robert barrett

[Elon Musk @elonmusk]

There were massive international protests over George Floyd and those police involved were severely punished with long prison sentences, yet the police responsible here did not even lose their jobs!

An incredibly unjust double-standard!

[robert barrett @beezerboy666]

@connorcrd @BitcoinPulseX @grok i'll take that i guess

[robert barrett @beezerboy666]

OFCOURSE! THIS CLOSE TO $500,000 AND IT ALL GOES DOWNHILL. IM THIS CLOSE TO SELLING MY RANCH.

[robert barrett @beezerboy666]

@TheGoobr that hurts tbh.

[P.b.Freire @Freire1Pb]

MAGA Ford gov finalized a contract outsourcing Canada’s largest healthcare project to a U.S. firm. The NDP says the $140 million contract to build the exterior of a Mississauga hospital should have been torn up during Trump's tarriff war on Canada.

[Massimo @Rainmaker1973]

In Virginia, a group of high school students is making a real difference by repairing donated cars and giving them away for free to single mothers in need of reliable transportation.

At Staunton High School’s automotive technology program, students go far beyond textbook lessons. Under the guidance of their teacher, they restore old vehicles donated by local residents and organizations, bringing them back to safe, road-ready condition.

Once the repairs are complete, the cars are gifted to single mothers who often struggle to get to work, school, or medical appointments without dependable transportation.

This heartfelt initiative beautifully combines hands-on education with meaningful community service. While building valuable technical skills, these students are also giving struggling families greater independence, freedom, and opportunity for a better future.

[iyah may @iyahmaymusic]

Seeing you vibe this song makes my day! 🤩

[𝐻𝒾𝑔𝒽 𝒯𝑜𝓌𝑒𝓇 @LampsOfValar]

I've said it before & i'll say it again, awakeafter is absolutely worth the follow. Awesome old world content!

[Derek @Derekrants]

Canada is being colonized right before our eyes. Don't wait until its too late to organize a push back.

They have to go back.

[healthbot @thehealthb0t]

Chlorine dioxide eradicated 99.99 of the spike protein.

[Jeff Evely - the Magnanimous GenX'er Male @JeffEvely]

"This is not a time to be timid. This is the time to pull out the megaphones - the time to say plainly that the entire field of gender medicine is built upon a lie."

~ Mia Hughes, Genspect

We @May_Day_Canada agree!

Please join us, 5 May 2026, in Ottawa, to bring an end to childhood medical transition.

10:30 am - Parliamentary Press Conference
1:00 pm - Rally on the Hill
6:00 pm - Town Hall (Doors open at 5 pm, Location Bikers' Church - 55 Carillon St, Vanier)

Details and tickets at https://t.co/iDYpd8hMxQ Donate at https://t.co/7wpUg54e4N

[Chris Ryan @Watchdog_MP]

🚨 As a retired Warrant Officer and Veteran, the numbers hit hard because they represent deceased fellow comrades, not just numbers on a page.

In 2023 alone: 21 Canadian Armed Forces members died by suicide (17 Regular Force at a rate of 27 per 100,000 — up from 20.3 the year before).

Male veterans face 1.4x the suicide risk of other Canadian men. Female veterans nearly 2x. Data shows this risk is highest for our youngest and junior ranks in transition.

Yet MPs are still having to demand basic annual public reporting because of conflicting data and gaps.

Our troops and veterans deserve better than excuses and silence.

Real transparency. Real support. Real action.

Tag your MP. Share if you stand with those who served. 🇨🇦💪
#SupportOurTroops #VeteranSuicideCrisis #CDNPoli

[DR POOL @DRPOOLQ17]

🚨 JUST IN: Over $800,000 RAISED for elderly Tennessee man Richard Pulley who is struggling to deliver food so he can pay for medication after his wife lost her job

This man is headed to retirement! 🇺🇸❤️

[Melanie In Saskatchewan @saskatchewan_in]

A Failure of Judgment at the Highest Court

To Richard Wagner,

Your refusal to recuse yourself from the Emergencies Act appeal is not a demonstration of judicial confidence. It is a failure of judgment at a moment that demanded restraint.

You have justified your decision on the basis that your prior public comments did not address the specific legal questions before the Court. That argument may satisfy a narrow, technical reading of judicial conduct. It does not satisfy the standard Canadians are entitled to expect from the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

The governing principle is not whether you commented on the precise statutory interpretation of the Emergencies Act. It is whether a reasonable and informed person would conclude that your previously expressed views could influence your assessment of the case.

You publicly characterized the convoy as the “budding start of anarchy,” described residents as being “taken hostage,” and spoke in terms that conveyed clear condemnation of the events and participants. Those were not neutral observations. They were judgments about the nature, legitimacy, and perceived threat posed by the very situation now under review.

This appeal is not a retrial. It does not exist to rehear evidence or relitigate the convoy as though the past can be reset. Appellate review in Canada is focused on whether the law was correctly interpreted and properly applied to established facts, with significant deference given to the findings already made by the lower courts.

That distinction matters.

The federal government is asking the Supreme Court of Canada to overturn decisions that found its use of the Emergencies Act unlawful. Those rulings concluded that the legal threshold for a national emergency was not met, that existing laws were sufficient, and that certain measures infringed Charter rights.

In response, the government argues that the courts applied the wrong legal standard, failed to give appropriate deference to executive decision-making during a crisis, interpreted the definition of a threat to the security of Canada too narrowly, and erred in their Charter analysis.

Each of those arguments turns on how serious and threatening the underlying events were understood to be in law. The Court must assess necessity, proportionality, and justification. It must determine whether extraordinary powers were warranted under the circumstances that existed at the time.

Those are not abstract exercises.

They require judgment about the nature of the events themselves.

To suggest that prior public condemnation of those events has no bearing on your ability to assess the legality of the government’s response is to rely on a distinction that may be legally convenient but is publicly unconvincing.

The issue is not your personal belief in your own impartiality. Every judge holds that belief. The issue is whether Canadians can reasonably maintain confidence in the Court’s impartiality when the Chief Justice has already expressed strong views about the factual foundation of the case.

Recusal would not have weakened the Court. It would have strengthened it.

It would have demonstrated that the Supreme Court understands the difference between legal defensibility and institutional legitimacy. It would have signaled that preserving public trust matters more than maintaining personal participation in a high-profile case.

Instead, your decision suggests that the threshold for stepping aside is so narrow that even prior public condemnation of the central events of a case does not meet it.

That is not a reassuring message to Canadians.

Other members of the Court have recognized the importance of avoiding even the perception of bias and have stepped aside in contentious cases to preserve the integrity of the institution. That example was available. It was not followed.

The principle of natural justice is clear. Justice must not only be done, it must be seen to be done. In a case of this magnitude, involving the limits of state power and the rights of citizens, that principle should have guided your decision.

This was an opportunity to reinforce public confidence in Canada’s institutions at a time when that confidence is already strained.

You declined it.

As Chief Justice, you are not merely a participant in this case. You are the steward of the reputation of the Supreme Court of Canada itself. That reputation rests not on assertions of impartiality, but on decisions that demonstrate it beyond reasonable doubt. In choosing not to recuse yourself under these circumstances, you have not strengthened that reputation. You have placed it at risk, at a time when public confidence in national institutions is already fragile. The damage may not be immediate, but it is real, and it is yours to own.

Respectfully,
Melanie in Saskatchewan

[Reclaim Our Skies @ReclaimOurSkies]

4/30/26, H4624 South Carolina Clean Air Act Testimony by Attorney Blake Horwitz @TheGeoFight_com
- Lawsuit on destroyed historical weather data: undermines justifications for geoengineering
- Increase of Disease in close proximity to airports
- Private company led by atmospheric scientist: intent to disburse chemicals using Carbon credits as profit-driven pollution
- EPA states Geoengineering efforts are government funded & aircraft emission cloudiness is warming the Earth
- Sulfur dioxide (a premium choice of climate intervention) becomes sulfuric acid which destroys farmland
- Weather derivatives: a for profit ‘Climate Stock Market’
-Support State bills to prohibit climate engineering
- Support the GeoFight at https://t.co/8BVBRq0Y0U

[Sen. Denise Batters @denisebatters]

Carney’s Liberal Government must be embarrassed about their stunning $67 Billion deficit!

They didn’t give senators the Economic Update booklets, and the Finance Dept. didn’t even send us an email.

This Liberal Govt treats senators like 2nd class parliamentarians.
I ask why:

[Artur Nadolny @ArturNadol7566]

SHE REPORTED 1,400 CHILDREN BEING RAPED. THEY INVESTIGATED HER.

Jayne Senior @Jes123tia456 spent 14 years as manager of Risky Business, a Rotherham Council project for vulnerable young women. For 14 years she handed evidence of systematic child sexual exploitation to police and social services. Names. Dates. Patterns. A 42-page intelligence report. She built the jigsaw piece by piece.

They shut down her programme. They told her the records were rubbish. They told her she was rocking the multicultural boat. They told her the children were consenting. Children. Ten years old.

She risked prosecution to become the source for Times journalist Andrew Norfolk, whose 2012 investigations finally broke the story open to the nation.

The Jay Report in 2014 confirmed what she had been screaming into the void since the late 1990s: at least 1,400 children had been abused in Rotherham.

Jayne got an MBE in 2016. The council got reputational damage it spent years managing. The officers got their pensions.

When she filed complaints with the IOPC about senior police officers who had done nothing, the watchdog warned her that if she kept going, she would be labelled a vexatious complainant and could face imprisonment.

She kept going.

Her complaint was eventually upheld in 2021. The report naming the officers was never published.

South Yorkshire Police @SYPTweet rejected the watchdog's findings. No officers were named. No further action was taken. Someone did warn her the officers might sue her personally if she spoke about it publicly.

She spoke about it publicly.

This is what accountability looks like in Britain. A youth worker risks prison to protect children. The institutions that failed those children close ranks, bury the reports, and threaten the one person who kept records.

The children were the problem, apparently. Not the men. Not the police. Not the council. The woman with the filing cabinet.

Source: The Times @thetimes, @BBC, @guardian , @yorkshirepost, Jay Report 2014, IOPC Operation Amazon 2022

[Isabella Maria DeLuca @IsabellaMDeLuca]

big brother is always watching ❤️

[Marc Nixon @MarcNixon24]

Canada has a major fake money problem

Criminals are making nearly perfect counterfeits

Are the liberals going to fix this problem or is this their way to push for digital currency?