Dave Topping

RCAF/Air Canada Pilot retired after 42 years of flying passengers in safety and comfort to their destinations. The only extreme I am into is moderation.

[Abhi Ai @Heyabhi29]

54 million smart TVs get "replaced" every year for a problem that has nothing to do with the panel, the processor, or age.

Not the screen. Not the hardware. Not how old it is.

I spent an afternoon with an electronics repair technician who has personally serviced over 600 smart TVs for customers over the last several years, and what he told me completely changed how I think about a "laggy" TV.

"Nobody's smart TV actually dies at 3 years," he said. "What dies is patience. A TV can be running a dozen background app refreshes and a nearly-full storage drive silently, permanently, unless someone goes in and touches settings that were never explained during setup."

He walked me through the exact 7 settings he checks, in order, every single time someone brings in a TV and says "it just got slow and laggy for no reason."

None of them cost money. None of them require new hardware. Most take under 60 seconds each.

🧵 Here are the 7 settings that fixed it:

[Dave Topping @BristolDriver]

@WeAreCanProud The 24th of October can't come soon enough.

[Dave Topping @BristolDriver]

@WeAreCanProud 10+10+10= NDP as in NO DEMONSTRABLE PROGRESS

[Scott Moe @PremierScottMoe]

More than 40 countries - Canada and its allies - have sanctions against Belarus for supporting war criminal Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.

Buying blood potash from Belarus is supporting Russian aggression.

It’s wrong and it doesn’t make sense.

All of that potash has to be shipped first through Russia, then across the ocean, then across the US to mid-western farmers.

Does anyone believe Belarusian blood potash shipped through Russia is going to be more affordable, more sustainable or more ethical than potash shipped from Saskatchewan - right here in North America?

[Vivian Bercovici @VivianBercovici]

Wow. This is the Canadian federal Minister of Heritage, who has carriage of the Jew-hatred file. So reassuring to know he's "thinking" of the Jewish community in Belleville, who are "shaken" after their synagogue was shot up in the midst of Kol Nidre services.
He could not write a more detached, cold, inappropriate post if he tried.
All Canadian Jews are more than "shaken." Canada has become a cesspit of rank Jew-hatred, emboldened by this federal government. If the target had been a mosque this Minister and Prime Minister would have gone ballistic immediately, not waited 12 hours to react.

"Shaken."

[Benonwine @benonwine]

John Cleese speaks for the majority of normal decent hardworking Britain's.

We are all John Cleese!! ✌️👍💪

[Melanie In Saskatchewan @saskatchewan_in]

PARLIAMENT IS BACK TODAY!
And #MarkCarney is already leaving!

Mark Carney will grace Question Period with his presence at 2:15 today, but dont get attached.

Because "attending Question Period" with Carney doesn't necessarily mean staying for Question Period. His usual approach is the leaders round: take maybe 4 or 5 questions himself, sit down staring intently at notes in front of him, let his ministers take over and, most often, leave before the whole thing is finished.

And "answer" is doing some fairly heroic work there! Ask Carney a direct question and you are liable to get the familiar collection of keywords, slogans, statistics and talking points assembled into something that occupied the allotted time without necessarily answering what was asked.

You know what I mean, we've all witnessed it in action. Case in point;
"Strongest fiscal position in the G7."
"Building Canada strong."
"Most connected economy in the world."
"More resilient. More independent."

We have heard them. Repeatedly. And thats where his attendance stops being a parliamentary trivia question and starts having real world consequences.

You cant hold a Prime Minister accountable in Parliament if he treats Parliament like an optional appointment. If he's not there, he doesn't have to defend the contradictions, explain the decisions, answer the follow-ups or face the people Canadians elected specifically to challenge his government.

And if he does show up, he only takes a handful of questions, answers them with slogans and word salads, hands the rest to his ministers and heads for the door, and that's not much better. Accountability requires access. You cant question an empty chair.

At 4:00, he's back on the plane and off to New York for UN meetings.

New York... well of course!

Brookfield Asset Management moved its head office from Toronto to New York in late 2024, while @MarkJCarney was still its chair, a mere few weeks before he entered the Liberal leadership race. And this wasnt some corporate decision that happened after he had wandered out the door. The board approved the restructuring unanimously while Carney was chair, and his own signature appears on the December shareholder circular documenting the New York head office and recommending the boards proposal. He didnt resign from Brookfield until January 16, the same day he launched his Liberal leadership campaign.

And when Carneys investments were finally disclosed before being placed in a blind trust, more than 560 individual companies appeared in his managed investment account, with roughly 91% of those companies reportedly headquartered in the United States. That’s a count of holdings, not 91% of the dollar value of his wealth, because those values werent disclosed.

So New York probably doesnt exactly feel like strange territory. At this point, Carney flying to New York feels less like international travel and more like the call of home. Think of it like Mecca for bankers if you will.

So, if you are wondering what the fall sitting might look like, there's your preview.

Carney was absent from 74% of Question Periods in the last session. So, using the sophisticated forecasting technique known as "watching what the man actually does," Canadians should probably expect more of the same:

✈️ Europe. Lots and lots of Europe!
✈️ Summits. So many summits, so little time.
✈️ International forums, naturally.
✈️ Investment meetings of course.
✈️ Speeches about Canadian sovereignty delivered somewhere other than Canada to non-Canadians.
🏛️ Parliamentary attendance, only when and if Carney's scheduling permits.
(And we thought Trudeau was a part time PM! Carney comes along, says hold my Perrier and shows us all what part time really looks like.)

Carney has spent an extraordinary amount of time travelling, meeting, announcing plans to meet again, signing MOUs and talking about future agreements. At some point Canadians are entitled to ask a remarkably basic question:

WHAT THE HELL IS ACTUALLY COMING OUT OF ALL OF IT THAT IS TANGIBLE FOR CANADIANS?

Not another meeting!
Not another MOU!
Not another announcement about an agreement they hope to negotiate later! Real, actual, measurable results for the Canadians paying for all of this

Meanwhile, Carney says this will be a "crucial" session and that his government will introduce some of the most "consequential legislation" in decades.

CONSEQUENTIAL FOR WHOM?

Because based on the last session, Canadians might reasonably wonder exactly what we are supposed to be looking forward to.

- Do we get to look forward to more debate being cut short using ill-gotten majority pressure?
- Will we see even more parliamentary procedure being used to ram and force feed legislation through faster without parliamentary engagement or oversight?
- Wanna bet more Liberal-majority committees controlling what gets heard, what gets called and what gets buried will become a regular feature, used to keep Canadians deaf, dumb and blind to what's happening... Maple Mushrooms growing in the dark feasting on actual shit perhaps?
- Will more committee business disappear in camera, safely away from those pesky prying Canadians who apparently think they are entitled to watch their own government operate since they fund it?
- Will more opposition concerns be mocked, dismissed or treated as irritating background noise while the Liberals remind everyone that they have the votes so, too bad so sad?

Is that what "consequential" means?

Because when a Prime Minister tells the country he’s preparing some of the most consequential legislation in decades, after we have already watched how his government handles scrutiny and dissent, perhaps Canadians should be asking one extremely inconvenient question:

WHAT ELSE ARE YOU PLANNING TO DO "FOR US" THAT WE DIDN’T ELECT YOU TO DO, NEVER VOTED ON, AND NEVER GAVE YOU A MANDATE TO DO?

Because lately, "for Canadians" seems to be the magic phrase slapped on decisions Canadians were never actually asked about. And funny enough, Brookfield keeps turning up somewhere in the vicinity of an extraordinary number of decisions supposedly being made "for Canadians." Ironic how that keeps happening, eh?

Oh, and somewhere in this "consequential" session we are finally getting a budget... in the fall. Federal budgets were traditionally, and overwhelmingly, a spring event. Sure, there were occasional exceptions. But Carney didn't make an exception, he changed the entire schedule.

His government moved the federal budget cycle to the fall, with the spring now reserved for an economic and fiscal update. Because apparently the federal budget needed to be on the same fiscal calendar as Brookfield. So Budget 2026 is coming. That should be fun... not!

And somewhere amid all this globe-trotting, another batch of federal byelections is coming. There are vacant seats waiting to be filled, including Yorkton–Melville here in Saskatchewan, and another round is expected soon. Carney is rumoured to call them this week.

So welcome back, Canada! Parliament resumes today, Carney will drop by and then he's leaving the country... again. And maybe thats the most useful preview of this "consequential" session we are going to get.

The government will be in Parliament making decisions Canadians will have to live with. But the Prime Minister?
IN PARLIAMENT, ONLY WHEN SCHEDULING PERMITS!

Melanie

🔗 https://t.co/REXjBrIaCj
🔗https://t.co/7sntVhPVPI

#cdnpoli #HereWeGoAgain

[Ms.BORN FREE 🇨🇦🙏 @LittleMsCujo]

Racketeering Expose by Derrick Sweet
Sept 20\26

My name is Derrick Sweet. I am a 61 year old Canadian and earn my living as a stock market analyst. I follow money for a living. I began my career in investing in 1993 at Midland Walwyn in Toronto as a Financial Advisor. After establishing myself as a successful advisor I was recruited by BMO Nesbitt Burns in 1997 and offered the position of Vice President and Senior Investment Advisor and presented with a $250,000.00 signing bonus, which was a lot of money back then. For several years I was one of the top advisors in Canada and a regular invited speaker at investment conferences across Canada. By 2002 I had sold my business to a bank and some time after that I started offering stock research reports to DIY investors who manage their own money. I provide this background on who I am so you have a better understanding how I discovered possible acts of racketeering.
I have been closely following Mark Carney’s violations of the trust he was voted to uphold for too long. I am not a lawyer and am not making any former charges against Mark Carney in this post. I am simply pointing out activities by the PM of Canada that are a direct conflict of interest that could possibly lead to several charges of racketeering.

The Prosecution Case Against Mark Carney, Prime Minister of Canada (the PM)

I. The Core Allegation: "Pay-to-Play" Infrastructure

The prosecution will argue that the Prime Minister (PM) has operated a criminal enterprise where public policy and taxpayer-funded contracts were used as a vehicle to inflate the value of a private entity (Brookfield) in which he holds a direct pecuniary interest (stock options).
The Nexus: The Acts: 42 distinct government deals awarded to or partnered with Brookfield.
The Benefit: $5 billion in reported profits for the entity.
The Conflict: Multi-million dollar stock options held by the decision-maker (the PM).
II. Count 1: Breach of Trust (Criminal Code s. 122)

Under Section 122, we do not need to prove a "bribe" was paid. We only need to prove that the PM, in connection with his duties, committed a Breach of Trust that would be an offence even if committed against a private person.
The Evidence:
Duty of Office: The PM is mandated by the Conflict of Interest Act to "arrange private affairs to prevent conflicts of interest" (s. 5).
The Breach: By failing to divest or recuse himself from a policy environment that directly benefits a company where he holds options, he has fundamentally violated the trust of the Canadian public.
Legal Standard: Per R. v. Boulanger, the prosecution must show the act was a "marked departure from the standards expected of an individual in the accused's position." Managing 42 deals while holding the stock is a "marked departure" by any reasonable standard.
III. Count 2: Frauds on the Government (Criminal Code s. 121)

This is the Canadian version of "racketeering." Specifically, Section 121(1)(c) prohibits an official from demanding or accepting a benefit for themselves in exchange for "assistance" or "exercise of influence" regarding government dealings.
The Strategy:
We will argue that the Stock Options constitute an "advantage or benefit." The value of these options is tied directly to the success of the 42 government-backed deals. Every time the PM announces a deal, he effectively "cuts himself a check" by driving up the equity value of the firm.
IV. Count 3: Organized Corruption (The "Racketeering" Element)

To push this into the realm of organized crime/racketeering, we look at the Enterprise (the Liberal Party/PMO) and the Pattern of Activity.
The Enterprise: The Prime Minister's Office (PMO).
The Pattern: A series of 42 separate transactions. In racketeering law, we look for "Continuity and Relationship."
Relationship: All deals involve the same beneficiary (Brookfield).
Continuity: The deals spanned a significant period of time and continue as long as the PM holds office.
V. The "Smoking Gun": Intent (Mens Rea)

The defense will claim the PM has a "Blind Trust." I have dismantled this below:
Transparency vs. Blinding: If the PM knows he has the options (which is public knowledge), the trust is not "blind."
The $5 Billion Profit Announcement: We will present evidence that the PM was aware of the financial health of the company while simultaneously crafting legislation (like the CLARITY Act or housing initiatives) that specifically favors Brookfield’s asset classes.

This is not a series of unfortunate coincidences. This is a closed-loop system of enrichment. The Prime Minister is using the sovereign authority of Canada as a marketing arm for a private corporation. He is both the 'Grantor' of the contracts and the 'Grantee' of the profits. In the private sector, this is insider trading. in the public sector, this is a Racket."

CONFIDENTIAL LEGAL MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Draft Criminal Referral – s. 121 & s. 122 Criminal Code (Canada)
TARGET: The Right Honourable Mark Carney, Prime Minister of Canada
NEXUS: Financial Entanglements with Brookfield Asset Management (BAM)
DATE: February 13, 2026
I. PREAMBLE & JURISDICTION

This referral outlines a prima facie case for investigation by the RCMP Sensitive and International Investigations Unit. The allegations concern a systematic pattern of conduct wherein the subject, in his capacity as Prime Minister, has influenced or directed federal policy and contracts toward Brookfield Corporation (and its subsidiaries) while maintaining a multi-million dollar personal financial stake in said corporation via unexercised stock options and carried interest.
II. STATEMENT OF FACTS

Direct Interest: As of February 12, 2026, the subject remains the holder of approximately $6.8 million USD in Brookfield stock options (calculated at market value), with expiration dates extending into 2033/2034.
The "Profit Nexus": On February 12, 2026, Brookfield Corporation reported annual distributable earnings of $5.4 billion USD, an 11% increase. This profit spike coincided with a series of 42 federal "deals" or policy partnerships announced during the subject’s tenure.
Conflict of Interest Screen Failure: Testimony provided to the House Ethics Committee in late 2025 confirmed that 95% of Brookfield-owned companies (approximately 1,900 entities) are not covered by the subject’s current "ethics screen," allowing for direct interaction between the PMO and entities that contribute to the subject’s future performance pay.
Policy Correlation: Specific federal initiatives—including the $3B auto sector save-out and the AI Infrastructure Fund—directly align with Brookfield’s core 2026 investment strategies (AI infrastructure and energy transition).
III. APPLICABLE OFFENCES (CRIMINAL CODE OF CANADA)

COUNT 1: Breach of Trust by Public Officer (s. 122)
The Theory: The subject has exercised the powers of the Prime Minister’s Office for a purpose other than the public good—specifically, the appreciation of his private equity holdings.
Evidence: The subject’s refusal to divest (liquidate) his assets, despite public warnings from the Ethics Commissioner and the Clerk of the Privy Council that a "blind trust" is insufficient for assets as large and specific as Brookfield carried interest.
COUNT 2: Frauds on the Government (s. 121(1)(c))
The Theory: The subject, being an official, has "accepted or agreed to accept" an advantage (the appreciation of stock options and carried interest) from a person/entity (Brookfield) that has active and ongoing dealings with the Government of Canada.
Evidence: The "carried interest" held by the subject is a direct performance-based payout. Every federal contract awarded to a Brookfield-managed fund (e.g., the Global Transition Fund) serves as an indirect "commission" or "reward" to the subject.
IV. INVESTIGATIVE ROADMAP

To move from "referral" to "indictment," the following evidence must be secured via production orders:
Internal PMO Communications: All emails between the PMO and Bruce Flatt/Justin Beber (Brookfield executives) regarding the 42 specific deals.
Blind Trust "Bypass" Logs: Records of "recusal failures" where the subject was present for decisions impacting Brookfield subsidiaries not covered by the s. 1,900-company screen.
Option Exercise Strategy: Correspondence between the subject’s trustee and Brookfield regarding the optimal "cashing out" window relative to government policy announcements.
V. CONCLUSION

The legal threshold for a Section 122 investigation is a "marked departure" from the standard of trust. The simultaneous management of the Canadian economy and the holding of a performance-based stake in a company receiving 40+ federal deals meets this threshold.
I have broken down the 42 Critical Deals and Policy Alignments between the Canadian Federal Government and the Brookfield ecosystem as of early 2026.
In a racketeering case, we don't just look for "contracts"; we look for "The Pattern." These deals are categorized by how they directly feed the valuation of the PM’s private equity holdings.
The "Brookfield 42" Portfolio Analysis

Category A: The Infrastructure & Housing "Mega-Deals" (14 Deals)

These deals leverage the 2025/2026 federal budget initiatives to de-risk Brookfield's massive real estate and modular construction divisions.
The Build Canada Homes Initiative: A $36 Billion federal program. Our investigation shows Brookfield-owned modular housing firms received the lion's share of "fast-track" status.
Canada Growth Fund (CGF) Backstopping: 4 specific "Carbon Capture" deals where the federal CGF provides "price certainty" for Brookfield’s decarbonization projects, effectively guaranteeing their 15-20% IRR (Internal Rate of Return).
The BGIS Master Contract Extension: Brookfield Global Integrated Services (BGIS) continues to manage 3,800+ federal buildings. Even though Brookfield sold its majority stake, it retains a "carried interest" in the performance of the legacy contracts.
Category B: The "Green Transition" Payouts (18 Deals)

This is the most egregious category for a racketeering charge because the PM personally co-headed these funds before taking office.
The Global Transition Fund (GTF) Infusion: Federal pension oversight boards (under PM influence) have directed over $12 Billion into the GTF.
Wind West & Nova Scotia Offshore: 6 deals where federal "nod" and subsidies were given to offshore wind projects where Brookfield is the lead equity partner.
Small Modular Reactors (SMRs): 2 deals for the Darlington SMR project. Brookfield’s acquisition of Westinghouse (nuclear tech) makes them the primary beneficiary of this federal nuclear push.
Category C: The "Digital Sovereignty" & AI Build-out (10 Deals)

A new 2026 frontier. Brookfield recently launched a $100 Billion AI Infrastructure program.
Sovereign Data Centres: 3 contracts awarded to Brookfield subsidiaries to build "Sovereign AI" data centres in Quebec and Ontario.
The "Microsoft Framework" Tailwinds: While the deal is between Microsoft and Brookfield, federal tax credits for "Clean Energy for AI" (passed in the 2025 budget) effectively subsidized $10.5 Gigawatts of Brookfield-owned power facilities.
Prosecutorial Conclusion on the 42 Deals
If we were in court today, I would argue that these are not 42 separate coincidences, but 42 bricks in a wall of private enrichment. The fact that 95% of Brookfield’s 1,900 subsidiaries are not screened means the PM can sit in a meeting about "Critical Mineral Supply Chains" (a Category C deal) and make a decision that enriches a Brookfield subsidiary he technically doesn't "know" he owns—yet his stock options move upward regardless.
Attorney's Note: The $5.4 Billion profit reported yesterday is the "fruit of the poisonous tree." We would argue those profits were only possible because of the de-risking provided by the Canadian taxpayer through these 42 deals.

If you believe I have presented proof of racketeering please do the following;

1) Share immediately on your time time - change your privacy settings to public for this post.
2) Share it with a conservative alternative media organization and your local MP.
3) Follow up with your MP and demand an investigation by law enforcement.
4) Remember, no one is above the law, not even Mark Carney.

[Melanie In Saskatchewan @saskatchewan_in]

📢 I am getting really tired of finding out what my own government is doing from somebody else’s podium in some distant foreign land.

Canadians were told Mark Carney was going to diversify our trade. He was going to find us new customers and make us less dependent on the United States so future trade disruptions have less impact.

Okay… so diversify!

Nobody remembers voting to blow up the relationship with the country that buys roughly two thirds of our exports, walk away from a deal because American demands supposedly threatened our “flexibility, independence, and sovereignty,” and then start sidling up to Brussels looking for something called associate membership.

That was not in the Liberal election brochure. That was not on the election ballot either! And it was not explained to the people who actually live here.

Three days ago, Carney was asked about reports Canada was exploring EU associate membership. No, he said. Canada was not looking to become a member of the European Union. He wanted a “unique alliance.” Then he flew to Europe.

There he sat in the European Parliament while Ursula von der Leyen delivered her hour long prepared State of the Union speech and proposed that Canada become the first associate member of the EU, a position that does not even exist yet.

Well… that seems to have escalated quickly. Except it didn’t.

Jonathan Wilkinson, Canada’s incoming ambassador to the EU, wandered out afterward and ruined the surprise. They had already talked about it. They knew it was going to be on the table. So stop playing word games with Canadians Mark Carney.

I do not care whether Carney calls it membership, associate membership, a unique alliance, or European Friendship Deluxe with free continental breakfast. What are you actually negotiating?

Do we get a vote on EU rules Canada may be expected to follow? If Brussels changes those rules, can Canada say no? Can Parliament? What Canadian laws and provincial regulations are being discussed? What has Ottawa already promised?

And why do we need this at all?

We already have CETA. We are already negotiating a digital trade agreement. We are already cooperating with Europe on defence, critical minerals, energy and technology.

So what does associate membership add? And more importantly, what does Canada give up to get it?

This is where my patience finally runs out!😡

A real leader in a real democracy would put this in front of the country. A referendum with a crystal clear question requiring a simple yes or a no from the people who have to live with the answer. Instead we get word games, photo ops in Strasbourg, and a Prime Minister who treats the House like a demon treats holy water: he will not sit in it unless he has to!

Carney walked away from Washington telling Canadians sovereignty was the line in the sand. If that is in fact the case - the real reason sputtered by Carney, then explain something to me like I am sitting at my kitchen table in Saskatchewan trying to pay the power bill…

If another country having too much influence over Canadian economic decisions is a threat to our sovereignty, how does another political bloc having influence over Canadian economic decisions protect it? Does sovereignty expire somewhere over the Atlantic?

Washington wanting a say in Canadian decisions was apparently so intolerable as to warrant walking away from the negotiating table with America. If Brussels wants a say, we are supposed to call it strategic autonomy. That is quite a parlour trick. One superpower wanting a say is tyranny. A whole bloc wanting a say is statesmanship. Huh, how convenient.

And drop the piety for a minute. A lot of the people who built this country left Europe for a reason. They left class systems, imperial ministries, conscription, religious tests, and distant capitals that decided their lives without asking. They crossed an ocean so their kids would not live under somebody else’s “common space.”

So why the hell are we walking back into it with a smile and a press release?

Europe is not sitting around enjoying unprecedented prosperity while von der Leyen hands Canada the secret recipe. She is getting hammered inside Europe over competitiveness, sky high energy costs, poverty inducing climate policy, uncontrolled migration and the direction she is taking the bloc. EU governments are already questioning parts of this proposed Canadian relationship.

Meanwhile Carney and von der Leyen sound like somebody photocopied the same economic manual and handed each of them half: carbon, climate, economic security, strategic autonomy, integration... all the things that make them indistinguishable from each other. One works from Brussels. One works from Ottawa.

Maybe this arrangement is wonderful. Then show us. Tell Canadians what you have discussed, what you have promised, what we are expected to follow, and whether we actually get a vote.

Do not brief Europe first. Do not announce it from a foreign parliament. Do not hide behind “unique alliance” like that phrase is a substitute for consent. Carney made sovereignty the standard. Not me… him.

So I have one request for Mackenzie Gray, Judy Trinh and every other journalist who gets close enough to stick a microphone in front of the Prime Minister.

Ask him.

Mr. Carney, if Canada could not accept becoming a rule taker for Washington because we are a sovereign country, why should Canadians accept becoming a rule taker for Brussels?

And if this is such a gift, why will you not put it to a national referendum instead of stepping around the people and the Parliament that is supposed to speak for them?

Please do not let him answer a different question. Canadians have been handled enough. At the core, it’s the same country, same sovereignty, and the same test.

Until we know what the hell they are signing us up for: Do not sign a damn thing!

~ Melanie ~

🔗 https://t.co/JmL5sXIwJ3
🔗 https://t.co/qf2xlLeg75

[JayGen 𝕏 er🇨🇦 @JayGenXer]

Lloyd Axworthy sat on CTV and said the quiet part.

Carney is talking a new European arrangement in their parliament.
Ours is dark.
No paper. No vote. No foreign-policy review 18 months after he promised one.

Axworthy’s words, not mine.
What do we give up.
What is the quid pro quo.
We are a North American country.
Free trade last time went through an election.
This one is being workshopped with friends and announced on a red carpet.

Then he said it.
God forbid I agree with Pierre.
On this one, the government has to be accountable to the House.

EU wants the minerals, the gas, and a say on the Arctic passage.
Canadians got a slogan.
Unique alliance.

Put the paper on the desk before Thursday.

#cdnpoli #CanadaFirst

[Michelle LA🇨🇦 @MichelleLA1981]

Wow!!
Former CBC producer Rodney Palmer telling us what many of us have been saying all along!
Your government funded media is literally running a propaganda channel.

[Wiretap Media @WiretapMediaCa]

🚨ALLISON INQUIRY BOMBSHELL🚨

Former CBC producer Rodney Palmer just delivered a forensic presentation to the panel on how Canada’s public broadcaster morphed into a Chinese-style propaganda arm. Called out his former colleagues — and DESTROYED whatever credibility they had left.

[Dave Topping @BristolDriver]

@Chuck_R_Shawn @ezralevant Maybe it's time for the RCMP to trade in their Red Serge for Brown Shirts with an arm band carrying the Liberal Party of Canada logo.

[Chuck R Shawn @Chuck_R_Shawn]

@ezralevant

[Dave Topping @BristolDriver]

@meetthendpca It's a four way tie with Avi Lewis hiding in the background afraid to contest a Federal Seat.

[Ezra Levant 🍁🚛 @ezralevant]

This bleary-eyed up-talker, dressed like a slob, is the perfect representation of Mark Carney's RCMP. What an absolute disgrace.

Why exactly did he visit Tanya? He didn't arrest her. He didn't ask her questions. He didn't give her any useful information or answer her questions either. So why did he come to her house?

It's to intimidate her; to let her know they are watching her, that they could come to her home and arrest her anytime they like, in front of her family. To scare her.

Canada in the midst of its worst crime wave in a century. But Carney has told the RCMP to prioritize prosecuting political dissidents.

Tanya, email me at [email protected] and we'll get you a free lawyer to fight these thugs.