For my Canadian friends

Those North of the U.S. / Canadian border may mistakenly believe their Southern neighbors neither know nor care about Canada's plight.
We are about to explode this myth of U.S. indifference:
"15,000 New Jobs For Albertans" #119
Who is Albertans, and why does he need 15,000 new jobs?
 
1747168603055.png

Caroline Boudakian

perotsdSno017hac0cut33c214g15t9c795uahh43m3l7h4t53740ml5fc8g ·
By: Ron Ledohowski
- - -
“Politics should not be a lifelong career,” wrote a 20-year-old Pierre Poilievre in 1999. “Elected officials should not be allowed to fix themselves in the halls of power of a nation.”

And yet, 25 years later, Poilievre has done precisely that.

Since first being elected in 2004 at the age of 25, Poilievre has been a full-time federal politician—and little else. With more than two decades in office, he’s the epitome of the career politician he once criticized. And the benefits have been substantial: Pierre Poilievre is now entitled to a taxpayer-funded pension valued at over $200,000 per year, beginning as early as age 55. Indexed to inflation, that lifetime payout could exceed $3.4 million.

For contrast, the average Canadian won’t qualify for full Canada Pension Plan (CPP) benefits until age 65, and even then, the maximum payout in 2025 is about $1,364 per month—just over $16,000 annually. Many receive far less.

So while ordinary Canadians work into their 60s (or longer) for modest retirement income, Poilievre is on track to receive a six-figure annual pension decades earlier—funded by those same taxpayers.

But the story doesn’t end with irony—it deepens into farce.

After leading the Conservative Party into a historic and unexpected defeat in the 2025 federal election—losing both nationally and in his own riding to Prime Minister Mark Carney—Poilievre has been handed a lifeline: parachuted into a guaranteed-safe Alberta seat, despite not having lived in the province for over 25 years.

The cost to Canadians? Millions of dollars. That includes the by-election expenses, Poilievre’s salary and benefits, and the public-funded Ottawa residence he’ll continue to occupy—even while ostensibly representing Alberta. All this, for a man who built his political identity around decrying government waste, entitlements, and political elites.

It’s a move so egregious it would have had the younger Pierre Poilievre foaming at the mouth.

In the end, the hypocrisy isn’t just personal—it’s systemic. Poilievre has become the very embodiment of the entrenched political class he once condemned. He railed against government privilege and careerism, only to entrench himself deeper into it than most ever do.

And now, Canadians are left paying the price—literally—for a man who, by his own words, should have known better.

1747168646106.png
 
"... a limit of two terms" Poilievre #122
There's nothing in the middle of the road except yellow lines and dead armadillos. Jim Hightower
I want what's best for the People.

In the U.S. the Republicans instituted a two term limit on the U.S. president, apparently out of bitterness for Democrat FDR's 4 terms. BUT !
Republicans shot themselves in the foot with it, they'd have loved to run Reagan for a third term.

Fred Thompson was a successful actor in the wildly popular Law & Order television series. Thompson also served in the U.S. senate.

The appeal of the citizen legislator is obvious. BUT !
Due to congressional rules, a voting district may multiply its own power by re-electing incumbents, because
members of congress accrue seniority with reelection, and seniority can be a prerequisite to leadership positions such as committee chairman.

I've got no dog in the Canadian parliament term limit issue. As a layman, I'm not sure what's best. There are benefits and disadvantages to either. BUT !
The Polilievre hypocrisy hasn't escaped my notice.
 
1747224779218.png

Gordon Ross

tonSeopsrd 0cl0u i5li3tc4h5im4ah147a1117a1igMhPytc 26 :6tM81 ·

By Lethbridge Herald on May 9, 2025.

Editor,

Congratulations to Danielle Smith for single-handedly embarrassing the entire province of Alberta in just one 20-minute speech.

It’s actually quite impressive how much misinformation, nationalistic pandering, and historical revisionism she managed to cram into such a short timeframe. Those 20 minutes were not just misleading they were an insult to the intelligence of anyone who values facts, accountability, and the truth just showing that she relies on the uneducated.

Let’s start with one of her first bold—and blatantly false—claims: that Canada is the only country on earth that possesses the number and quality of natural resources we have. This is objectively untrue. Countries like Russia, the United States, Brazil, and even Australia boast not only comparable but, in many cases, greater and more diversified reserves of key natural resources. Russia alone has significantly larger oil and gas reserves than Canada.

So, for a premier of a province to make such a demonstrably false claim on a national stage is either ignorant or dishonest—or both. Then, just a few minutes into her speech, she proudly states that Alberta has never asked for handouts or special treatment.

Again false. Alberta has repeatedly benefited from federal equalization programs and support during downturns in the oil and gas industry. Let’s not forget the significant federal assistance provided during the COVID-19 pandemic or during economic busts in previous decades.

Denying these facts is not only misleading—it rewrites history. Next up: the claim that the federal Liberal government has “targeted” Alberta by cancelling oil and gas projects and implementing a ban on tanker traffic that could transport oil to new markets.

This statement distorts reality. The so-called “tanker ban” (actually Bill C-48) only applies to crude oil tankers along the north coast of British Columbia—a region that is environmentally sensitive and home to several Indigenous communities that opposed such developments.

Even then, Alberta does have existing and potential routes—like the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion (which the federal government actually purchased and is currently constructing)—to get its oil to tidewater. So, this narrative that Alberta is being uniquely punished just doesn’t hold up.

And now, the pièce de résistance: Smith claims that federal “anti-resource development policies” have “scared away half a trillion dollars”—yes, $500 billion—in global investment in Alberta’s oil industry.

That number is not just inflated; it’s laughably disconnected from economic reality. For comparison, Alberta’s entire GDP is around $400 billion. Claiming we’ve lost more than the province produces in a year due to “scared investors” is not just misleading—it’s propaganda.

Even if you stacked together every major shelved oil project over the last decade across Canada, you wouldn’t come close to that figure. And those projects were often shelved due to global oil price collapses, corporate decisions to divest from fossil fuels, and global market shifts—not federal policies alone.

She then ends by once again flirting with the idea of Alberta separatism. It’s a recurring theme in her rhetoric—a hollow threat that has no economic or legal grounding. Alberta could maybe entertain the fantasy of separation if it actually had that magical half-trillion dollars that she was talking about.

But the reality is this: Alberta benefits enormously from being part of Canada. We receive federal transfers, we access interprovincial markets, and our people enjoy the stability and infrastructure of a well-established federal system.

Separation isn’t just unlikely, it’s financially and politically suicidal. To wrap up: Danielle Smith has proven herself to be a dangerously misinformed and ideologically driven premier who’s more concerned with stoking division than solving real problems. In a single speech, she demonstrated a lack of understanding of economics, history, federalism, and basic facts.

Joshua Dillabough

Lethbridge
 
1747225015542.png

Serhiy Rafalyuk

is in Alberta.​

potoSsrendu300t42Meum30a2981cd i116e3a t26ycs27 54ti3mhAYmr: ·

𝑪𝑶𝑽𝑰𝑫 𝑩𝒂𝒄𝒌𝒕𝒓𝒂𝒄𝒌 — 𝑫𝒂𝒏𝒊𝒆𝒍𝒍𝒆 𝑺𝒎𝒊𝒕𝒉’𝒔 𝑾𝒂𝒓 𝒐𝒏 𝑺𝒄𝒊𝒆𝒏𝒄𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝑻𝒓𝒖𝒔𝒕

From the very start, Danielle Smith sent a clear message:

She doesn’t trust public health.

On her first day in office, October 11, 2022, she claimed unvaccinated people were “the most discriminated-against group” she’d ever seen.
She didn’t apologize to frontline workers.
She didn’t acknowledge the lives lost.
She apologized to anti-vaxxers.

And it didn’t stop there.

She removed Alberta’s Chief Medical Officer, Dr. Deena Hinshaw.
She refused to support mask mandates.
She promised legal amnesty for those who broke COVID rules.

And then she built her own “COVID Review Panel” — stacked with vaccine skeptics and lockdown critics.

On January 24, 2025, the panel released a shocking report:
• Opposed vaccine mandates
• Recommended ivermectin
• Called to halt COVID vaccination programs

Medical experts were horrified.
T
he Alberta Medical Association said the report was “anti-science and anti-evidence.”

The Canadian Medical Association called it dangerous.

But Smith never apologized.
She never corrected the record.
She empowered pseudoscience.
She weaponized distrust.
She undermined public health.

And in the next crisis — people might pay for that with their lives.
 
1747392647150.png


Canada Strong and Free

Nancy MCClure · Sernpsoodt M4918a6Ma6c1190 mhA8mah1laha0 ylt42:f9t80i436 ac8 ·

"Pierre Poilievre: The Leader Who Isn’t Here But Also Won’t Leave"

As much as I didn’t want to yesterday, and believe me, I really didn’t, I found myself watching the political equivalent of a soap opera villain refusing to exit stage left.

Yes, I watched that press conference. You know the one. Where Pierre Poilievre, who lost both the election and his seat, stepped up to a podium like the guy who gets fired but keeps showing up to the office because his access card still works.

Let’s be clear: he’s not the leader. His party lost. He lost. Full stop. The plan is for him to run in an Alberta by-election (of course), and win, and then stage his grand resurrection tour like some sort of prairie phoenix rising from a flaming pile of misinformation. But in the meantime? We’re told that Andrew Scheer, yes, that Andrew

Scheer, is technically in charge.

Now, if Scheer is the interim leader when the House is sitting, does Pierre become the leader when it’s recess? Like some kind of Halloween werewolf situation where the full moon hits and suddenly, bam, he’s back? It’s absurd. And frankly, if Scheer is your stand-in, it’s like choosing margarine when the butter's gone bad. Still spreadable, but you don’t want it.

Yet, Poilievre persists. He took to the mic, delivered his usual soft-spoken faux-reasonableness, and got back to doing what he does best: declaring everything broken.

First it was Canada. Now it’s the government. Soon, I assume, it’ll be gravity.

He attacked Carney’s cabinet like a guy who didn’t get invited to the party, so he stood outside with a megaphone yelling that the music sucks. Never mind that Carney had to manage a complex transition, balancing institutional knowledge, regional representation, gender parity, and subject-area expertise. That’s what real governance looks like. Adults in the room, even if some of them are still unpacking.

No, I don’t love every appointment. But unlike Pierre, I don’t think democracy is a stage play where the sore loser gets to keep delivering monologues while the rest of us are trying to reset the set.

And here’s what really sticks: Poilievre doesn’t even have the grace to acknowledge that Mark Carney is extending him a courtesy he absolutely doesn’t have to. Carney has said he’ll move quickly to get Pierre’s by-election underway, as soon as legally possible. He didn’t have to. By law, he could wait up to six months to call the election and then there would be the election period. But instead, he’s taking the high road, even while Pierre’s still digging the ditch.

Let’s also be clear: this by-election comes with a $2 million price tag. That’s what taxpayers are on the hook for, just so Pierre can claw his way back into relevance. And he can’t even manage a simple thank-you, or, at the very least, a week of silence while the government tries to get back to work.

And all the while, he’s still living in Stornoway. Still acting like he never left. Still pushing the same tired lines about everything being broken, except maybe his own
sense of self-awareness.

Honestly, I’d have more respect for him if he just took the summer off. Go fishing. Learn to weld. Take a vow of silence. Do literally anything except hijack our national conversation with another staged rant.

Because you know what’s coming. He’ll win that by-election in Alberta, and then we’ll be treated to photo ops of him and Danielle Smith wandering through golden canola fields like the awkward leads in a low-budget rom-com. (Tagline: “Together, they’ll break the confederation and your will to live.”)

This isn’t leadership. It's like he's playing dressup. And we don’t need pretend politicians right now, we need grownups. Builders. People willing to make hard, boring decisions. Not more noise from someone who isn’t even in the room.

So until he gets his seat back, and makes it official, can someone please, please, just unplug his mic?

Because as Mark Carney might say (in a tone far more composed than mine): “I’m a pragmatist.” And pragmatically? The best thing Pierre Poilievre could do for Canada right now… is disappear for a bit.

Pierre Poilievre: still unelected, still uninvited, still unbelievably loud.


... pragmatically? The best thing Pierre Poilievre could do for Canada right now… is disappear for a bit.

How about permanently?
 
493217817_10162681355846063_2135709604642652502_n.jpg
 
498241697_10161469961997684_5368259210109270407_n.jpg



Tariffs, Truth, and Timing: Let’s Talk About What Really Happened

Pierre Poilievre is stirring up outrage over a tariff change announced by Mark Carney’s government — accusing him of quietly dropping retaliatory tariffs on the U.S. to “nearly zero” during the election and keeping it hidden until after voting day.

Sounds suspicious, right?

Here’s what’s really going on:

So first, the decision was not hidden.

It was published on May 7, the final day of the election — in the Canada Gazette, our government’s official public record. It was public the day it happened. Poilievre didn’t “uncover” anything. He simply waited 37 days to bring it up.

If it were truly scandalous, why didn’t he say something then?

Because this isn’t about the tariff. It’s about timing and manipulating outrage.

So, why lower tariffs at all? Isn’t that giving in?

Not if you understand what’s happening behind the scenes.

Carney’s administration has been working to diversify Canada’s trade relationships, reducing our dependency on the U.S. economy. That means:

Retaliatory tariffs don’t pressure the U.S. like they used to.

Keeping them doesn’t help us — it raises prices for Canadians and hurts Canadian businesses.

Dropping them doesn’t show weakness — it shows we’ve moved beyond needing to play their games.

It’s called de-escalation, and it’s a smart move when you’ve already shifted economic power away from your opponent.

So why is Poilievre mad now?

Because he’s trying to create a story. Not based on new facts — but on selective outrage.

He waited over a month to mention this.

He's framed it as a “secret” even though it was public.

He has ignored the larger strategy behind the move.

This isn’t accountability. It’s opportunism.

So let’s ask a better question.

What’s more dangerous — dropping outdated tariffs from a position of strength, or deliberately misleading the public about something you knew 37 days ago, just to score political points?

Because this kind of manipulation breeds mistrust. Not because of what happened — but because of how it’s twisted after the fact.

So, what does this mean for Canadians?

It means we’re playing a different economic game now — one that looks past reactionary politics and toward long-term independence. It also means we have to be more thoughtful than ever. Because we’re not just choosing leaders anymore. We’re choosing who we trust with truth itself.

If this helped clarify the situation, share it. Let’s make truth louder than spin.—
E19DCfYKfQC.png
feeling uneasy.
 
498594374_1778344152719887_5841663748181581667_n.jpg


Rachel Hansen

ndrptseSoo828660123fhat4mtgt05fht783f7m426mh1hh3h21l6t5uc529 ·

Well Poilievre is back like a bad cold still trying to burn it all down and find reasons the current government is incompetent, and the media is all over it as if Pierrer has suddenly become "the one that got away." It's not time for internal mudslinging. It's time to pull together for the sake of the country. Polievre is wholly incapable of rising to that. His lack of diplomatic skill is becoming more and more apparent. He's more a arsonist in chief than he would ever be a leader. Today its the budget. Meanwhile Poilievre knows full well that Trump hasn't gone away and is a big problem for our new government, when putting together a new budget, specifically Trump's constant changing of moods with respect to tariffs. How can you make a fiscal plan for the next year when our largest trading partner keeps changing the rules every 2 weeks? Tariffs are on, then they're off, then they're on for some industries but off for others. Oops, now they've changed their minds again, and will probably change it several more times in the next month. How are you supposed to forecast trade and economic activity under these circumstances? What value does a budget have if it's based on the tariff rules that Trump proposed in March vs. what's in effect today vs. what might happen tomorrow when he changes his mind again? You'd have to come up with a dozen separate budgets for each possible scenario. Perhaps PM Carney knows something the press hasn't acknowledged yet - Trump's "existential threat" is a bunch of bs. His tariff plan is NOT working, he doesnt have manufacturing coming back to America, the US is losing billions in lost tourism and international sentiment towards the US has soured a great deal. Carney doesnt want to table a bill now because he knows by fall that Trump is going to be MUCH more likely to negotiate a better deal for Canada. He's already backed off on tariffs for the auto sector, he's soon going to realize that if he wants Canada's business, he's going to have to kill off the rest of his stupid plan and admit he was wrong. And that will change our budget a great deal. Last thing Canada needs is never ending rage farming from Pierrer Poilievre and the news media that promotes him.
 
1747579073838.png

Democracy Inc.

ropStesdno3 7gc675hpAr58cc98l1catii M:h3 08ugA2ia10m 1c4tg4l ·

🇨🇦
LET’S PRETEND THAT PIERRE IS BEING INTERROGATED BY A COMPETENT LAWYER

❓️
Why did you vote for bill C-311, and then later say you won't vote to ban abortions ?
( He voted to ban abortions (Bill C-311)

❓️
What do you have to say to the disabled veterans that suffered due to your vote to cut their disability pensions after they fought for Canadians?
(He voted to cancel Veterans Disability )

❓️
Why did you consistently vote against workers’ right to strike during your entire time in HoC?

❓️
Will you vote to raise the retirement age again?
In 2012 you voted to raise the retirement age from 65 to 67.

❓️
Why did you instruct your MPs to keep quiet on gay rights?

❓️
How will you mitigate global warming?

❓️
Will you eliminate the school lunch program again?
(Voted against Bill C-322 , March 2023)

❓️
Do you intend to support Russia against Ukraine?
(Voted against aid to Ukraine Feb 6 2024)

❓️
How much have taxpayers paid for your many trips and accommodations across the country to promote yourself?

❓️
You have stated that you will alter the Notwithstanding Clause (section 33, 7-15), thereby eliminating our Charter legal rights. In what ways exactly, do you plan to alter the Notwithstanding Clause ?


❓️
You have stated publicly that you will not support Dentacare/Pharmacare, Will you now take Dentacare and Pharmacare away from Canadians?

❓️
Since you stated that “First Nations needed to learn the value of hard work more than they need compensation for abuses suffered in residential schools” , (June 2008), do you intend to support First Nations in their efforts for reconciliation?

❓️
As you have suggested before, do you plan to use Bitcoin in place of the Canadian Dollar?

❓️
When do you plan to get your security clearance?

❓️
How do you respond to the foreign interference allegations that CSIS has stated are rampant within the Conservative Party?

❓️
How would you describe your relationship with Jeremy McKenzie of Diagolon, and Adam Zivo (spy for foreign intelligence agency), and Nazi , Christine Anderson. And Galen Weston, all of whom you have friendly photo ops with.?

❓️
How often do you wash your hair?
 
https://www.facebook.com/stories/17...zM5MTM0Nzk=/?bucket_count=9&source=story_tray
https://www.facebook.com/groups/407886918530422/user/100069869871466/?__cft__[0]=AZWnvStzrlBmy_S8GyRiWHQHd3pmJt-vzMrADAzakqynEFTfa5_iBoIj__EVKwwx10Thlz98th9aFxMhslpji_it3_OhUkwyMGqdsoGJhLFf-OotunoGTdslcx4tSjwWMIG5aSCkJMDzWFOSR0sLetq7sJ_vBciq8pEK1jDXqECdlqsz4mFjHeXrCKfr0iESJMh0F7Cgkb3Hfd9YhTrjxpE5CvrZMQOQifj4a9W4zWp4aJ_d3Tx4GdGh1sWKPQ79LT2Gdfwxm0KXl6i63H2L6FlT&__tn__=<,P-R


https://www.facebook.com/#
May be an image of 3 people and train

https://www.facebook.com/stories/122114337554002837/UzpfSVNDOjEwNTg2OTg4NDI4MTM4OTM=/?view_single=false&__cft__[0]=AZWnvStzrlBmy_S8GyRiWHQHd3pmJt-vzMrADAzakqynEFTfa5_iBoIj__EVKwwx10Thlz98th9aFxMhslpji_it3_OhUkwyMGqdsoGJhLFf-OotunoGTdslcx4tSjwWMIG5aSCkJMDzWFOSR0sLetq7sJ_vBciq8pEK1jDXqECdlqsz4mFjHeXrCKfr0iESJMh0F7Cgkb3Hfd9YhTrjxpE5CvrZMQOQifj4a9W4zWp4aJ_d3Tx4GdGh1sWKPQ79LT2Gdfwxm0KXl6i63H2L6FlT&__tn__=<<,P-y-R

Democracy Inc.

ortepdonsS fii3hMa7121l980f15t28:c64ut53a0M0 l20 uf11 3yfP53 ·

🇨🇦
OUSTED UCP MLA ACCUSES PREMIER’S HUSBAND OF SECRET LOBBYING

A fiery exchange in the legislature raises questions about David Moretta’s role in rail project discussions.

Former Alberta United Conservative Party infrastructure minister Peter Guthrie has accused the husband of Alberta Premier Danielle Smith of working as an unregistered lobbyist, which allegedly included an attempt to meet with Guthrie about a major rail link between Calgary and Banff.
And Guthrie went further in the legislature, questioning whether the alleged involvement of Smith’s husband in confidential government business related to the rail link had “crossed the line into undue influence over government, policy and spending.”
In August 2024, The Ty<< first revealed that Smith’s husband, David Moretta, attended an hour-long confidential government meeting at McDougall Centre, the provincial government’s Calgary office, on Sept. 26, 2023.
Smith’s schedule, obtained by The Tyee through Freedom of Information requests, shows her office arranged the meeting. Senior members of her staff attended but she did not.
The meeting was in relation to a private proposal to build a rail link from Calgary to Banff. Two private companies have heavily lobbied both the governments of former Alberta premier Jason Kenney and Smith’s current government.
Guthrie resigned in February as infrastructure minister and was subsequently ejected from caucus after he publicly called on Health Minister Adriana LaGrange to step down over what the Opposition NDP has dubbed the CorruptCare scandal.
That scandal, now the subject of several investigations, including by the RCMP, involves multimillionaire businessman Sam Mraiche of Edmonton, who received hundreds of millions of dollars of sole-source contracts from the government during COVID.
As reported by The Tyee in February, Mraiche also made $300,000 in a three-month period through the purchase and sale of a property to Alberta Infrastructure when Guthrie was still minister. Guthrie has said he had no knowledge of the transaction and ordered an internal review before he resigned.

CONTINUED
 
Part 2

Fiery words in legislature
In a tense exchange in Alberta’s legislature Tuesday that can be watched online, Guthrie, who represents Airdre-Cochrane as an Independent, pointed out that in Alberta there are no rules that bar the spouse of a minister or premier from being a lobbyist. He then asked Smith if her husband had ever been registered as a lobbyist when she was premier.
A visibly angry Smith said she was “tired of the rumors and innuendo and slander against my family that I have been hearing about for months.”
She said her husband, who owns a restaurant, had never registered as a lobbyist “because he has never, ever lobbied any government, including ours. And I would ask for the innuendo and the slander to stop.”
Guthrie countered with the allegation that Smith’s husband had “indeed lobbied this government under the guise of a rail expert.”
And he asked why Moretta had not “proactively disclosed this given that the premier is a staunch supporter of rail, particularly the Calgary to Banff proposal, and given the insider advantage reeks of preferential access and concerns of influence peddling.
“To the premier, are decisions in your office being made in the public interest or to benefit the well-connected few?”
Smith did not respond. UCP House Leader Joseph Schow rose to defend the premier and her husband.
“I find the nature of that question absolutely repugnant and disgusting,” Schow said, adding that there is a long-standing tradition of not attacking the family members who can’t defend themselves. He said Guthrie should apologize.
After Speaker Ric McIver cautioned Guthrie about attacking people who were not present, Guthrie responded. “No apology will be forthcoming.”
McIver cut off Guthrie’s microphone. “You will be cautious, or you will lose your question.”
Undaunted, Guthrie keyed off Smith’s earlier statement that her husband had “never, ever lobbied any government, including ours.”
Guthrie told the legislature he had been invited to a meeting with Moretta and “I declined the request because I had concerns about the appropriateness of such a meeting.”
Moretta, he said, met with government officials, including from the offices of ministers and the premier, and “it is rumoured he may have obtained confidential documents during those meetings.
“To the premier, with your interest in rail and your husband’s efforts, has this crossed the line into undue influence over government, policy and spending?”
Schow again rose on Smith’s behalf, calling the “attack” on the premier’s husband disgusting.
“I would also challenge that member to take this line of questioning outside of the chamber and see where it lands that member.”
‘Legitimate questions,’ says Guthrie
Guthrie responded to an interview request from The Tyee today with this statement:
“The conduct displayed by government members in the House reflects a troubling pattern: when confronted with legitimate questions about clear conflicts of interest, they respond with hostility and threats. Instead of engaging with concerns about transparency and potential corruption, they resort to aggressive deflection. This kind of behaviour is contributing to the growing erosion of public trust in the UCP government — particularly in the premier.”
Two photos of light-skinned men are shown side by side.
Alberta Independent MLA Peter Guthrie, left, questioned in the legislature whether the alleged involvement in confidential government business by David Moretta, husband of Premier Danielle Smith, right, ‘crossed the line into undue influence.’ Photo sources: Peter Guthrie Facebook (left) and David Moretta (right).
The internal documents obtained by The Tyee of the 2023 meeting showed that Liricon Capital, and its business partner Plenary Americas, provided a letter to Smith in advance of the Sept. 26 meeting.
It’s not known if Moretta was given access to that letter. And it is not known if this is the confidential document to which Guthrie referred in the legislature on Tuesday.
In August, Smith, through her press secretary, acknowledged that her husband had attended the meeting but she did not address how the premier determined it was appropriate for her husband to attend a confidential government meeting.
Smith and her husband “share a long-standing enthusiasm for rail as an efficient form of transportation for goods and people,” the statement said, and they often discuss ways to expand passenger rail service in the province.
“As the premier values his opinion on the issue, he was invited to attend a meeting at the premier’s request so she could hear his opinion about what he heard.
“Mr. Moretta has absolutely no connection to Liricon and has not lobbied on behalf of any entity (rail related or otherwise) at any time,” the August statement said.
Liricon owner denies ties to Moretta
The internal documents also show that Smith’s senior staff, including then chief of staff Marshall Smith, executive director Rob Anderson and executive assistant Jeremy Hexham, met several times with Adam Waterous, who along with his wife Jan, own Liricon.
Waterous is an investment banker turned oil tycoon. He and his wife also own the Mount Norquay ski resort in Banff and they hold a long-term lease on the historic Banff railway station. In addition to the rail line, they want to develop the railway station and build a gondola directly from it to their Mount Norquay ski resort.
Liricon has proposed building a $2.6-billion rail link between Calgary International Airport, downtown Calgary and the Banff train station. To be feasible, the plan would require hundreds of millions of dollars in mostly federal funding.
The Waterouses previously told The Tyee they didn’t attend the same meeting as Moretta and had no concerns that he had. They also said they have never met Moretta and he has no connection to Liricon.
In late April 2024, the Smith government announced it had set aside $9 million in the budget to help fund a passenger rail master plan for the province that would include a fast train between Calgary and Edmonton.
Why Was Premier Smith’s Husband in a Secret Megaproject Meeting?
Smith and Moretta were later photographed in the observatory car of a restored steam train with Alberta Transportation Minister Devin Dreeshen.
This latest revelation by Guthrie is bound to raise yet more questions about Smith’s ethics and judgment at a time when she is under pressure by factions within the UCP to advance a separatist agenda for the province.
In May 2023, Alberta ethics commissioner Marguerite Trussler found Smith had contravened the provincial Conflicts of Interest Act when she contacted then justice minister Tyler Shandro about criminal charges against Calgary street preacher Artur Pawlowski.
“In the whole scheme of things, it is a threat to democracy to interfere in the administration of justice,” Trussler said in her report.
 
1747767044268.png

𝑭𝒂𝒊𝒍𝒖𝒓𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝑭𝒂𝒍𝒍𝒐𝒖𝒕 — 𝑺𝒎𝒊𝒕𝒉’𝒔 𝑯𝒆𝒂𝒍𝒕𝒉 𝑹𝒆𝒇𝒐𝒓𝒎𝒔 𝒔𝒑𝒂𝒓𝒌 𝒂 𝒄𝒐𝒗𝒆𝒓-𝒖𝒑 𝒔𝒄𝒂𝒏𝒅𝒂𝒍

Danielle Smith promised to cut costs in healthcare.

Instead, she delivered chaos — and fired the whistleblower.

A University of Alberta study showed that since surgeries were outsourced to private clinics:
• Wait times for 9 of 11 procedures have increased
• Cost per surgery has skyrocketed by 79%

In January 2025, AHS CEO Athana Mentzelopoulos was fired just days after she opened an internal investigation into these same private contracts.

She had even scheduled a meeting with the Auditor General.

Then — suddenly — she was gone.

Her lawyers say she was fired for uncovering political interference and overbilling.

The UCP called her “incompetent”.

But they never disproved her claims.

Watchdog groups say it clearly:

“This looks like corruption — and a cover-up.”

Smith’s health reforms are not saving money.

They’re funneling tax dollars to friends — while silencing anyone who tells the truth.

This isn’t leadership.

This is a system being captured from the inside.

𝑹𝒆𝒈𝒂𝒓𝒅𝒔,

Serhiy Rafalyuk
𝑷𝒐𝒍𝒊𝒕𝒊𝒄𝒂𝒍 𝑪𝒓𝒊𝒕𝒊𝒄 𝒐𝒇 𝑪𝒂𝒏𝒂𝒅𝒊𝒂𝒏 𝑷𝒂𝒓𝒕𝒊𝒆𝒔
𝑪𝒐𝒏𝒔𝒕𝒂𝒏𝒕 𝑬𝒏𝒆𝒎𝒚 𝒐𝒇 𝑪𝒐𝒓𝒓𝒖𝒑𝒕 𝑮𝒐𝒗𝒆𝒓𝒏𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕
 

JoAnn IsaacSIMPLY NOT SKIPPY

JoAnn Isaac · pnreStosdosc4M4 1ta0df3gca6me1P Yaii0t18e58gc431hrt 0u422:yt ·
Anaida Poilievre’s uncle, Venezuelan lawyer José Gerardo Galindo Prato, had previously entered Canada in 2004 and lived without documentation until 2007, when he was deported by Canadian border agents.
Back in Venezuela, Galindo Prato was convicted in 2017 of helping a drug trafficker escape from prison and served six months in prison, which he says was a trumped-up, false charge.
In the fall of 2018, he flew to Miami, then to Pittsburgh, and later crossed at Roxham Road.
The Breach obtained a draft copy of Galindo Prato’s written submission to Immigration Canada from early 2021, applying to stay on humanitarian and compassionate grounds, which Anaida Poilievre helped him prepare.
At this stage of the asylum process, he would have already failed his refugee application and been served with a deportation order, according to an immigration lawyer The Breach consulted.
The Poilievre Project: A radical blueprint for corporate rule by Martin Lukacs
According to email and Facebook correspondence seen by The Breach, Anaida Poilievre organized the drafting and mailing of the submission with assistance from a parliamentarian.
In one message she wrote that she had a “person helping in a MP’s office.” In another, she was even more direct.
“I’m trying to help my uncle,” she wrote, and “the MP can help us.”
At the time, she worked as an executive assistant in the office of Conservative MP Michael Cooper, a close ally of Pierre Poilievre.
Since Poilievre became leader, she has taken an active leadership role herself, narrating ads, introducing her husband at major events, and playing a key role in fundraising for the party.
The revelations about an undocumented family member raise questions about whether Pierre Poilievre was in any way involved in advocating for his uncle-in-law to stay in the country, despite his outspoken rhetoric against “illegal border crossers.”
In December 2024, Poilievre called for Canada to bulk up the security at the border, including by deputizing provincial police and cracking down on “false refugee claims.”
“We need to shut off the flow of false refugee claims who are in no danger in their country of origin but who are sneaking in either through our porous border, through our weak visa system, and then when they’re here, making a false claim,” he said.
Galindo Prato’s written submission, which the immigration lawyer verified looks like a typical example, says he was persecuted and jailed without trial in Venezuela.
But online court documents from the Venezuelan Supreme Court of Justice indicate he was charged with helping a drug trafficker escape from prison while he served as a legal consultant in a psychiatric clinic.
Because refugee and immigration proceedings are highly confidential, The Breach could not confirm whether Galindo Prato has received his permanent residency.
But The Breach was able to identify Galindo Prato sitting with the rest of Anaida Poilievre’s family in the front row at the Conservative Party convention in Quebec City in August 2023.
 
1747859237014.png

Canadians Against Pierre Poilievre

Jeff Cotter · ersotSodnp046ug95u0huc68llhcmmi097ui4aaf2if5m221h243i0l301ll ·


So let me get this straight…

Pierre Poilievre has spent years fearmongering about “illegal border crossers” and “false refugee claims.” He’s called for stronger borders, a crackdown on Roxham Road, and tighter refugee screening.

But now we learn that his wife Anaida Poilievre helped her uncle, Venezuelan lawyer José Gerardo Galindo Prato, cross into Canada through Roxham Road in 2018, after he’d already been deported once, and after serving time in Venezuela for allegedly helping a drug trafficker escape prison.

According to The Breach, Anaida helped draft and submit his application to stay in Canada on humanitarian grounds. At the time, she worked for Conservative MP Michael Cooper and even said in messages, “I’m trying to help my uncle… the MP can help us.”

Galindo Prato’s claim was that he was persecuted and jailed without trial. But Venezuelan court records say he was convicted of aiding a prison escape while working at a psychiatric clinic.

Refugee claims are confidential, but he was later spotted in the front row at the Conservative convention in 2023, sitting with Anaida’s family.

So while Poilievre publicly rails against refugees and asylum seekers, he’s had no issue helping one enter the country through the very process he condemns.

The hypocrisy couldn’t be clearer. One rule for everyone else, and a different one when it’s family.

Sources:
• The Breach
• National Observer
• Public Venezuelan court records
 
They traded in their white sheets for black hats ….
🤷🏽‍♀️

1747998669915.png

Canadians Against Conservatives (no hate speech or bullying)

Angela Johnston Wilson · oStdpnoserM0214mMg08hP7ut:hgtgi5gayat5h ah1c5a8 895 80h8032 ·
The Black Hat Gang: Alberta’s Quiet Push for U.S.-Style Liberties
In the quiet prairie city of Medicine Hat, Alberta, a political movement has taken root under the name The Black Hat Gang. While the name may conjure images of outlaw biker crews or paramilitary factions, the reality is more subtle—but no less significant. The Black Hat Gang is composed primarily of local conservative activists, retired politicians, and United Conservative Party (UCP) insiders who share a deep dissatisfaction with federal oversight and a passionate drive to reshape Alberta's legal foundation in line with American constitutional ideals.
Wearing their trademark black cowboy hats, members of the group symbolize a return to what they view as fundamental freedoms: medical autonomy, gun rights, and aggressive property protections. Their push centers on a radical overhaul of the Alberta Bill of Rights, proposing a slate of 22 new "guarantees" that would codify a series of individual liberties rarely seen in Canadian provincial law.
Who Are the Black Hat Gang?
Estimates suggest the group includes about 20 to 30 active members, with a core leadership of roughly six to ten politically influential individuals. Among the most notable are:
✔️
LaVar Payne, former Member of Parliament for Medicine Hat from 2008 to 2015.
✔️
Scott Payne, LaVar’s son and a principal organizer of the movement.
✔️
Ian Parkinson, a longtime political figure and conservative activist in the region.
✔️
Mitch Sylvestre, president of the Bonnyville-Cold Lake UCP riding association and closely linked with the Take Back Alberta movement.
✔️
Leighton Grey, a lawyer known for representing clients who opposed COVID-19 public health measures and for promoting Alberta’s independence from federal governance.
The group operates through meetings, political lobbying, and media appearances. Rather than acting as a traditional political party, they function as a political pressure bloc, using their connections to influence legislative direction from within the UCP.
The Push to Rewrite the Alberta Bill of Rights
The group’s central demand is to enshrine 22 new rights into the Alberta Bill of Rights. Their proposals include:
《 The right to refuse medical treatment, including vaccinations, without penalty.
— Note: While Canadian law generally respects informed consent and bodily autonomy, public health mandates such as vaccination requirements have been upheld during health emergencies under provincial and federal authority.
《 The right to own and bear firearms, echoing the U.S. Second Amendment.
— Canada’s firearms laws are federally regulated under the Firearms Act and the Criminal Code; provincial laws cannot supersede federal firearms regulation. Alberta currently advocates for less restrictive gun laws but remains subject to federal regulation.
《 Expanded property rights, including the legal right to use “sufficient force” to defend one’s home and land.
— Canadian law allows reasonable self-defense, but the use of force is tightly controlled and subject to criminal law; "sufficient force" is legally interpreted case-by-case.
《 Protection from “excessive taxation” and unjust seizure of property.
— Taxation is constitutionally within federal and provincial jurisdiction; Alberta has among the lowest provincial tax rates in Canada.
《 The right of parents to make unimpeded decisions about their children's healthcare and education.
— Parental rights in Canada are balanced against child welfare laws and provincial education standards.
《 Guaranteed access to legal and medical services regardless of employment or union status.
— Canada’s universal healthcare system provides medical access regardless of employment; legal services are not guaranteed but are available via various public and private mechanisms.
《 Protections against “government interference” in religious expression and private enterprise.
— The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees freedom of religion and reasonable limits on government interference, balanced with anti-discrimination laws.
These suggestions mirror the libertarian principles found in U.S. state constitutions, particularly in places like Texas, Idaho, and Florida. The underlying philosophy is one of maximum individual autonomy and minimal state intervention—principles that remain controversial in Canada’s parliamentary and communitarian legal culture.
Danielle Smith’s Role and Response
Premier Danielle Smith has met with the group and has expressed sympathy toward many of their ideas, particularly around bodily autonomy and parental rights. Her own political rhetoric often mirrors their language—she has previously advocated for medical choice during the pandemic and framed government mandates as violations of individual freedom.
While the group has not yet achieved a formal legislative victory, they are influencing UCP policy discussions. Red Deer-South MLA Jason Stephan has been a point of contact for them within government, helping to raise their proposals with caucus members. Other UCP legislators have acknowledged the group’s growing influence, especially in rural and southern Alberta constituencies.
Broader Implications for Alberta
The Black Hat Gang’s efforts signal a quiet but powerful ideological shift in Alberta’s conservative movement. Their proposed changes would move the province closer to an American-style legal framework, prioritizing individual rights over collective governance. Critics warn this could undermine federal norms, reduce protections for vulnerable groups, and lead to legal conflicts with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
This campaign also raises important questions about Alberta’s constitutional identity. While provinces can establish their own bills of rights, those laws cannot supersede federal law or the Charter. If the Black Hat Gang’s proposals were adopted in full, Alberta could face constitutional challenges and renewed tensions with Ottawa.

CONTINUED
 
PART 2

Nonetheless, the group remains undeterred. They see themselves as freedom fighters restoring the soul of Alberta to its “frontier” roots—a vision that appeals to many disillusioned with urban liberalism, federal authority, and pandemic-era mandates.
Alberta Delegates and the Black Hat Group Advance U.S.-Aligned Separatist Agenda
In Alberta, secessionist forces are rapidly mobilizing under the banner of the Commonwealth of Alberta Delegation to Washington, an advocacy group backed by the Alberta Prosperity Project (APP), which claims 55,000 volunteers and supporters. This movement aims to establish an independent “Commonwealth of Alberta” by December 15, 2025, and has already sent envoys to Washington to solicit support from the Trump administration for Alberta to become the 51st U.S. state, a territory, or an allied republic. At the center of this effort is the Black Hat Gang—an institutionally funded, far-right network of anti-vaccine activists, private health lobbyists, Christian nationalists, and constitutional revisionists with close ties to Danielle Smith’s UCP government. The Gang has proposed a complete rewrite of Alberta’s Bill of Rights, seeking to enshrine U.S.-style “liberties,” including unrestricted gun ownership, the right to use deadly force to protect private property, religious opt-outs from public health mandates, and total deregulation of education and medicine. Danielle Smith has met directly with members of the Black Hat Gang and their legal representatives, signaling not just tacit approval but strategic alignment with their anti-Canadian agenda. This coordinated campaign represents an existential threat to Canadian constitutional sovereignty and the rule of law.
Sources:
□ CBC News (reporting on the group's legislative proposals and influence in the UCP)
□ Medicine Hat News (local coverage of LaVar and Scott Payne’s activism)
□ Alberta Views Magazine (background on Take Back Alberta and right-wing movements)
□ Public statements from Danielle Smith, Jason Stephan, and Leighton Grey
□ Government of Alberta archives on the current Alberta Bill of Rights
□ Canadian legal commentary on provincial rights vs. federal constitutional law
□ Canadian Firearms Program, Public Health Agency of Canada, and Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms materials
Disclaimer: This essay is intended for informational and analytical purposes. It presents publicly available information about political actors and legislative movements in Alberta without endorsement or accusation. All named individuals retain the right to their perspectives and positions, which are presented here as part of a public discourse.
 
BBC

King's big moment in Canada after Trump row​

Sean Coughlan - Royal correspondent / Sat, May 24, 2025 at 7:32 AM GMT-5
The King is visiting Canada after President Trump said it should be part of the US [Reuters]
"This is a big deal for the King to do this," says Jeremy Kinsman, former Canadian high commissioner to the UK, as King Charles prepares for a historic visit showing support for Canada, which is facing pressure from US President Donald Trump.
"I hope that Trump understands," says Mr Kinsman, ahead of the King becoming the first monarch to open Canada's Parliament in almost 70 years.
So what can we expect from his speech as Canada's head of state, to be delivered in French and English in Ottawa on Tuesday?
It will be written on the advice of Canada's government. But along with the workaday lines on policy plans, Mr Kinsman expects a message, loud and clear, that Canada will not be the 51st US state.

Perhaps Trump's royal smack-down will be televised.
For the shameless, even global embarrassment may be immaterial.
But if not a deterrent to Trump, perhaps constructive to those dealing with the maliciously fickle U.S. president.
 
Back
Top