“There is no media in the world I have more contempt for than the Canadian Media. They literally work for the Canadian government. They are state media.” —Tucker Carlson, 24 January, 2024
Tucker Carlson is in Alberta today to address audiences in Calgary and Edmonton. He will be joined on the stage at Calgary’s Telus Convention Centre by Alberta’s Premier, Danielle Smith. Premier Smith, elected to Alberta’s top job just 9 months ago, is pushing back against the Woke authoritarianism epitomized by the antics of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
An inductee into the perverse cult of Klaus Schwab’s WEF, Trudeau is obsessively attacking the health and viability of Alberta’s otherwise vibrant oil and gas sector.
Carlson’s visit comes just as Federal Judge Richard Mosley has condemned the Trudeau government’s invocation of the Emergency Act in February of 2021. The Emergency Act basically halted the normal operations of the Canadian government. The most recent incarnation of the War Measures Act allowed Trudeau and his main handler, Deputy PM Chrystia Freeland, to notoriously seize the bank accounts of Truckers from across Canada.
These Truckers had famously converged in Ottawa to present a well reasoned critique of the lethal and draconian measures forced on Canadians in the name of fighting COVID-19.
The fact that a Federal Court has now decided that the Emergency Act was wrongfully imposed, has major legal and political ramifications for the Trudeau government, for the criminalized Truckers, and for Canadian citizens generally.
The Federal Ruling came down after Tucker Carlson’s taping of a conversation with Gord Magill, a refugee from Canada living in upper New York state. Magill has been a Canadian Trucker although he did not take part in the legendary parking protest in Ottawa in the winter of 2021. Magill has published several editorials on Canadian issues in Newsweek.
Click here to watch the interview
One of the major subjects that Tucker and Gord Magill discussed in the video was the persecution of four men singled out by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. The RCMP announced their charges against the men on February 14 of 2021 just as the Trudeau government was about to announce the Emergency Act.
The police forces trying to do the bidding of the Trudeau government had desperately looked for Truckers at Ottawa who would fill the bill of “terrorists.” They found none even though they riffled through many parked trucks looking for loaded guns. Since 9/11 the mere utterance of the word “terrorism” seems sufficient to empower governments to crush various types of legitimate dissent in the name of protecting the public.
A government investigation in 2022 of the invocation of the Emergency Act turned up a note by Deputy Prime Minister Freeland that related the advice given her by a banker friend.
The banker proposed to Freeland that the truckers should be “designated as a terrorist group,” that their “assets should be seized” and that they should thereby be “impaired.” (See Freeland’s note below which came up as part of her evidence in the Rouleau Inquiry.)
That scrawled note jotted down before Feb. 14 described precisely what happened subsequently. The Emergency Act also empowered police to violently beat protesters and run them down with horses
The Trudeau government reached out to the Truckers demonstration at Coutts and came up with four men that the RCMP agreed to charge with the accusation that they had conspired to kill cops. These four men were denied bail by Liberal Party judges including Johnna Kubik. These political prisoners, convicted of nothing, have been consistently maltreated in jail for two years now.
The Coutts Four have been denied legal help by, for instance, the Calgary-based Centre for Constitutional Freedoms and the sketchy Democracy Fund associated with sketchy Rebel News. The Coutts Four have been taken away from their families and jobs and incomes. Nevertheless they have been required already to come up with hundreds of thousands of dollars to pay a long stream of legal bills in what is misleadingly described as a “pre-trial process.”
The Coutts Four have already been subjected to a number of weird unorthodox procedures that have put a cloud of suspicion on the whole process, but especially over the main Crown Prosecutor, Stephen Johnston. When secret evidence was accidentally released by the Crown to the lawyers for the accused, the lawyer for Tony Olienick accused the Crown Prosecutor, Stephen Johnstone, of committing “crime fraud.” This crime fraud, it was alleged, took the form of the directives given by Johnstone to the RCMP. The RCMP are apparently conceived of as Johnstones’ “clients” subject to “solicitor-client privilege.”
Olienick’s lawyer, Tonii Roulston, asked to be removed from the case after making accusations against the Crown Prosecutor. Did Ms. Roulston withdraw from the proceeding voluntarily or under duress?
The RCMP themselves are in a deep conflict of interest because they claim to be targets of a plot by the four accused men put together artificially onto a single trial to heighten the perception that they were all mutually engaged in a “conspiracy.” The RCMP themselves are curating the evidence in this murder trial that lacks any murdered victim.
Thus those curating the evidence are RCMP members operating on the principle that they themselves are the would-be victims of the unrealized actions that supposedly took place exclusively in the imaginations of those accused of thought crimes. The RCMP case involves testimony from unnamed police plants who secretly taped the accused in a scheme of obvious entrapment to bring about a desired political outcome in a heavily politicized case. It involved the production on Feb. 14 of a RCMP photo widely distributed in the media of odds and sods of weaponry gather who knows where and with proper chains of custody.
The photo of course is meant to mislead those who initially saw it in the newspaper beside the initial published accounts of the alleged crimes. The picture offered a (false) appearance proof that the police were dealing with an open and shut case. Now almost two years later it is becoming increasingly clear that there is nothing open and shut about this case. What is very clear, however, is the extreme bias of the police, the prosecutors and Trudeau’s bought-and-paid-for media who continue to hit obstacles in convicting the Coutts Four.
The origins of this tainted legal process go back to the Trudeau government’s need to come up with some evidence of terrorism to justify issuing the Emergency Act. This Emergency Act has now been deemed by a Federal Judge to have been illegal from the moment it was enacted. It is Trudeau who should by now be on trial if Canada was something other than a police state in the making.
Although the process against the Coutts Four now under way is frequently referred to as a “pre-trial procedure,” that characterization misrepresents what is really going on. In fits and starts the trial of the Coutts Four has in reality been going on for a long time already. If the process looks like a trial, acts like a trial, and makes noises like a trial, it is a trial.
Meanwhile, Trudeau’s bought-and-paid-for media have been delivering the goods by conducting an outrageous ongoing trial-by-media of the Coutts Four.
The New York Times has been covering the story closely, probably with the view that this legal matter approximates the style of criminalization applied to the protesters at the US Capital on Jan 6, 2021.
The imperative of this trial-by-media is to paint the Coutts Four as “insurrectionists” in a disgraceful miscarriage where much of the malevolence can be traced back to the Canadian Anti-Hate Network.
See this, this, this and this.
Originally published by Globalresearch.ca.
Author
Leave a Reply