Ezra Levant and John Carpe critique Mark Carney’s January 14th Daily Show announcement of his Liberal Party leadership bid, calling it undemocratic amid Trudeau’s partisan prorogation until March 24th. Carney’s globalist ties—Goldman Sachs, Brookfield ($1T), Bloomberg—and dual passports (UK/Irish) fuel skepticism despite his "outsider" framing. The JCCF’s January 7th lawsuit, citing Boris Johnson’s 2019 UK precedent, challenges Trudeau’s 11-week prorogation as a shield from scrutiny over crises like illegal immigration and tariff threats. Legal optimism grows, but listener concerns—AI voting risks, expanded voting rights for non-citizens—suggest deeper systemic manipulation, exposing Canada’s electoral integrity under fire. [Automatically generated summary]
Did you see Mark Carney announcing his leadership campaign on an American late night comedy show last night?
It's pretty crazy that he would announce his run for the Canadian politics in America.
If a conservative did that, I think they'd be called unpatriotic.
I want to show you some clips from it, so please make sure you have the video version of this podcast.
Just go to RebelNewsPlus.com, click subscribe.
It's eight bucks a month.
You get the video version every day, plus the satisfaction of knowing that you keep Rebel News strong because we don't take any money from the government and we can't get any money from Google and YouTube.
They've demonetized us.
So we really rely on you.
So please give us a shot at RebelNewsPlus.com.
Thanks for helping.
One more thing, though.
You know, with COVID behind us, who knows what the globalists are planning next?
Maybe it's the expansion of the conflict in Europe or the release of another virus or the undermining of free and fair elections.
Whatever it is, you need to be prepared.
It is essential that you take the time now to sit down with our friends at Rocklink Investment Partners.
Rocklink will work with you to develop a financial plan for your family to give you security and peace of mind in the midst of so much uncertainty.
Our friends at Rocklink are freedom-loving conservatives who want to help other conservatives be prepared for the future.
Call Rocklink and get your investments working for you.
Call them at 905-631-5462 or email them at info at rocklink.com.
That's RockLink with a C. Info at rocklink.com.
All right, here's today's podcast.
Tonight, Mark Carney announced his campaign to be the Prime Minister of Canada on a U.S. late-night comedy show.
It's January 14th, and this is the Ezra Levant show.
Shame on you you sensor is bug.
Hey, take a look at this What are they making up there of the overtures and sort of trolling to Canada about being a part of the United States?
Mark Carney's Insider Status00:15:00
Well, I mean, the bottom line is not going to happen.
Julie's got the overture.
I mean, you don't want it.
You don't want it.
Well, we're proud.
We find you very attractive.
But we're not moving in with you.
It's not you.
It's us.
We have.
We do things a little differently in Canada.
We believe in providing.
I just want to tell you before you go any further, I'm up for it.
We're up for it.
Whatever you do differently.
We want to experiment too.
What do you guys want?
We can be...
You want, like...
We can be friends.
There can be a few benefits, John.
Friends with benefits, but not.
We're not going to commit all the way.
Benefits of trade, benefits of defense.
Right.
Yeah, yeah, no.
We'll be cool about it.
We won't levy tariffs on all your goods as retribution for you not going out with us.
We respect your boundaries of the Liberal Party.
I am of the Liberal Party, yes.
Are they looking for a new leader?
I think they might be, John.
Sir, may I recommend to you, with your charm and debonair wit, yet strong financial backbone, that you offer yourself as have you offered yourself as leader?
I just started thinking about it when you started.
That's Mark Carney with a soft announcement that he's running for the leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada.
Of course, that's the Daily Show, an American late night show.
Comedy show, entertainment show.
I'm not quite sure.
20 Minutes with a Boring Central Banker doesn't sound too entertaining to me, but it was a political decision, not a genuine commercial or audience-building decision by that network.
Could you imagine, though, a Canadian conservative announcing their leadership for the Canadian Conservative Party on, say, I don't know, Fox News?
It would be called unpatriotic because it is.
If you're running for the leadership of Canada, why are you telling foreigners first?
Why are you letting a foreign comedian journalist grill you?
It wasn't really a grilling now, was it?
It's a vanity move to show that you are loved by the Hollywood elite.
It's a flex of some sort, I guess.
Nearly 20 minutes long.
That is not a genuine show.
Obviously, this was paid for in some way.
I mean, that is not entertainment for the U.S. mass market.
No one in America knows who Mark Carney is.
He was the leader of the Bank of Canada, then the Bank of England, then he was involved with the World Economic Forum.
No one in America knows who he is.
That was not genuine TV.
That was a product placement.
I wonder if it'll be counted as a campaign expense, like my book, The Labranos, was, and I was prosecuted for it.
Same thing, though, with Trudeau's recent vanity appearance on Stephen Colbert's show.
No one in America really cares about Justin Trudeau other than as a punchline and a joke.
They know him as the people kind guy.
But remember, these shows are bought and sold.
Remember when Stephen Colbert did this obvious product placement for Pfizer?
Remember this?
deeply embarrassing.
Yeah, well, I mean, this is what they've decided to do.
It was really weird for Mark Carney.
I mentioned that he was formerly the head of the Bank of England and the head of the Bank of Canada.
He was at the finance department in Canada.
He's involved with the United Nations.
He was on the board of directors of the World Economic Forum.
What a bizarre attempt to call himself an outsider.
Yeah, that's what he said.
A wild hypothetical.
Let's say the candidate wasn't part of the government.
Let's say the candidate did have a lot of economic experience.
Let's say the candidate did deal with crises.
Let's say the candidate had a plan to deal with the challenges in the here and now.
You Siddiqui, you're running as an outsider.
I am an outsider.
Wow, that's all.
So you're going to be coming in there to say, I have not been in the government.
I have worked in the financial markets.
I understand all the things that go around trade.
Not only has he had these masters of the universe jobs, I mean, he worked for Goldman Sachs.
He went to Harvard and then to Goldman Sachs and then all these Master of the Universe jobs, but he's actually been a financial advisor to Justin Trudeau and the Liberals for close to five years.
I mean, he's officially led some economic growth council for Trudeau for months, and I presume he still does right now.
He's an insider, if there ever was one.
And the other ultimate insiders, Katie Telford, Trudeau's chief of staff, and Gerald Butts, his best friend since college, they're working the phones for Mark Carney.
By the way, Mark Carney's wife, who's even more radical and environmentalist than he is, works in New York at the Eurasian group with Gerald Butts, and they're getting big government contracts from Canada down there in New York.
It's so corrupt.
Mark Carney is not so much an outsider as someone who regards himself as above us.
I think that's what he means when he says he's an outsider.
He has never had a difficult blue-collar job.
He's never been a guy who drives his own car.
He's always had a driver.
He is someone who shops for him.
So when he says an outsider, I think he means he's an above-er.
He's above us.
Really weird.
He grew up in the Northwest.
He's born in Northwest Territories, grew up in, like he grew up somewhat modestly, went to school in Edmonton before going to Harvard, but he collected passports.
He's one of these international jet centers.
He's got a UK passport.
He's got an Irish passport.
Mark, you looked like you were about to...
Yeah, I was a tell.
As a European, you know, as a honorary European actually, I'm an Irish citizen.
Yeah.
So there you go.
Speaking as a European, I like to say falling.
But really, he's not rooted anywhere, is he?
He is a master of the universe.
That's what he means when he says he's an outsider.
He doesn't know local politics.
He's never knocked on a door.
And last night's interview was not a real interview.
I think the reason why both Trudeau and Carney have gone to American softball interviews is because they don't want to answer tough questions.
Trudeau and Carney both don't want to answer the questions about what the heck happened with Christy Freeland.
Why is the country pro-road?
Are they cutting another dirty deal with the NDP?
Any real questions that Canadians want to know and that even a CBC journalist these days might even ask?
No way.
Go to that clown, you know, Jon Stewart on the Daily Show.
He'll tell a few yucks.
It was so scripted.
There was a moment where he talked about Pierre Polyev, the Conservative leader.
And his approach is to criticize Polyev is to say Polyev is someone who's been in politics his whole life and doesn't know how to do anything.
Now, there is a grain of truth to that.
Pierre Polyev has been an MP since his 20s.
And in a way, that is all he's done in his life.
That's also true about Mark Carney, of course.
He has been in the Department of Finance and then Bank of Canada and Bank of England.
That's government too.
The difference, if I may, is that one of them has got the approval of the democratic system by being elected again and again and again, by having to knock on doors and do the church circuit and synagogue circuit and mosque circuit, to do the farmers market circuit, to do the rotary club circuit, to have to actually listen to ordinary people.
Pierre Polyev has been in elected politics his whole life, and Mark Carney has been in selected politics his whole life.
He seeks to impose himself on the people, not to get approval from the people.
I think that Mark Carney's attacks felt weak.
He said a lot of time to prepare his talking points.
They didn't feel particularly strong.
I thought this was a little weird when he said that Pierre Polyev tried to take our rights away during COVID or tried to take our money away.
I didn't quite get it.
Pierre Polyev was in opposition during COVID.
What do you make of this?
I'll say this.
There is a type of politician.
You have a few of them here in the United States.
I think we just- Stop it.
Yeah.
They had a lot in and around Brexit.
Yes.
And we have Mr. Polyev in Canada, a type of politician who's tend to be a lifelong politician.
Really?
Tend to worship the market.
They've never actually worked in the private sector.
Right.
And they see opportunity and tragedy, like you just had with the California fires, these horrible fires.
Correct.
And they see opportunity and tragedy to push an agenda that here's one they prepared earlier, and they fit it in.
And so whether it was Brexit here, often, you know, the star of the beast type approach.
So Pierre Polyev, when COVID started, his reaction was, hmm, this is a good time to cut spending and cut taxes.
Everyone's just been pushed out of a job.
Nobody's got worked.
So let's cut the taxes on the work they don't have and let's take away the social safety net when everybody's vulnerable.
Wow.
Yeah.
And how did that work out for who did poor people?
Well, fortunately, he was in opposition.
Oh, that was his idea.
That was his idea.
I think he just sort of made that up as some sort of weird applause line.
Polyev was not in power, and I don't think he did those things that Mark Carney accused him of.
But how would Jon Stewart know?
He wouldn't know enough to ask a follow-up question.
Now, the reaction by the regime media to this appearance, it was positively erotic.
They were thrilled.
And I can understand why.
Justin Trudeau is hated across the country.
It's like when Joe Biden had that disastrous debate with Donald Trump.
Remember that?
Here's my favorite line when Trump said, I don't know what he was saying, and I don't think he did either.
Remember that line?
Take a look.
There are 40% fewer people coming across the border illegally.
That's better than when he left office.
And I'm going to continue to move until we get the total ban on the total initiative relative to what we're going to do with more Border Patrol and more asylum officers.
President Trump?
I really don't know what he said at the end of that sentence.
I don't think he knows what he said either.
Look.
That debate was so atrocious that every Democrat and every Democrat journalist in America at the same time said, oh my God, we're going to get slaughtered.
We've got to get rid of that guy.
And I think we're in the same position in Canada with Justin Trudeau.
And so the expectations of the regime are so low that to see someone else talk about the party without some of the blemishes on them, without to see anyone other than Justin Trudeau talk like a leader, everyone was thrilled to see it.
I mean, to see anyone other than Melanie Jolie, the pure DEI woke appointment, represent the liberal brand is remarkable.
I mean, is there anyone in the liberal cabinet that you could genuinely see leading the country?
No.
Maybe some people say Dominic LeBlanc.
I'm not so sure.
So I think to say that that was a home run for Mark Carney is mainly the expectations are so low.
And Trudeau is so hated that people were just relieved that there was someone saying, yeah, I'll lead the Liberal Party and he wasn't about to detonate.
Of course there were no tough questions.
That's the reason you go on the Daily Show, just like Trudeau going on CNN and MSNBC.
And by the way, if you're trying to woo Donald Trump, if you're trying to negotiate with him or talk to him, you don't go on CNN or MSNBC or The Daily Show.
Those are atrociously anti-Republican, anti-Trump channels.
That's part of the message here, too.
There's a lot of questions about Mark Carney that we don't have answers to yet that Jon Stewart of The Daily Show wouldn't ask about his conflicts of interest.
When will Mark Carney disclose his conflicts of interest?
Chairman of Brookfield Properties, huge company, chairman of Bloomberg LLC.
I mean, Brookfield alone has a trillion dollars under management.
It's like a mini BlackRock.
Does he still own that?
Is he still lobbying the country?
Is he still getting contracts for Canadian government deals?
Has he been lobbying all this time?
He's been an advisor.
We know he has.
I mean, they want just to have this appointed and done in private and quiet and secret, like they do at the World Economic Forum.
They want a World Economic Forum-style succession here.
They don't want an election.
They want a succession.
I think there's something deeply undemocratic about what's going on here.
Proroguing parliament for partisan reasons, not reasons in the public interest.
The Liberal Party allowing 14-year-olds to vote, allowing non-citizens who are merely permanent residents to vote, plus pre-existing Liberal members who are foreign citizens.
As far as we know, they're still allowed to vote before Canadians are asked anything about this.
The NDP will obviously do a deal with Mark Carney.
And if and when they do, that is seven months for Mark Carney to be a parachuted-in World Economic Forum master of us.
It's like Klaus Schwab himself said.
What we are very proud of now is a young generation like Prime Minister Trudeau, President of Argentina and so on, that we penetrate the cabinets.
I would know that half of this cabinet, or even more, half of this cabinet, are for our actually young noble leaders of the World Economic Forum.
And if you don't like this World Economic Forum candidate, well, we've got another World Economic Forum candidate for you, Chris Jerfreeland, who's literally on the board today.
Build Out the Grid00:04:56
Mark Carney was on their board a few years ago.
I think it comes down to this.
Around the world, populism is rising as a response to out-of-touch, top-down, we know-best, selected ideological leftists like Mark Carney.
I think you see this in the election of Donald Trump, in the growth of the Reform Party in the United Kingdom, in Georgia Malone, in the national, in Marine Le Pen in France, in Kirt Builders in Holland, in the alternative for Deutschland in Germany.
All around the world, you see populist conservatives rising up to replace this World Economic Forum UN global warming knows best approach.
COVID was one big reason.
Mass immigration was one big reason.
Inflation was one big reason.
People have warmed to Pierre Polyev precisely because he's smart, conservative, and populist.
I don't think that Mark Carney and his connections and his money, I don't think that's powerful enough to save the Liberal Party.
I don't think it'll work.
But I think it'll do a lot of damage to Canada over the next seven months to have a hand selected through a riggable process to rule over us, not to govern with the consent of the people, but to rule over us.
I think it'll be the last hope of the regime in their inner circle.
If you were a CBC reporter and you realized that Mark Carney was the only hope of stopping Pierre Polyev and saving the CBC from being privatized, you'd probably go to Bat Forum 2, now, wouldn't you?
I should tell you that in just a few days, I will be joining a number of rebels, including Sheila Gunreed and Avi Amini and a crew, to fly to the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, as we do every year.
Now, last year, you might recall, I bumped into Mark Carney on the street with Avi Amini.
Here's how that went.
I heard you had a meeting the other day with the Prime Minister in Ottawa.
Is that correct?
I see the Prime Minister from time to time.
In what capacity, may I ask?
Well, I do a lot of work on climate, as you know.
I'm sure a big fan of that.
Did you ever register as a lobbyist or is it just friendship?
Sorry, I don't.
When you meet with the PM on climate, are you there on your own behalf or are you there on behalf of a company lobby?
I am the UN special envoy on climate action and finance.
And what do you make?
It's a bitter cold in Canada, down to minus 40s.
Minus 40.
And Gilbeau is saying go to electric cars.
That doesn't work.
Well, you've got to have, watch out, you've got to have the full capacity, right?
And you've got to have, you know, one of the things we're going to need to do in Canada, across Canada, and this is, you know, for the benefit of jobs in the country, is build out the grid.
You can't switch before you build it out, number one.
Number two, one of the things you need, regardless of the form of energy you have, we have, is also to have what's called a capacity market alongside the electricity market.
So you think that Gilbo's plan is a little bit hasty since we haven't done those foundational things?
Well, I think what's important is that, you know, whether it's in Alberta, Ontario, Canada, Australia for that matter, is that you have to, yeah, you have to build.
You have to build.
I take it Mark Carney is going to be busy in Canada, and so will Christia Freeland, the two World Economic Forum graduates duking it out.
Isn't that something?
But I will be there in Davos, and we'll be hunting for these oligarchs and masters of the universe.
So be sure to follow our reports next week from Davos.
And of course, we'll have a great team here in Canada reporting every day on these liberal shenanigans.
It's undemocratic, I tell you.
Stay with us, Moorhead.
Well, everybody complains about the weather, but no one actually does anything about it.
It's inevitable, isn't it?
And that's how I think most Canadians feel about the Governor General's decision to accede to Justin Trudeau's demand that she dissolve Parliament until March 24th, right in the middle of multiple crises, the largest and most important of which is Donald Trump saying, if Canada doesn't stop illegal immigration and illegal drugs, he's going to put tariffs on our imports.
The obvious response, of course, being to stop illegal migration and drugs.
But of course, in Canada, we accept, apparently, that we have to have a porous border.
Governor General's Dilemma00:14:42
So we're moving to the threat part of that, which is the terrorists.
Anyway, that's crisis number one.
Crisis number two is that the government's falling apart, that liberals themselves no longer have any confidence in him.
And in this time, Justin Trudeau has apparently commanded the king's representative in Canada, Mary Simon, the Governor General, to simply give him the gift of three months' wiggle room.
It looks like Trudeau will hang on for a bit of that.
But on March 9th, of course, the Liberals will announce their new leader who will, according to our system, become prime minister.
Even though Parliament will not be sitting, even though there will be no general election, whoever wins that race, and it could be Mark Carney, the Irish and English citizen who has come back to rule us.
By the way, as we've mentioned before, this Liberal leadership contest includes children as young as 14.
It includes people who are not citizens, but rather merely permanent residents.
Why did the Governor General go along with this?
Why did she dissolve Parliament to essentially save Justin Trudeau?
That is not in the public interest.
That's not in the national or constitutional interest.
I understand that's in Trudeau's personal interest and maybe in the Liberal Party's interest.
But why did the Governor General dissolve Parliament in this double crisis?
And is there anything we can do about it?
like the weather, do we have to accept it?
Well, I saw news that the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms has gone to court to seek a review of the Governor General's decision.
I didn't know you could do that.
Joining us now to talk about it is the boss of the Justice Center, our friend John Carpe, who joins us now from Calgary.
John, great to see you again.
How are you doing?
Good to see you, Azra.
John, I would never have thought that the Governor General's decision could be reviewed.
In my mind, she is an arm or a finger of the king.
And I don't know if there's any court that can tell the king or his delegates what they can or can't do.
But I have not looked into it deeply.
I just sort of always assumed you can't touch the king or his deputy in Canada.
On what basis do you think the decision to prorogue parliament can be challenged?
Well, the prorogation of parliament is not something that you routinely see getting taken to court.
Part of this situation is that we've got a very strong precedent from 2019, when in the United Kingdom, Prime Minister Boris Johnson prorogued Parliament for five weeks, not nearly as long as the 11 weeks that Justin Trudeau is proroguing parliament in Canada or trying to.
Boris Johnson prorogued Parliament for five weeks, which was longer than the usual one to three weeks.
And the highest court in the United Kingdom, the United Kingdom Supreme Court, ruled that it was a violation of the constitutional principle of the sovereignty of parliament.
Johnson had a minority government.
He wanted to get the United Kingdom out of the European Union quicker.
It was dragging on.
It had been three years since the referendum.
And the court ruled that his prorogation of parliament was illegal because it sought to shield the government from scrutiny by parliament.
And we have the same constitution fundamentally in Canada, where the government is or should be accountable to parliament.
The government needs to enjoy the support of the majority of MPs.
And so what we've got Justin Trudeau doing is analogous to what Boris Johnson did in 2019, proroguing Parliament, but it's for a political purpose.
It's not because the business of Parliament has come to a natural conclusion, in which case prorogation would be a very normal thing.
There's nothing unusual about prorogation.
It completely shuts down Parliament, but without an election following it.
So we're arguing in this court application that this is an illegal prorogation because it is done for the partisan political purpose of benefiting one political party, and it's not being done in the national interest.
And it is unjustly shielding Trudeau and the other cabinet ministers and whatever new people are after the liberal leadership race on March 9th.
All of this is taking place without parliamentary scrutiny at a crucial time, and that's unacceptable.
John, I have just learned more from you in the last 90 seconds than I have on this subject in my whole life.
I did not know that Boris Johnson prorogued parliament for five weeks and was overturned by the Supreme Court.
I didn't know that.
And as you point out, in UK no less, the mother of parliaments, I wouldn't have thunk it.
And you're right.
Nobody thought about it in 2008 because the Justice Center is getting emails from people saying, why didn't you challenge Harper's prorogation of Parliament in 2008 when there was a threat to topple his minority government and replace it with a liberal NDP Bloc Quebec coalition?
And the short answer is the Justice Center did not exist in 2008.
I was going to say, I don't think you guys were around in 2008, but that's incredible.
Nobody thought about it.
Nobody thought about it at the time because they could have taken that to court and maybe they would have, you know, it's hypothetical.
It was a little bit of a different fact scenario, but who knows?
But now we've got this UK precedent.
So it's like, okay.
That UK precedent sounds very strong.
In fact, five weeks in the UK versus almost three months in Canada, political scrounging around there.
Oh my God, even more so here, achingly in need of a confidence voter in election here.
Every single fact or factor there seems to be more acute here.
And I don't know if the governor general would have even consulted the king or even legal counsel here.
I think she just would have, I think she's such a partisan flack herself.
She would have done whatever Trudeau asked her to do.
I thought, and the reason I started by saying no one ever does anything about the weather, how can you, is because I assumed that prorogation was a unchallengeable prerogative of the king.
And what you're saying is the decision-making process is reviewable.
Is that what you're saying?
Absolutely, it is.
And in the United Kingdom, this came up as well because Boris Johnson went to the Queen, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth, at that time and said, I want to prorogue Parliament.
And the Queen said yes, and the Queen prorogued Parliament.
What they did in the court action, they didn't attack the Queen or criticize the Queen, or they didn't argue that the Queen should have rejected the advice of the Prime Minister.
They didn't take that tactic.
What they said instead was that the advice that Boris Johnson gave to the Queen was unlawful.
And so the court action was against the Prime Minister's advice.
And so we are filing this court action in the same manner.
We're not going to try to go after the Governor General and we're not going to try to argue that she should have disregarded the advice of the Prime Minister and she should have told the Prime Minister to go jump in the lake and so on and so forth.
We're just leaving that alone.
We're saying that the advice that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau gave to the Governor General was unlawful advice.
And that is kind of our legal tactic.
That's what happened five years ago in the United Kingdom.
Well, John, like I said, just short minutes ago, I would have thought this was a lark, a Hail Mary pass.
And by the way, it still is surely an uphill battle because while it's been done in the UK, it's novel and candle.
I haven't even heard anyone talk about it other than you guys.
But with that British precedent, I'm suddenly filled with a little bit of hope.
Of course, they always say the phrase, time is of the essence.
That's a lawyer's way of saying move quickly.
Because, of course, the prorogation ends on the 24th.
The liberal shenanigans are scheduled for March 9th.
We need Parliament now.
Donald Trump is taking office on Monday.
That's when this tariff crisis will come to fruition.
How quickly are you moving?
I take it you filed whatever originating notice is required.
Has the government of Canada accepted service of the documents?
Have you moved into a really speedy case management?
What court?
Is this the federal court you're in?
Have you been assigned a judge to manage this thing?
I got all sorts of procedural questions because to get something moving super fast is hard in our system.
And I would imagine that's the number one way to defeat this and just to rag the puck.
How's it going in terms of speediness?
Well, we filed our court action on Tuesday the 7th.
So on Monday the 6th, we had the prime minister make his announcement that he was going to resign and that parliament would be prorogued.
We had our court papers filed Tuesday the 7th, the day after.
And so we've already had, we're in case management.
We've got a case management judge who has been assigned to us, which is good.
That means that you've got one designated person.
The federal government walked into court and said that it was not urgent.
Initially, they said, well, it's going to take us a week just to get back to you with our position as to whether or not this is an urgent matter.
They then, the judge was not amused.
So they've said, okay, our position is that this is not urgent.
So now we have an application at 12 noon Thursday later this week to deal with whether this is urgent or not.
And hopefully we can win on that point.
Realistically, we could be going to a hearing by the end of January.
It's not impossible.
Certainly in the United Kingdom, from the time of filing until a decision was rendered by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, there's four weeks that went by.
So when courts want to move something up the pipe quickly, they will.
And so we are hopeful to get a hearing in late January or early February so that it can make a difference.
And I don't want to make predictions, but I don't think the court will look too kindly on this federal government delay tactics, trying to suggest that somehow this is not urgent and we can just take our sweet time and get a decision whenever.
Yeah, that's ridiculous.
The fastest, I mean, I've seen the court move quickly sometimes.
You might recall several years ago, Trudeau Panpick Debates Commission kept Rebel News out.
We were able to get into court on really a couple days' notice.
I remember in 2019, we filed our lawsuit on a Monday.
Incredibly, the hearing, sorry, we filed our legal papers on a Friday, pardon me.
We had a hearing on the Monday.
I've never heard of anything that fast.
You might recall that David Lehmeti, the former justice minister, quit parliament in disgrace after the Emergencies Act was found to be unconstitutional.
And he hit delete on his Twitter button, which would have destroyed a bunch of public records.
We filed lawsuit against him.
We had a hearing in front of the chief judge of the federal court himself within a week, I think.
So the government, the courts can move wicked fast if they realize something is urgent.
And I can't think of anything more urgent or frankly more important than this.
And that's not to say you're going to win.
But if the court is going to hear the matter, they've got to hear it quickly.
I'm very excited.
John, I'll tell you when I knew you were coming on the show today to talk about this, I was very skeptical, but that's because I did not know about that British precedent.
And now that I know about that British precedent and I know the very basic facts that you've outlined, I'm suddenly optimistic because wouldn't that be something?
And you know, something feels impossible until you do it.
And then, well, we always knew we could do it.
Like, I think back to the challenge of the Emergencies Act.
And I think you guys were part of that, if I recall.
Like it was almost unthinkable.
How could you challenge the Emergencies Act?
There's no way we had the whole public order commission and they rubber stamped it.
No, a real court with a real judge really rebuked it as illegal, unconstitutional, unintelligible.
He had a whole bunch of adjectives there.
And it totally changes things when you roll the dice on something and you win something that was regarded as impossible now is possible.
I regarded your lawsuit here as impossible.
And now I hear there's a strong British president.
I'm really excited about it, John.
I hope you keep us posted on it.
Well, we will for sure.
And I think, you know, as you know, I've got this book coming out, Corrupted by Fear, where I criticize some of these rulings by judges who seem to repeat what they heard on the six o'clock news and write it into their court judgments.
But this particular case now with the prorogation of parliament has absolutely nothing to do with COVID or lockdowns or travel restrictions or vaccine mandates, et cetera, et cetera.
And so I'm very hopeful that a court will look at this with an open mind and rule according to law.
And I think we're not going to have the problems that we have, that we have had in Canada where judges are putting too much credence in what they hear on the six o'clock news when they're writing their judgments about lockdowns and vaccine passports.
I don't think that's at play here at all.
And I think that's very positive.
And you know what?
Justin Trudeau's Losing Momentum00:03:45
Not just that.
I think Justin Trudeau has lost his it factor.
I think that the whole country is tired of him.
And, you know, I'm thinking back to an even older British president.
In the name of God, go, you know, throwing out the parliament.
I don't want to try and remember that condemnation of the British Parliament.
In the name of God, go.
I think that everyone is sick of Trudeau and everyone sees this as a cynical ploy.
And so I think that maybe, just maybe, you'll get a fair hearing.
You might find a federal court judge who is still in love with Trudeau, but I think just as likely you'll find one who is not in love and not in hate with him, but will give you a fair hearing.
And if the precedent is as you say it is, there is no basis whatsoever.
No one in the country can say this is a prorogation in the national interest.
No one even pretends that, certainly not Trudeau or Mark Carney or Christia Freeland or any of them.
And wouldn't it be amazing if just like the Emergencies Act was overturned, if this prorogation was overturned, it would be a delight to see the plans of these schemers dashed.
John, good luck and keep in touch.
All right.
Have a great rest of the day.
All right.
There you have it.
John Carpe.
He's the leader of the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms.
Go to jccf.ca.
Stay with us.
more ahead.
Hey, welcome back.
Your letters to me.
Matt Hogg says, a vote for Carney is a vote for Trudeau and Butts and the whole anti-Canadian apparatus.
More of the same or worse.
Not a chance.
Well, there's quite a good chance.
I think he really is the chosen one from the insiders of the Liberal Party.
He's Trudeau's choice.
He's Joe Butts and Katie Telford's choice.
Boy, the media loved him last night, didn't they?
So I think Pierre Polyev will beat him, but boy, the regime is not going out without a fight.
Eviction Carpentry says, just like Harris, unelected person, dropped in place.
Well, for the same reason, too, Joe Biden spooked all the Democrats when he had that atrocious Democratic debate against Donald Trump.
And so the Democrats said, we've got to get rid of this guy.
And they looked around.
And I think Mark Carney is probably stronger than Kamala Harris, but like her, he's a sneering, condescendent, condescending elitist.
At least Kamala Harris had won election as a senator and in earlier positions in California.
Mark Carney has only been handed things.
He's never had to fight for them in a Democratic contest.
Last one from Jay Digital, who says, I get the reasoning that clowns need a carney to continue the circus.
Yeah, I've seen some jokes about that, but it's actually not joking at all.
I think he really does have a strong chance of winning.
Remember, it's not about getting people to the polls, it's voting by computer, which can be gamed.
AI can cut through it, and no one's better at AI really than China.
I think that there's a huge chance of election tampering, even in ways that, you know, even if you follow the rules, 14-year-olds get to vote.
Permanent residents get to vote.
And when I say vote, they just push buttons on a computer or a phone.
Regular Canadian citizens will have no role and have no say in this.