I'm sensing this being in North Bay and all the communities I'm traveling to across the country -- is a real determination of Canadians not to be dragged down with this bizarre show that's happening in Washington. And there's a real determination in Canada right now to come through this better on the other side.

NK: What kinds of things have have people been telling you as you've been going around and talking about Elbows Up? What are, what are they saying? And I wonder if you've, you've seen a shift? Because I'm sure there are people who, who like what, what Donald Trump has, has said, uh, in the past. Then, there were those who don't agree with it, obviously. But have you seen a shift in what people have been saying?

CA: What I've seen is that prior to January 6th, I think Canadians were unsure, they were cranky. I think we were sleepwalking towards the same kind of catastrophe that's befallen America. But when Donald started attacking our nation and our right to exist as a people, something shifted dramatically. I hear stories every day of people who are, you know, boycotting American products, people who are trying to work on these Tesla takedowns. People are trying to find ways that they, as an individual, can defend our nation. And it's been actually a really inspiring thing to see the determination and the excitement of people as they realize they're not alone. That we are as a nation right now, at a moment of historic togetherness.

NK: We have, over the last few days -- and since the start of the campaign -- we've seen NDP leader Jagmeet Singh offering details about the NDP's response to the United States, and these tariffs threats, and other things that we're seeing from the White House. But that kind of galvanization of pro-Canada sentiment does not seem to be translating into more support for the NDP. As you have likely seen, the latest numbers from Nanos Research and the Globe and Mail. suggest only 4.9 per cent of Canadians say they want Jagmeet Singh to be the next prime minister. Polling from last week from Abacus Data put the NDP in a distant third place with 11 per cent support. So, how do you account for those numbers?

CA: Well, I think right now that this is a historic moment that's changed the political landscape immensely. Because people sense that we are in a wartime situation. And I think people are searching for a solution. And certainly, we've seen Pierre Poilievre's large numbers drop. I think what's important for the New Democrats is to remind people that in this future Parliament -- which I think, you know, it most likely looks like Mr. Carney will be in -- we're going to need people in there who are going to continue to fight for the values that people are telling me that they see as fundamental to Canada. And right now, you know, the wins we got on dental care, on pharmacare, people still really value that. They see that as a fundamental difference from Americans. So, we're in this campaign. It's a very different campaign. We're still far from the end of it. And I think that you're going start to see some of those numbers stabilize as people, people were really, really worried that MAGA was going to take over in Canada. I don't think that's going to happen, but I think what's going to be really important is that those votes come down in a way that makes sure that Canadians feel that our values are moving forward in a democratic, progressive manner because that's the opposite of what we're seeing in the United States.

NK: Former NDP Leader Tom Mulcair wrote an op-ed last week urging Canadians to support the Liberal Party, writing, quote, if you can't seriously say you're going to form a government that can take on Trump, then get out of the way, unquote. What did you make of that?

CA: I've known Tom for a long time. And I know that Tom's always been very bitter that he was put out at the Edmonton Convention. And I'm not detracting from Mr. Mulcair, but I mean when I ran originally, nobody said I was going to form government, they sent me there to hold government to account, and something that New Democrats are known for doing. I think maybe Mr. Mulcair believes that it's all or nothing. And he rolled the dice and didn't make it. But right now, it's really important for Canadians to stay focused on the fact that we have a dangerous narcissist on our border, but within our parliamentary system, we're going to need those voices and those people who are standing up. As much as we see a threat, we also see the importance of maintaining our difference from what's happened in the United States, where it fell into a two-party system. It fell into the parties that were seen as super powerful, but more and more disconnected. We cannot be disconnected from people at this point.

NK: But what he's saying is -- and then, there may be Canadians and voters who agree with Tom Mulcair -- that they're worried about splitting the vote. If things are very, very close, and they're concerned about what might happen if their preferred party doesn't get in, he's saying that the NDP should get out of the way. If the Liberals are the closer option, you know, they're worried that the NDP not getting out of way, as Tom Mulcair says, is going to be more of a problem.

CA: Mr. Mulcair said the NDP should just not run because we may not form government. I fundamentally disagree with that. And that might be the reason he did end up losing the support of the members. People are going to make choices in various ridings, and I think that that's what democracy is about. But what's really important right now, we have to stop the MAGA movement in Canada. I think Mr. Poilievre is fundamentally unfit for office. I think Canadians are coming to see that. I think his numbers are not going to hold where they were. But as we look to where we need to be in taking on the ideology of Trump in the long-term, we need the diversity.

NK: You were on our show, I think it was right around this time last year, talking about leaving politics, not running again. If you knew that all of this was coming politically, and this is where we would be, would you have stayed?

CA: I think I'm in the spot where I really need to be. If I stayed, I would be door knocking in a riding that was already bigger than the United Kingdom as they threw 20,000 extra kilometers onto. I feel now the freedom to be speaking up for Canadians, to be meeting people. I'm heading out to Nanaimo in a week. I'll be out in Edmonton right after that. We're getting calls to travel the 401 corridor, and to get out to Nova Scotia, about building resistance, about building grassroots. organizations to stand up to Trump and defend the Canadian values. So, I wasn't expecting this would be happening in the twilight of my parliamentary career, but it looks like I'm busier than I ever have been. [chuckling] And I really haven't had a chance to even stop and reflect on it.

NK: Charlie Angus, I appreciate your time. Thank you.

CA: Thank you so much.

CH: Charlie Angus is the NDP MP for Timmins-James Bay. He’s in Timmins, Ontario.

[ambient electronic]

Vancouver Shop Owners

CH: Sunan Spriggs is fed up. She owns the clothing store CityLux Boutique in downtown Vancouver. And in recent years, hers is one of many stores in the city that's seen a sharp rise in shoplifting. Now, Vancouver council has voted to create a retail security task force -- to address what councillor Brian Montague has called an unprecedented increase in theft. Sunan Spriggs says that help is desperately needed.

SOUNDCLIP

SUNAN SPRIGGS: It's just a regular event, you know, almost on a daily basis that somebody will come in, you know, obviously on some type of substance, and just acting erratic. And sometimes, they will try to steal product and run out of it, run out the store. Sometimes, they will just come in and just, you know, make my staff very uncomfortable. We had other incidents where they tried to break in at night and have smashed our windows. It's just a regular occurrence, it's just become part of the norm of operating a business in downtown.

STEPHEN QUINN: And have you had your, your, your window smashed more than once?

SS: Multiple, multiple times.

SQ: Multiple times. And is the, insurance covers that every time, or do you have to pay for it out of pocket?

SS: No. For small businesses, our deductible is so high that it doesn't make sense to use it most of the time. And then, your premium goes up the next year. So, one of the problems with vandalism or retail theft is that as a small business, we don't have the same options as a lot of these bigger corporations to leverage our insurance. So, it comes right out of our pocket.

SQ: And, Sunan, when you're talking about theft, I mean, as you say, somebody walks into the store, do they grab something and run, or do they try to hide it, or what does that look like?

SS: It depends. There's all types of thieves. Some come in and just try to grab it and run. Others are a little bit more, conceal it a little bit better, and, and sometimes, we don't realize until they've left already. But if we're dealing with, in Vancouver, our biggest issue is with individuals that just come in to try to grab it.

SQ: Councilor Montague said that there was an 11.7 per cent jump in reported shoplifting citywide in 2024. Does that track with what you have experienced at your store?

SS: It was, really started in around 2020 when the pandemic hit. But yes, since the pandemic until now, it has been on the rise.

SQ: Are you doing, just very briefly, what can you do to prevent this, Sunan?

SS: I have a, you know, interesting way of preventing it. When it comes to the organized crime, I will post them on social media, and that's very much helped us reduce the amount of individuals that come in and try to steal from us because we always find them, and, you know, there's always repercussions. In terms of the drug challenge that we have, this is something that don't really have measures for. This is why we do need the city to step in and actually take action. Because again, it's not just about the thefts, it's about the safety as well. And so a lot of these individuals, my bigger concern is our safety at the store.

CH: Sunan Spriggs is the owner of CityLux Boutique in Vancouver. She was talking to Stephen Quinn, host of The Early Edition.

[ambient electronic]

FOA: Child Art Sales

CH: Mario Perron says it was all a mistake. You may remember his story -- he's a Montreal-area high school teacher who was accused of putting up his students' artwork up for sale online, without their knowledge or consent. In some cases, with a price tag of over $100. When the parents found out, some of them filed a lawsuit against Mr. Perron and the school board, asking for an apology and a total of over $1.5 million in damages. Now, the Lester B. Pearson School Board says the lawsuit is discontinued. It conducted an internal investigation, and in a press release, it said Mr. Perron, quote, "explained that the drawings had been put online solely and strictly as part of an educational activity aimed at learning digital photo editing techniques", unquote. He says he never meant to sell the kids' art at all and made no money from it. But back in February 2024, Nil spoke to Joel DeBellefeuille, one of the parents whose children's art ended up online. He alleged that Mr. Perron was genuinely trying to sell it. Here's part of what he told Nil about how his son found out.

SOUNDCLIP

JOEL DEBELLEFEUILLE: So, they turned around and did a quick Google search and noticed that several of the students' drawings were up for sale on multiple websites. And it wasn't just, you know, print photos. It was coffee cups, towels, T-shirts, sweaters, shower curtains, just a full array of merchandise with the drawings of 96 students inside the class.

NK: It's, it's staggering to hear you tell it. How did he tell you? What did he say?

JD: So he normally, you know, arrives home around 2:50 every day; my wife picks him up. And I work, I work out of the, out of the basement downstairs. And when they arrived, I had heard them, you know, kind of talking amongst themselves. Hey, you should go downstairs and tell Daddy about what happened at school today. So, of course, my ears perked up. [NK chuckles] I was curious. And so, I was waiting for him to come around the corner. And sure enough, he just said, you know, Daddy, you're not going to believe what had happened. And then, he started to tell me what did happen. And I, you know, I freaked out, and I couldn't believe it. And he started showing me on his phone the, you know, screenshots that he had taken and the links. And so, I went on my computer and found the exact same links, and I couldn't believe it. And I said, look, leave it with Daddy. I'll handle it. And I think I've done quite a good job of handling it. [chuckling]

NK: You've been busy. You got the word out, that's for sure.

JD: I did, yeah.

NK: And what are these drawings like? Describe them for us.

JD: Well, the project was draw a creepy, sort of scary photo of a likeness of somebody. And, I mean, some of them are quite good, actually, and it's just shameful that it has come to this where he chose that he can, you know, profit off the backs of, of kids. And that's what's concerning, you know, to myself and I'm sure quite a, quite a bunch of other parents that it's, you know, these, these children are being exploited. Let's, let's call it what it is. They're being, their artwork is being exploited by somebody that parents are trusting.

CH: From Our Archives, that was Joel DeBellefeuille, speaking to Nil in February 2024. The Lester B. Pearson School Board has now discontinued its lawsuit against the Montreal-area high school teacher in question.

[jaunty instrumental]

Marine Le Pen Barred

Guest: Gilles Paris

CH: Last week, she was a favourite to win France's next presidential election. This week, Marine Le Pen appears to be out of the running. On Monday, a court found the leader of France's far-right National Rally party guilty of embezzlement of EU funds -- and barred her from running for office for five years. As you would expect, her supporters are not happy about that decision -- and are preparing to rally this weekend, in protest of what they consider an unjust, politically motivated conviction. Gilles Paris is a journalist and editor with Le Monde newspaper in France. We reached him in Paris.

NK: Gilles, did this decision from the court come as a surprise to people across France?

GILLES PARIS: In a way because people were not following the trial very closely. What was surprising is that Marine Le Pen was caught off guard by the ruling, after years of delaying and denying, which explained why the case came to trial so late. She's now hesitating between two strategies. To play angry, at the risk of shattering her image as a calm and moderate leader, which was the result of a strategy of de-demonization of her far-right party, or to prepare a new defence in which she will acknowledge her fault and hope for a reduced sentence, particularly on the question of ineligibility.

NK: There are already three appeals launched, as I've been reading, and a decision on those will not come for another year, if I'm not mistaken, not till 2026. But if we go back to what our listeners heard in the introduction, what she was found guilty of, it was embezzlement, embezzling EU funds.

GP: Exactly.

NK: And, of course, being banned from running for office for the next five years. On the embezzlement charges, Gilles, what evidence was brought forward in court? What did that evidence show?

GP: Oh, a lot of evidence between the inquiry was able to show that people involved in this embezzlement knew that it was embezzlement. They showed emails saying that, and documents which proved that Marine Le Pen was in the centre of the system. So, it was running for a long period of time -- almost 10 years. It was created by her father, and then she took over. But -- well, at the end -- we had a real clear picture of this misuse of public funds.

NK: And how much money are we talking about? What was it meant for, and what was it used for in the end?

GP: You might know that political parties in France are not rich, so it was a way to get some funds in order to have people working for the party. They received very good pay for a partial job. And this would be very complicated to present to the French people as something which can be acceptable. But we are talking about more than 4 millions of euro, which is something big

NK: So, more than 4 million euro that was meant to help staff the party, hire people for the party, but only some of the money was used for that. Where did the rest of it go?

GP: Well, the people were working for the party, but the money was supposed to create the staff for working in the European Parliament, not for the political party. That's a big deal.

NK: She has called this -- Le Pen has -- judicial warfare, lots of hyperbole, and anger in her response. We mentioned the appeals, but she and her party have amassed quite a bit of popularity. So, as she and supporters continue with that messaging and those two strategies that you mentioned though, what kind of response is it garnering in France?

GP: Well, that's obvious that she's very popular, that she has very good poll numbers. But playing the people against the judges is a risky choice. Initial polls show that a clear majority of the French people consider the judgment to be balanced. And that it proves that the institutions are working well. We must notice that the courts have chosen to speed up the appeal procedure, which will take place next year in 2026. So, she cannot say that she's being mistreated by the court. Such a rapid appeal is unprecedented in France. What's more, Marine Le Pen has received the support of foreign figures considered highly controversial in France, including Putin, Orban, Bolsonaro, Elon Musk, and Donald Trump, and they won't help her very much.

NK: This was a panel of three judges. The head of that panel, the lead judge, has been, we're reading, receiving death threats. Her personal information has been published. What kind of response has there been to that response -- the doxing, as it's known, of this judge?

GP: Well, it's difficult to fight back social networks when such information are made public. We saw that in the United States after some ruling of federal judges, and we saw reaction of the head of the Supreme Court in the U.S. And we had the same reaction in France from the high level of the Justice Department. So, that's a pushback we can witness even if, well, it's difficult to put an end to death threats, of course.

NK: There are those that Le Pen's supporters, the majority of them, believe that this is not, you know, the judicial system working as it should be in their view. They believe that she's being railroaded, as they say here, that this, this is not justice at play. Jordan Bardella could run in her place. He's the current president of the National Rally. He's young and popular as well. So, could this court case -- the result -- fuel their popularity and their mission politically?

GP: It could. But again, the first results of the first polls are not showing that. Of course, her base is very angry, and they will maybe rally next Sunday in Paris. But her strategy was to broaden her brand. She needs to be accepted by electors in the centre, in the centre-right. And doing what she's doing now will not help her, I'm afraid. Of course, she can hope for a more favourable decision on appeal, but the facts will not change, and they are overwhelming.

NK: Gilles, I'm glad we could speak. Thank you very much for your time.

GP: Thank you for your call.

CH: That was Gilles Paris, a journalist and editor at Le Monde newspaper in France. We reached him in Paris.

[country]

AIDS Researcher

CH: The damage President Trump's tariffs could do is the subject of headlines around the world today. But doctors want us to know the recent cuts to the United States Agency For International Development are also disastrous -- and they could cost lives. Dr. Julio Montaner is the executive director and physician-in-chief at the BC Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS, a research, treatment and educational facility. Dr. Montaner told the CBC about the global damage the funding cuts will cause.

SOUNDCLIP

JULIO MONTANER: We have long known, work that we've done here in B.C. -- and elsewhere -- that people who are living with HIV, if they are treated, they are no longer sick, they won't die prematurely, and they will not transmit the disease. If you withdraw treatment for people who live with HIV, they will get sick, they will die, and they will transmit the disease. And so, what we're talking about is a unilateral decision of withdrawing care very much for millions of people around the world, after we globally have recognized PEPFAR and the United States administration, historically, starting with President Bush, as being the drivers of a global effort that has seen the burden of disease related to HIV decrease by at least 50 per cent globally since the epidemic started. And in British Columbia, we have led the way to show that if we do what we call treatment prevention. you can decrease the number of people living with HIV by greater than 90 per cent. And this is the policy that we brought to the United Nations, and has been embraced by the United Nations as the means for us to bring HIV under control by 2030. And guess what? With almost six to 10 years to the deadline, President Trump is withdrawing the U.S. support, the largest chunk of support going to the developing world, and to the American administration themselves, so that we are going to see more HIV, not just in Africa, in Asia, in Latin America, in North America. If you stop treating people, people are going to migrate to the places where the treatment is available. So, even the threat of President Trump putting forward these restrictions in funding and access to medications already started the movement of people living with HIV around the world. How are we going to protect Canada, our own British Columbia, from the immigration of people living with HIV from south of the border, from everywhere else around the world? This is devastating.

CH: That was Dr. Julio Montaner, talking to Chris Walker, host of Daybreak South yesterday.

[eerie instrumental]

Joe DePugh Obit

CH: When Joe DePugh first heard Bruce Springsteen's 1984 hit Glory Days, he had a deep personal response to it. I know -- a lot of people did, it was a big hit, great song. But it was different for Mr. DePugh. Because he instantly knew that it was about him...that he was the friend who was the big baseball player back in high school who could, according to the lyrics, "throw that speedball by you, make you look like a fool, boy." Mr. DePugh and Bruce Springsteen spent their childhoods together in Freehold, New Jersey -- and as kids, they played baseball on the same team. Joe DePugh recalled that time in a 2011 interview with Vermont Public Radio.

SOUNDCLIP

JOE DEPUGH: He was always terrible in sports. My nickname for him was Saddie because we kind of rated the kids in the classroom according to ability. So, the really good kids were bad, and the really bad kids were sad. So, he was always Saddie.

CH: Years after school, Mr. DePugh bumped into "Saddie" as he was leaving a bar in Jersey.

SOUNDCLIP

JOE DEPUGH: I had to get going about 9.30, so I headed out the door. And I'm walking down the pathway there to my car, and here comes Springsteen. And at this point now, I hadn't seen him since we graduated, so this is five or six years has gone by, and he is just starting to become a name. We went back in and ended up closing the place until like 1.30 in the morning, just talking about old times, you know, and the nuns, and games and stuff, and everything.

CH: And that’s the meetup memorialized in Glory Days. Last week, Joe DePugh died in West Palm Beach, Florida. He was 75. Reflecting on their childhood, his brother, Paul, told the New York Times, quote -- "We didn’t have much, but, like Bruce, we had enough ... We always had a roof over our heads. But after my mother died, everything went to hell.” Unquote. According to the paper, Joe became the legal guardian to his brothers who were shuffled between foster care homes. He got a degree in English. Worked as a substitute teacher for a bit. Ended up becoming a contractor. And while there was debate over the years about who the baseball player in Glory Days was, Joe DePugh knew it was him. On Instagram this week, Bruce Springsteen took a moment to mark Mr. DePugh's passing, calling him a "good friend" when he needed one. He ended the post with: "Glory Days my friend."

The AIH Transcript For April 3, 2025

Social Sharing