Connect with us

National

Trudeau says he considers ‘quitting every day’ but vows to stay on as prime minister

Published

4 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has told Canadians that he considers quitting “every day,” but that he is determined to stay on anyway.

During a March 15 interview with Radio-Canada, the French arm of the government-funded Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC), Trudeau revealed that he routinely thinks about abandoning his role as prime minister and views his job as “super platte,” a French phrase that directly translates to “super flat.”

“I think about quitting every day. It’s a crazy job I’m doing, making the personal sacrifices,” he said. “Of course, it’s super tough. It’s very challenging at times.”  

However, Trudeau noted that he “could not be the man I am and abandon the fight at this point.” 

Trudeau’s interview sparked controversy online as the British Broadcasting Corporation’s (BBC) originally reported that Trudeau said he found his job “super boring” when he used the French phrase “super platte.”

Shortly after, the Crown outlet changed Trudeau’s statement to “very challenging” following backlash from a Canadian columnist. The outlet failed to explain why they made the change or if Trudeau’s office had anything to do with it.   

“Super platte,” which can be translated as “super boring,” could also mean “super unfortunate” or a number other of similar statements.

The interview garnished ridicule from Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre, who blasted Trudeau for his statement suggesting that serving Canadians is “boring.”  

“Canadians are not the only ones suffering,” Poilievre Poilievre said at an “Axe the Tax” rally in Fredericton, New Brunswick this weekend.  

“‘It’s a crazy job making the personal sacrifices,’” he added, referring to the interview. 

“Yeah right, like flying off to Billionaire Island. Burning thousands and thousands of liters of jet fuel at our expense into the atmosphere. And in these 80, 90 $100,000 vacations you take – sounds like a terrible personal sacrifice,” Poilievre challenged.  

“I’m quoting you: ‘Of course, it’s super tough. It’s super boring at times,’” he quoted. 

“Wow. Thinks the job is boring .. [but] serving the people is not boring. serving the people is what we do,” he declared.  

The interview comes as a recent poll found that 70 percent of Canadians believe country is “broken” as Trudeau focuses on less important issues. Similarly, in January, most Canadians reported that they’re worse off financially since Trudeau took office. 

Additionally, a January poll showed that 46 percent of Canadians expressed a desire for the federal election to take place sooner rather than the latest mandated date in the fall of 2025. 

Recent polls show that the scandal-plagued government has sent the Liberals into a nosedive with no end in sight. Per a recent LifeSiteNews report, according to polls, were a Canadian federal election held today, Conservatives under Poilievre would win a majority in the House of Commons over Trudeau’s Liberals. 

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Energy

Oil and gas industry critic in Canadian senate flew 100K in past year to climate conferences: report

Published on

Senator Rosa Galvez

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Senator Rosa Valdez has traveled extensively to advocate against the use of fossil fuels.

Environmental hypocrisy from left-leaning Canadian politicians has again been exposed after records show a senator known for her opposition to the nation’s oil and gas industry in the past year alone jetted over 100,000 kilometers to attend so-called “climate change” conferences.

Senator Rosa Galvez, who was appointed by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in 2016, according to newly filed records as per Blacklock’s Reporter, show that over the past year she flew some 100,084 kilometers (62,189 miles) to attend climate change junkets.

Galvez’s multiple trip charges were said to have been paid by the Parliamentarians’ Network for a Fossil Fuel Free Future along with the American Society of Civil Engineers and other sponsors.

According to the records, Galvez continued to speak harshly against oil and gas, which is a large part of the Canadian economy, right up until taking a jet to fly to a May 25 Casablanca conference on “energy justice.”

The senator also attended a May 2 meeting in Sao Paulo, Brazil about “fossil fuel phaseout in the Amazon” as well as multiple other conferences whose themes were focused on phasing out the use of oil and gas.

Galvez is a self-described environmentalist, and according to her official biography, she is one of Canada’s “leading experts in pollution control and its effects on human health.” She has claimed that the “climate crisis is the greatest challenge of our time and will require an unprecedented transformation.”

Thus far, she has not commented on her recently disclosed travel.

In 2019, as chair of the environment committee, she was tasked with overseeing hearings on a bill that was ruled unconstitutional, which impacts Canada’s oil and gas sector, that is Bill C-69, also known as the “no-more pipelines” bill.

Since taking office in 2015, the Trudeau government has continued to push a radical environmental agenda like the agendas being pushed by the World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset” and the United Nations’ “Sustainable Development Goals.”

LifeSiteNews recently reported on another display of hypocrisy on how Canada’s “Climate Change Ambassador,” appointed by self-proclaimed socialist Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault, has billed taxpayers $254,000 for travel expenses in just two years on the job.

There have been two recent court rulings that have dealt a blow to Trudeau’s environmental laws, however, after provinces including Alberta and Saskatchewan took on the federal government over laws impacting the oil and gas industry.

The most recent was the Federal Court of Canada on November 16 overturned the Trudeau government’s ban on single-use plastic, calling it “unreasonable and unconstitutional.”

The second ruling comes after Canada’s Supreme Court recently sided in favor of provincial autonomy when it comes to natural resources. The Supreme Court recently ruled that Trudeau’s law, C-69, dubbed the “no-more pipelines” bill, is “mostly unconstitutional.” This was a huge win for Alberta and Saskatchewan, which challenged the law in court. The decision returned authority over the pipelines to provincial governments, meaning oil and gas projects headed up by the provinces should be allowed to proceed without federal intrusion.

The Trudeau government, however, seems insistent on defying the recent rulings by pushing forward with its various regulations.

It has also used the climate “change” agenda to justify applying a punitive carbon tax to Canadians. As reported by LifeSiteNews, Trudeau’s carbon tax is costing Canadians hundreds of dollars annually, as government rebates are not enough to compensate for high fuel costs.

Continue Reading

COVID-19

Ontario judge rules in favor of woman who refused COVID nasal swab test

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

‘I do decide that the nasal swab test, which the screening officer in this case required or demanded Ms. Fernando submit to, was an unlawful requirement or demand,’ wrote Ontario Court Justice Paul Monahan in his June 26 ruling.

An Ontario court has ruled in favor of a woman who was charged and convicted for refusing to submit to a COVID nasal swab test upon returning home to Canada in 2022.

In a June 26 ruling, Ontario Court Justice Paul Monahan decided in favor of Canadian woman Meththa Fernando, who was charged in 2022 for refusing a COVID nasal swab test when returning to Canada from abroad and subsequently found guilty. Monahan concluded that in Fernando’s case, requiring her to submit to such an invasive test was unlawful and ordered her conviction be overturned.

“I do decide that the nasal swab test, which the screening officer in this case required or demanded Ms. Fernando submit to, was an unlawful requirement or demand,” wrote Monahan in his ruling.   

“Ms. Fernando’s refusal to comply with the requirement or demand was lawful on her part,” he continued. “Because the requirement or demand made of her by the screening officer was not lawful, Ms. Fernando should not have been found guilty by the Justice of the Peace.”  

Fernando began her legal journey in 2022 when she refused a nasal swab at Pearson International Airport in Toronto, Ontario. Upon her return home to nearby Mississauga, a screening officer from the Canadian Public Health Agency randomly selected her to undergo the nasal test.  

However, Fernando, who told the officer she was already vaccinated against COVID, refused the test. She was charged and later convicted of failing to comply with an order under Section 58 of the Quarantine Act and fined a total of $6,255. 

Canada’s Quarantine Act was used by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government to enact severe draconian COVID travel rules on all returning travelers to the country. 

Fernando chose to take her case to an appeal court following conviction, arguing that the Quarantine Act did not “authorize a screening officer to use a screening test which involved the entry into the traveller’s body of an instrument or other foreign body.”   

As LifeSiteNews previously reported there have been several instances of injuries after receiving the swabs, including leaking brain fluid due to the test puncturing the brain tissue.   

“The prosecution raised the point that perhaps the insertion into the nasal cavity did not involve the entry into the body,” Monahan stated. “I disagree. The insertion of a nasal swab into the nasal cavity is most definitely an insertion into the body.”  

“I am reversing the Justice of the Peace’s decision and entering a finding of not guilty,” he concluded. “Those are my reasons.”  

Besides potential brain tissue damage, COVID-19 nasal tests have been flagged for seriously questionable accuracy rates. One study authored by British and American scientists last year found that PCR nasal swab testing has only around 63% sensitivity. 

Severalotherstudies, as well as federalguidelines, have identified major accuracy issues with PCR tests and other means of testing for coronavirus. The most common PCR testing protocol for COVID-19 also has come under fire in December, when a coalition of scientists called for the retraction of the original article detailing the method, due to a lack of a properly peer-reviewed report. 

Pro-freedom lawyer Daniel Freiheit celebrated the decision, telling LifeSiteNews, “This ruling is a stark reminder that many laws may have been broken during COVID. I think this was caused by a collective fear of the unknown and a kind of mass panic.” 

“In times like that, it’s utmost to rely on first principles: basic freedoms that I had always been taught would act as checks and balances: freedom to speak, freedom to associate, freedom to deny novel medical treatment, right to retain counsel,” he continued.   

He explained that the ruling will give Canadians a sense of vindication since many knew the tests were invasive and unjust but complied out of fear.  

“Many people knew it was wrong and unlawful at the time but had no choice except to comply,” he said.  

“It was either that or face detainment at the border, harassment, fines, threats of more fines, threats of quarantine, etc,” Freiheit explained. “Submitting to this unlawful treatment was the easiest way out, especially for people coming into the country with medical conditions, tired children or frustrated travel partners.”  

This ruling is not the first time actions taken by the Trudeau government during COVID were found to be unlawful.

In January, the Trudeau government’s use of the Emergencies Act to end the Freedom Convoy protest against COVID mandates was ruled to have violated the Charter of Rights and Freedoms by Federal Court Justice Richard Mosley.  

According to the January ruling, the EA is meant to be reserved as a last resort if all other means fail. In Mosley’s judgement, this threshold was not met and thus, the Trudeau government violated the rights of Canadians.    

Shortly after the ruling, Trudeau announced that the government was appealing to the Federal Court of Appeal, a court where he has appointed 10 of the 15 judges. 

Continue Reading

Trending

X