Shaun Newman Podcast - #809 - Trudeau - Abraham - Hozack

Episode Date: March 10, 2025

Ben Trudeau is the founder of Alberta Free a lobbyist group for small business in Alberta.Grant Abraham is a lawyer who has spent 20 years in international business, he is the author of the “Battle For the Soul of Canada” and leader of the United Party of Canada. Danny Hozack is the Chairman of the Economic Education Association of Alberta and organizer of the Freedom Talk conferences.We discuss the history of Canada with a focus on the events leading to the Quebec referendums, the idea of Alberta the 51st state and whether Alberta can get to a referendum.Cornerstone Forum ‘25https://www.showpass.com/cornerstone25/Get your voice heard: Text Shaun 587-217-8500Substack:https://open.substack.com/pub/shaunnewmanpodcastSilver Gold Bull Links:Website: https://silvergoldbull.ca/Email: [e-mail] Grahame: [phone]Bow Valley Credit UnionWebsite: www.BowValleycu.comEmail: [e-mail] Use the code “SNP” on all ordersProphet River Links:Website: store.prophetriver.com/Email: [e-mail]

This is Viva Fry. I'm Dr. Peter McCullough. This is Tom Lomago. This is Chuck Pradnik. This is Alex Krenner. Hey, this is Brad Wall. This is J.P. Sears. Hi, this is Frank Paredi.

This is Tammy Peterson. This is Danielle Smith. This is James Lindsay. Hey, this is Brett Kessel, and you're listening to the Sean Newman podcast. Welcome to the podcast, folks. How's everybody doing today? Junked Silver. It refers to older circulation coins like dimes, quarters, half dollars and dollars from back

before our government debased our money by removing the silver from our coinage. Many of these older coins are not only a solid investment, but they're ideal. They're ideal. Welcome to Mondays where I screw up ad reads for trade or barter if the economy ever truly went that far sideways. I don't know about you. I think the barter economy, I don't know if we ever get there, but I sure do understand, appreciate the sleep at night, you know, like I went and bought some coins. I did.

Because I'm like, you know, if it ever gets there, at least I got some. And silver gold bull, well, they're my go-to. and they have a feature on junk silver right now, exclusively for all you listeners. So I figure if I've done it, you know, it's a safe little hedge if we ever get there. Lord willing, never, we never go there. But in our world, who knows, everything changes so rapidly.

So if you're interested, text or email Graham in the show notes for details, deal, for details on this feature or any other question you may have, Ryan Bell, buying, selling, storing, or using your retirement accounts to invest in precious metals. And, well, we're off to the rates. is on a Monday. Sean's already butchered one. All right. Bow Valley Credit Union. Bo Valley Credit Union is your Alberta regulated, fully service financial institution, is proud to present the first in Canada gold collateral lending. Now you can lend, oh boy, against your physical gold and silver for your favorable rates. I can't even read

today. Like I've just like, what, have my eyes not working? It's not even my tongue today. It's my eyes. Now all of you can lend against your physical gold and silver for favorable rates. It's like a helock on your gold and silver. Don't have any physical gold or silver. We can help you get a loan to purchase your gold and silver today. That is silver gold bowl. I don't know if you notice, but gold is a booming. And if you want to get in contact with them, email Leanna at Welcome at Bow ValleyCU.com.

Tell them I sent you for all your other needs or any ideas around Bow Valley. You want to see what they are. Bow ValleyCU.com. And you can get an e-metals account started today. Profit River, did you see they got another gun grab? this past Friday. So, you know, I don't know what we're waiting for, but certainly you should probably reach out to Joel. He's the primary contact for all you lovely listeners. They've created an email address, SNP at profitriver.com, and I put that down in the show notes, so you just got to go down

there, ask Joel about anything, okay? This guy is sharp. He's going to help you navigate this ever crazy world of the liberals just trying to take away every gun under the sun. And for any of the listeners that make a purchase, you're entered into a $100 gift card draw every month. It doesn't matter. You can enter as many times you want it. You can purchase 10 different times, get 10 different entries. And it doesn't, it's not like a, you know, you're going to spend $1,000 or something. You can spend $5 and be entered. So that's pretty cool. Just head on over to profitriver.com. You can obviously make these purchases in store and reference me, or you can make it online. You can reach out to Joel. And just remember, no matter where you're at in Canada,

they are the major retailer of firearms, optics and accessories serving all of you wonderful people. So Carly Clause and the team over Windsor Plywood here in Lloydminster, they are the builders of the podcast studio table. And when it comes to wood, whether we're talking mantles, decks, windows, doors, sheds, man, can I just say the plus three outside? You know, I'm like, deck season is getting close. You're looking at your deck. You're like, oh, maybe I should, you know, we've been talking about doing a couple things. Well, when it comes to wood, stop it and see Carly here in Lloydminster, Windsor, Plywood. Tell them I sent you.

And, well, get some quality. would today. Cornerstone Forum 2025 heading to Calgary at the Winsport May 10th. All the details down the show notes. You click on it. We got a hotel, okay? This is big. If you're coming, make sure you get in on the blocked rooms before they are gone.

You have until March 20th, and I would suggest that you get on that. We got a full lineup. Once again, go click on the show notes there, and you can find out everything you need to know. I'm hoping I'm going to see all of you, lovely listeners there. And if you're in need, you're

and a couple listeners reach out to me. This is how cool you all are. If any of you are struggling, like, man, I would love to be there. I just can't afford the $200 ticket. There may be some ways to help you out. So shoot me a text if you're like, you know, don't feel bad, we get it.

It's tough times and it looks only to be getting worse with all the tariffs coming into play and everything else. And some of the listeners want to help a few of you find folks out. So if that's you, text me and we'll see what we can do. If you're listening or watching on Spotify, Apple, YouTube, Rumble, X, make sure to subscribe and leave a review. And with that all being said, let's get on to that tale of the tape. The first is the founder of the Alberta Free Lobbyist Group for Small Businesses in Alberta. The second is the chairman of the Economic Education Association of Alberta and a key organizer of the Freedom Talk conferences.

The third, a lawyer who has spent 20 years in international business. He's the author of Battle for the Soul of Canada and leader of the United Party of Canada. I'm talking about Ben Trudeau, Danny Hosek, and Grant Abraham. So buckle up, here we go. Welcome to the Sean Newman podcast. Today I'm joined by, while this is going to be an interesting go. Danny Hosek, Benoit, Trudeau, and Grant Abraham. So we're talking a whole lot to do with what's been going on in Canadian politics.

I don't know. The Alberta, actually, I don't even know how to frame this. It started out last week or a week and a half ago, folks, by the time of this. airs with David Parker, Michael Wagner, and Tanner in a day coming on. And since then, there's been a whole lot go on. And I wish you could have heard the, we were having coffee before this, and it was a fascinating discussion. And we'll see where we get to today.

But I just, I look around this table and I see a lot of men who've been staring at a problem of, or maybe some of the issues Canada's had for some time. And yet I'm the guy that gets to facilitate it. I think what a wild ride. Everybody knows this in this room. I started out and not here. And here we sit today. So with that all being said, gents, thanks for making your way here.

I appreciate you being in the studio today. Thank you for having us. Now, before we start, because once we get going, I don't think I'm going to be able to interject with this. One of the things you get for coming in the studio is one ounce silver coin from silver gold bowl right here in Alberta. So it's kind of like the tip of the cap, you know. It's of coming all the way to Lloyd Minster, you know, 150 miles east. What did you say of West Evanston Mall?

150 miles east of West Edmonton Mall. There you go. So this should be interesting. Now, do we just want to start with thoughts on Canada's today, or do we want to start with Ben and maybe a little more history? Where do you boys want to start this chat? What's story? story there. It's funny. As long as the history doesn't take 150 years. It's funny. The audience,

I'm waiting. Just start in the 1750s. I like that. Yeah. No, no. I want to start from the start. It's funny, you know, to the audience. I just had these guys around the kitchen table. Couldn't get any of them to shut up. And then I come in here and there's a mic and they're all like, I don't know. Where do you want to start? What do you want to do? Oh, okay. Well, all right. Ben, Ben, let's start with a little bit of history and then we'll get into some of the stuff that's flying around the table today. Yeah. Well, and I believe this story is important because Because in Quebec, there was two attempts of separation in 1980 and 1995. But all that originated way before that.

I mean, Canada, the way it is right now, when the English came in on September 13, 1759, on plane of Abraham, this country was French for 225 years. So this country actually had been French longer than English. And when you look at the French situation after the English came in, there was the Paris Treaty of 1763. Now I will go on the constitutional side how we end up where in the mess we're at. But basically, the Sector 13, 1759 was after seven years of war. It was the last battle that got it.

1763, the king of France signed with the king of England an agreement to give Canada away or the French territory in Canada. Canada, by the way, came from, it's now Quebec City, and Canada was given by Jean-Cartier in 1534. So the first French guy that came here was 1534. Was it called Canada? He called it Canada because that's how we understood it from the Indians, the way they were pronounced it.

In French, the closest way was Canada, when he went to that first village, which is now Quebec City. And when you look after that at what the French have done on this continent, from the time they started Quebec City in 1608, Montreal in 1642, and from Montreal spur a bunch of explorers that founded Chicago, that founded Louisiana, that founded so all the other side of the Appalachian was all French, along the Mississippi River.

and leading to 1763 where finally the English officially take over. And at that time, the USA were getting as well get rid of the English at the same time. So the king of England made a deal with the Americans. No, in fact, no, it was an idea, but basically what the king did. He offered to the Americans that want to be loyal, he remained loyal to him to move north. And he started giving land in Quebec, that was French, for 225 years. So it's like if you have some military coming on your land now

and say, no, like I know you, you're the seventh generation on this land, but now it's not yours anymore because we have Americans here that want to remain faithful to us and get out. That created a lot of trouble leading to 1837. Well, in fact, 1791, where England decided to create two legislative,

Assembly, one in Quebec for Upper Canada and one in what is now Ontario in Upper Canada. I don't know. I always confused the both. And from 1791 to 1832, we ran with two legislative assembly that were absolutely independent. The problem, the French Legislative Assembly is that 80% of it was populated by English people. and like a French judge was paid half of what an English judge would be paid. A French MLA was paying didn't have the same stuff than the English MLA. So there was kind of a revolt basically when London started giving some land in 1833

where they gave 847,000 acres to the British American land company. And that totally exploded the French community. And they started, basically what they started doing, they started invading house of judges and all that at night and forcing them to resign. And that led to a little guerrilla from 1837, 1838, which then created the Patriots in Quebec. And now in fact, since 2002 in Quebec, Victoria Day, or the birthday of the Queen, is not Victoria Day, it's Patriot Day. So Quebec is very attached to their history, their root history. So fast forward, 1861, 1865 Civil American War. Right after that, they're trying to solve the problem they have with the French.

They hung 26 French leaders, sent 50 to Australia to count down the spirits there. And then there's a long history from there, like in late 1900, in 1890, 99, 99% of all the wealth of Canada was concentrated within one square a mile in Montreal. And the shop owner would build house of $1 million, which is equivalent of $40 million today. In that square a mile, meanwhile, on the other side of the street, there are French workers. the average age was 19 years old, the life expectancy in these shop run by the French. So again, a lot of resentment built up. If you were French, early century, you couldn't get any loan, which then created the first credit union in Quebec,

which is now the largest creative union in the world, Desjardin, which has 7.5 million members out of 8 million population. And I'm putting everything in context because you see that it's a very, tight-knit society. And as you progress in history, leading to independence, during the war, 1917, there was a conscription that was a big revolt because when you were French, you had to go fight for the king, but you couldn't speak French once you were enrolled. So I think was in English. So 94% of Lishen was French-speaking only. So you were plucked from your farm from your place at 19 years old, put in a battalion to go at war, and it was forbidden

to speak French. And then because once they landed though in France and all that, because you were speaking French, they would send you first. So when you look at battalion during the first and second world war, 80 to 90% of all the French that went to battle died on the battlefield compared to 30% of the English. If I may. Yeah. Does this not give you guys, like and I mean you guys as in Quebecers a lot in common with First Nations like in the treatment and how like they were they were forced into different spots and not allowed to do like I and the reason I bring this up is you know so much of our society wants to break off into like well we got reparations for this and can't we just see that we've been getting

screwed over by government for a really long time all these different groups and one of the things about the convoy that that always took out about me took out to me was the alertedly rolling in the first night and being happy to see Quebec and like everybody coming together and that's got to scare the living crap out of our government. You can carry on. I just, I find it interesting, you know, like I hear all that and all I ever hear out West is what we've done to the First Nations and how we have to make amends for that. And I listen to Quebec and I'm like, holy crap, this is, you know, it almost rhymes, you know, it's almost a similar story. Obviously, just to a different culture.

Yeah, no, I agree that that, that's, that's half correct because Quebec always had way more volume. Like, like in the early 1900s, no, there was 75,000 in, in, in, in 1836, it was 75,000 in New York, Canada for 500,000 French, no. So, so, so they were way more numerous. So, so the English that knew couldn't just shut them, shut them up, you know, they had to work with them. And then, and then if you go after the war, the Second World War,

It's called in Quebec the Dark Era. So there's a premier that was there, Maurice Duplesi. And that was the birth of real sovereignty in Quebec. He's the one that brought the Quebec flag that got rid of the Union Jack and every English representation. It brought back French, like the flag of Quebec

represent French royalty with the Flores de Lis. I don't know, the flower represented of that. That was the son of the King of France. no. So, and then Dupli decided to put on the map certain Quebec families because the English were controlling everything. And that led in the early 60s with Jean de Sage and Jean Lassage decided to start a movement saying Maitre Sheenou, master in our own land. Parallel to that, Trudeau, Pierre-Ute Trudeau, started a political publication in 1950 named Citibre. And Cite Libre was super influential in Quebec. It was a think, a bit of a tax. A bit of

of writing I believe that here in Alberta we spoke about in Ted Byfield would do. So Stedeb was on that level and it's funny because at Stedele of a journalist that was working for Trudeau because he didn't have to work. So his dad started gas station in 1900, sold everything for $1 million in 1905 and his grandpa had the largest legal office in Montreal that was dealing with all these rich guys within the Golden Square Mile. So Pierre-O-Trudeau was raised in a lot of wealth. And so he had that luxury of starting a publication, paying for it and all that. And René Levac worked for him. And there's other guys that work for him. So most of the people that change Quebec that led to sovereignty

or the referendum worked for Trudeau. So Trudeau was always playing both sides. And what he's done with Cittier, he built up a very, very sturdy plan on how to basically destroy Canada, and how to bring Marxists in Canada and stuff like that. And he had two colleagues, L'Aland and Marchant, and when they were elected in 1968,

they were called in Quebec the three doves. there were like the saviors, like these three guys would. And both guys ran as MP expecting for one of the three to be elected. Well, all three were elected. And then Trudeau went for leadership and won the leadership. And then he just applied like his plan to lead Canada towards what his son is finishing right now as a post. Trudeau always had that that world view

good friend with Castro it was known that it was to Castro In fact in 1967 in 1968 he was elected the PQ started in 1969 the 1970 election the PQ was about to win in Quebec and then Trudeau built up a

scam he aligned 10 brain strokes at his bank's friend which is now TDs for the Canada Trust and they roll 10 armored vehicle out of Montreal to Toronto saying that it was an exodus

of funds and because of that the PQ lost at that election through that maneuver of disinformation meanwhile you had his Valier was one of his editor at Citi Bre you get going too fast

Okay, I want to just make sure maybe everybody in the room, you know, I got two guys sitting here not in their head and they're, mm-hmm, mm-hmm. You're saying that Pierre Elliott Trudeau lined up 10 brink trucks. Yeah. And said they were out of money? No, he said that he said, you see, because of the sovereignty of Quebec, money is leaving. Ah. And they're hauling the money out. They're hauling the money out because Quebec wants to separate.

it. And that was six days before the vote. And then it scared everybody. And they were devoted for the PQ because they didn't want the money to go out. See, this is the, I find that story as interesting as anything you've said because I go, they know no bounds

on what they can do to win an election. To change the public's narrative. And you think they can't do it, but you're just telling me a story on how they did it. Yes. So when you bring it, if I may, to the conversation of today and I don't mean to jump over anything.

And if there's things we need to go back on, we certainly can. And you look at what's happening right now with Carney, and you look at what's happening now with all of our leaders and the tariffs coming in and Trump is the bad guy and we're all going to align with liberals and we're going to be team Canada and we're going to fight this. You can see how they can construct a narrative. Yes. That would get most everyday Canadians on board.

I guess is what I'm trying to spit out. Correct. That was in April 70. Then in October of 70, the FLQ kidnapped James Cross, who was the English Council, Commerce Council in Montreal. And two days later, they kidnapped Pierre Laporte, who was the Minister of Labor. But Pierre Laporte was the money bag, and it was the leader of that. I was talking to you a bit earlier in Quebec.

There's always these occult, like these five, six guys that control. Pierre Laporte was the leader of that group that was managing all the money for the liberal parties. If anyone's listening, he did say it right. The Quebec government has the occult as part of its political parties. Political parties. Yeah. So, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so anyway, so Pierre Laporte was kidnapped. And, and, and the guys that kidnapped it, there was four guys, including Valia, Valia, was the main editor of Citibre.

So it was very, very, very, very good friend of Trude. And, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, they, they, they, they, they, they, they, they, they, they, they, they, They forced the French CBC to read a manifest, to bring freedom to Quebec. And when Pierre Lapot was found dead, Trudeau decided to call the war measure in Montreal. And so in October, October 15, you see, they can On October 5, October 15, there was a student protest that were where the army were sent. October 17, the war measure were called. And that same night, 400 symmetry people were arrested, and he kept the war measure on until

December. And so when he called the war measure, there is more soldiers, the Kaysan army, to enter Montreal than on D-Day. He sent 14,000 soldiers in Montreal. It was 12,000 in D-Day. and he posed the tanks on the street corners it was forbidden to walk more than three

together so even family of five they needed the mom needed to walk behind the husband or they wouldn't let three person walk together they arrested 473 but they busted 6,000 doors that night so at 4 a.m.

Entering getting the guys out of their bed naked putting them in for 72 hours without any reason, artist, poets, anybody that would have wrote against the Trudeau regime was arrested. My dad at the time was doing his master in sociology at Montreal University,

and it was the editor of Montreal University newspaper, and the next morning he showed up at his office, and there was a soldier waiting for him, and they ransack his office. They took all, empty all the files, the filing cabinets, every paper. They told he removed everything from his position. because his writing was deemed subversive.

What would the Sean Newman podcast be at right now in Canada? Would I be getting ransacked? Yes, definitely. Grant, you're nodding your head over there. And what are your thought? You know, like, I don't know. What do you, do you warp to rate now or do you hear something there you think is important that the audience is? I think, uh, this conversation is interesting because where, where it's going to is a discussion about a referendum.

And I think this is relevant for Alberta now because Alberta sovereignty is the conversation right now in the country. And for me, I see Alberta as Helms Deep for Canada in terms of starting with this province and the preservation of our culture, values, traditions in the province and in Western Canada. And whether it goes through them, that's another day's conversation. but I think for me this conversation is very interesting because I'm kind of politely waiting for the window to ask Ben or our other friend

and remind me of your name is Danny Danny, forgive me Danny how many billions of dollars we've sent to Central Canada since 1960 and I think we're pushing 630, 630 billion Yeah so I mean you know let's say we're on the second half towards a trillion

Actually that's net we've actually said like we've sent 50 billion a year right 630 billion we get nothing back for so and then you so you talk about equalization payments and you talk about um the issue of electoral reform and the need to recognize that most elections does doesn't matter what happens after winnipeg and then you start to capture the sentiment right now in Canada where western Canadians are and albertans in particular and i think in a lot of ways, this is really the pulse right now in the country and certainly in this province. We've got Trump challenging Canada to actually clean up human issues, value issues, issues in relation to things that we would all wish to see cleaned up in our nation,

fentanyl and human trafficking. And then we've observed a very strange response in this country. Why would the good people in government ever wish to not do that? And yet we've seen a response that is a tariff response from the liberals. And surprisingly, or in my view, unsurprisingly, we've seen the same response from the federal conservative party. And then now just this week, we're seeing the same response here from Alberta in terms of Premier Smith and Blesser supporting Justin Trudeau in relation to these tariffs. And for me, it's very interesting this last 48 hours in Alberta because it feels like the comfort blanket that has been the Alberta conservative kind of framework

with Daniel Smith has been pulled off and people are feeling very uneasy now in relation to where we're out in this province in particular. And it spawned discussions that are heading south. And I think for me, that is the discussion for our province. And how do we engage that? is a referendum the solution? And I think that's part of the framing of this conversation. And I'd be interested to hear, you know, what that referendum looked like in 95

and whether it was actually binding in law and what that would mean for us now if we did run a referendum. And I think that's what a lot of Albertans are thinking about in terms of our own sovereignty. And, you know, do we separate from Canada? Will we be allowed to separate from Canada? and is the solution in America or is it the rebirthing of a new Canada that starts in Alberta

which is certainly my perspective Yeah Well where I'm leading with all that Is that no we went through a referendum in 1980 With all that history behind and quite fresh Like the in 1980 It was 10 years before that the army was in the streets of Montreal And despite that

The referendum didn't went through Plus there was superstore superstar promoting it. Everything was leading to a success. And despite that, the result in AD was a 40.44 for the yes and 59.56 for the no.

And do you have what the question was? I have it on my computer. But basically, the question was, do you give the mandate to go negotiate a new deal with other ones? Because Renélezavec was, when, Renévaig never really wanted total separation despite what was told West. Okay?

Renévaig, he was talking about sovereign associations. So what he wanted is a sovereign Quebec with very tight link with the feds. And then we would tell the feds what to do. And this is how the Quebec government from Jean-Aza-Jean lead everything. So the first thing you want to do when you want to separate you,

you have to take back control of your finance. So in 62, he created the Society General de Finanement, the General Society of Financing, was basically a slush fund for the politician. So in Quebec, there's that society, now it's called Investment Quebec Investment. And basically, this is what you use for protocol matter, everybody knows it.

So it's a slush fund of 10 billion that the politician can invest in companies and stuff like that, no? So it's okay. Everybody knows it and it brings money to the province. But then in 65, he created the Kese Depot. So Canada created the CPP, and Quebec create Kese Depot. And when you look, both were created at the same time because Quebec didn't want to join the pension plan. And when the Keseeepo was created in 1965, when you look today, the Kesee Depot is worth $473 billion in asset versus the CP at $700 million.

billion. So with 22% of population, they have three times more performance than the CPP, the Cazet Depot. And the good thing in the Cazer Depot is that they are, they are concerned on Quebec. Let's invest in Quebec first. Like we're speaking of a high, no, speaking of a high-spin train between now and Monten-Tegroarie. Well, in Montreal, when they redid the Champlain Bridge, which is like, like the biggest like arterial bridge in Canada, I think. There's a, they made, they put a train on the bridge and the train was paid by the Kesee Depot. Did you say the $7.29 billion? That was in, that's what, in the Canada pension? What was the number in Kandahension?

So, so right now the Kappaission Plan investment fund is $699.6 billion. 699, okay. And the Quebec Keseeepu, it's $473 billion. Yeah. And most of the cases of the depot, like here in Alberta, cross-arred mill and Calgary is owned by the Quebec pension plan. Sutherment in common is the Quebec pension plan, that they invest in Canada primarily, no?

So, and primarily in Quebec and then in Canada. And then the Societional de Finanseman with their Slush Fund, what they do, they protect Quebec interest. Like in 1999, Videotron, which was our Kerbal network distributor, made a deal with Rogers and the premier came out that they say

you you you you blog the transaction and he picked up Quebec a Quebec company he said I'm fine we're financing you you buy it we won't let our infrastructure be owned by

by Ontario so so so this this is so again you go back and then context Quebec has its own language its own TV shows in Quebec when like my mom lives with us

right now, until I'm building her house. She's building a house in next spring. So in the interim, she lives with us. And mom, she wakes up in the morning, listen to Quebec news, Quebec show, Quebec movie, Quebec, everything. And still as today, 77% of the population in Quebec speaks only French. They don't speak a word of English. So then you have a society that's entirely like its own language,

like they don't even translate TV show, they redo them. Like CSI, there's a Quebec version of CSI. They don't translate the American TV show. They buy the right, hire Quebec actors and film it back in Quebec. So all the Quebec culture, all the Quebec media is built like that, no? And then you have shows that have like on Sunday night 2.5, 2.6 million people looking at them. This is why Jack Layton won in Quebec with the NDP, because Layton understood that.

And it was that every Sunday night, he was at that show on French CBC, because he knows that a third of the population is listening to that show every Sunday night. And so in Quebec there, one is saying that despite all these tools and the situation, the referendum fell twice. So, affirmative is a very complex process. and I believe that that way, it would be nice for Alberta to the referendum, but the mechanics in it,

and to get there, I'm not a big believer in it, to be frank with you. I don't believe that we will be able, in our context, I mean, freak, we cannot get our own pension plan right now. No, and even on the freedom side, I hear people say, oh, I don't trust the provincial to, oh, so you trust more the federal than the provincial to manage Germany. And there's that culture in Alberta,

where it seems like to be at the federal level is almost a promotion that needs to be broken. So then if the guy who helped with the referendum in the 90s, is like, I don't think a referendum is the right answer. You know, in the first roundtable we had, I think it was pretty clear, a 51st state where all of Canada is a 51st state is a terrible idea. It is.

Okay? So then everybody goes to the next thing, referendum. And the guy that helped with a random random, I'm saying, I think that, you know, with all the things Quebec has, it's probably a poor idea and it probably doesn't happen the way you want it to. You're not going to get 73% of Albertans to come out and go rah, rah, rah. So then where does that leave us? Well, one place that leaves us is not needing 73%. Yes. Like, like I was listening to your, you know, visit with Michael Wagner and Tanner and David Parker. Parker and I mean the and you met you asked him about did you have a copy of the question like the question in 95 took about three minutes to read it yeah I mean but but everybody knew if you vote yes you're leaving and if you vote no you're not you I mean so everybody everybody I understood the question but it was

almost incomprehensible in writing you know I mean and so so the furthest thing we had then was a clear question but I mean everybody knew what it meant and so it all it all worked and we all understood what the rule was and the rule was 50% plus one were leaving And, you know, not to get, like, to cut in on you or anything, but to me, Michael the other day said, well, it has to be, like, a clear question and a clear majority. Well, a clear majority in democracies is 50% plus one. Like, it's not 60% or 66% or whatever. I looked at some of the, we've been ruled since you asked, like, what do we send to, or what do we send to Quebec?

Or what do we send to the rest of Canada? We've sent them $630 billion. We send about 50 billion a year, but 20 billion just stays there that they don't even account for. We send 50. The last time I looked at it, we send 50 billion a year, 10 billion we get back in transfer payments, 20 billion they provide us in services, and 20 billion just stays there. So over the last 30 years, it's about 630 billion. If you look at it in like in 1935, the liberals formed the government with 44.8% of the vote in 58.

and in 1984, the Conservatives actually won with 53% and 50% of the vote. In 93, the Liberals won with 41%. The Liberals won again in 2015 with 49%. They actually won. They actually didn't win in 2021. They had 32.6 and the Conservatives had 33.7, but they made a deal with the new Democrats to continue to run the government. So we've been sending like $50 billion a year.

You talk about with a clear majority? No, we've been sending like $50 billion. a year to a government to spread around the rest of the country that only had somewhere between, you know, 32 and 41% support. So I think when it comes time to leave, 50% plus one will be the, that's a clear, 50% plus one is a clear majority. That's, that's, maybe that's a little different topic and maybe I'm getting ahead of that. No, I don't think you're getting ahead.

I just, I, you mentioned it, Grant. Are they going to let us leave? When I look at the rules, it's not like you get 51% and you're up. Well, then it's like, well, is the government going to let you leave? Right? And I know it'll spur on a whole new set of conversations. But like... Well, I mean, this is the conversation in Canada right now

because it's easy to say, and I'm going to say it, we have a parliamentary system that clearly isn't working for Canadians. We have a judiciary that, let's say, surprises us a lot to be polite. We have a two-tier policing system in this country. And the question, let's say, five years ago was, are we happy in the West, while we were tolerating, let's say, the system because everyone was doing okay. But basically, we've now seen that we have a broken system. The challenge now is that there are two other things that really are still not in the kind of conscious conception of Canadians' minds. They're not at the forefront of Canadian minds.

And one of them is that the Liberal Party and the NDP are telling Canadians that we will be a forefront of Canadians. first post-nation state. And that means that the country stops being really having any sovereign connection between its people and its polity or its people and its government. It's ruled by someone else, somewhere else. It's the construct of the United Nations, the WEF, the WHO, and we're really just become serfs on land that help make the country work. And that is not the vision of Canada. It never has been and it's certainly not what our forefathers have fought for in this country. So that that's a reality that Canadians have to start to get their minds around. The second reality, and I suppose there's three just to adjust my comment.

The second reality is that that significantly changes our understanding of what is actually going on in the country and we don't actually start to see and understand why things are happening the way they are until we see it through that post-national pair of glasses. It's like you have to put on a pair of glasses and say, why are these strange things happening? Why did COVID happen the way that it did? You know, why aren't we talking about foreign interference, even though the country's rife with it? Why aren't we engaging this issue of post-nationalism in terms of a public discussion? That's the lowest hanging fruit politically to talk about because it's the betrayal of a people.

And yet these are the reasons why these things are happening. And now what's happening actually in Canada is we have the very high priest of post-national. coming in and basically being slotted into our primary, our principal, premier, prime minister's seat to conclude the deal on post-nationalism, which is to migrate Canada into this state. And if anybody need, from my perspective anyways, I mean, this is a discussion for us here today. If anybody needs to have a discussion about what's really going on is look at what President Trump is asking us, which is the third force here, the third force in my comments. And he's basically saying, fix these in human issues. We don't want people dying. We don't want Americans.

I mean, they say it's only, you know, half a percent of the drugs are coming in from Canada. But if you listen to Sam Cooper's research recently, I mean, we're talking about fentanyl lab, Vancouver and Toronto being the epicenter for the money distribution for organized crime in Canada with regard to the drug trade. And we're talking about fentanyl labs up the, up the B.C. coast on inlets of the B.C. coast that are producing masses amounts. And we're talking about them being shipped out of Vancouver Harbor, not in suitcases or smuggled in, you know, ladies makeup bags.

They're being shipped out in 20 and 40 foot containers. That's what Trump's really talking about. And that's why he's saying to us to the nation, you're really not taking me seriously on this fentanyl discussion. So you would think that as, you know, high-minded and good Canadian people, we would be wanting to stop the death cult in the country and stop seeing our children trafficked

for whatever horrible reasons that they get trafficked. But what does our government say? No, no, no, we're going to have retaliatory tariffs because we won't actually deal with organized crime in the country, A, and maybe I wasn't surprised to hear the liberals and the NDP say that. But when Paul EF came out and said that there's going to be retaliatory tariffs, I started to say, well, you know, there's another little indicator of a globalist response because any globalist response

is designed to make the Canadians weaker, poorer, and less powerful. And that's what a trade war is going to do with our country. And that's why whatever our leaders are doing in this country right now is asinine and stupid. And yes, we need to stand up for Canada. I get that. I love Canada.

In fact, I bleed for this country. But this is not the response. The response is to actually fix these issues and tell Trump that we're going to fix these issues and let them have a liaison person and into whatever our teams are that are going to be deployed in this country to go and clean up those labs, identify them as terrorist organizations. And if we need to release a shoot to kill order in terms of lethal force to destroy this counterproductive and worse,

destructive force in our nation. So that's what he's talking about. And he's talking about probably deeper. And if my conversations with Americans and any intelligence communities that I would talk to in my journeys, they're basically saying we're concerned about foreign migrants that could be armed that could actually create a beachhead in Canada for the foreign troops that we think are in Canada, the Chinese, to actually destabilize our northern border. But our politicians aren't talking about this. You'll never hear this on the news, but this is reality in Canada. And this is why this is why this conversation is so important. Because what Trump is really saying to Canada right now is you will never be a post-nation.

state, you will be Americans unless you get your house in order. And that is the discussion that we need to be having in Canada. What do we do to actually fix this? And for me, I said in my earlier comment, Alberta is Helms Deep for the fixing of this country and we need to take care of Alberta because it's it's the anchor point for this nation. It will allow us to fix Western Canada. And then if the rest of it at some point get sorted out, it can engage and join under the terms that are set from the West. That's my view. But we've got to look at what Trump's really saying here. We've got to understand what post-nationalism means.

Trump has been talking for years now about the deep state. He's been talking about globalism. And this is the war. And this is a war of good and evil. This just isn't political ideology. This is good and evil. And I know what side-off. I'm on and the battle lines are being drawn and we need to fight for it.

And I'm seeking a peaceful solution politically in this country and we need to look at that. But our way of life, our culture, value and traditions as Canadians are going to be defined and defended in Alberta. And again, I believe other different can be the way, just like it's not as easy as we might know as people might say, might think. The big change in there is the Trump factor is that, and in 95, in fact, when we did the campaign, what we've done before the campaign,

we've done some alliances with, so there's the French president, Giscaardes-Destein, he was president in the late 70s of France, and he always loved Quebec, so he moved to Quebec after his presidency and lived in Montreal. I believe he still lived there, maybe he's dead now,

I mean, I don't know, but he was a professor. at the Montreal University and just card this day in 95 put us in contact with higher 30 in France and we had a deal that if we had that 51% France will be the first country to recognize Quebec sovereignty if ever the feds would go would go Waco and then we have that deal with him and we had that deal with the the UN Committee of the Francophany it's a it's so as well you have to our that the United Nations are is bilingual it's French and English these are two

official language of the United Nations so so so so we we do have we do have a lot of support from the UN and other other organization and a lot of the people that we could we could organize stuff but I believe the first thing and lastly in 95 as well there was all these they've been refer to them in in five six ex-USSR countries that all became independent one through the other 91, 92, 93, 94. So we had a lot of models on which we could work on, very fresh models, on how to build up a constitution and how to actually become sovereign

and has as the new country recognized. Okay. Alberta. I think we're all, you know, sitting in this room, we're like, Alberta is going to have to be part of the solution to get us out of the predicament we're in. Yeah, I think. Yes, absolutely. So if you watch, and maybe I'm missing a couple things here

and you guys can fill in the blanks, but if you watch Daniel Smith's action to date, she went and tried talking to Donald Trump when nobody else would, right? And she got harassed by the east and applauded by the West. And then she took him serious and sent, you know, created the buffer zone on the border and the sheriffs and everything. And so she took what Donald Trump was saying very seriously. I would argue.

I think we can all agree on that. Am I? And then Donald Trump didn't go, Alberta, I see what you're doing. You're great. And this is awesome. He went, Canada, you're not doing enough. And now it's pushed Daniel Smith. I assume I'm just reading the tea leaves to be like, hey, like we're doing our part.

But if you're going to harass all of Canada, then we have to align with Canada. Am I making that too general? No, I think you've summarized it pretty well, and I wish I could articulate the situation we're in as well as Grant just did. You know what I mean? Because this isn't, like so many people I think are listening to this thinking we're talking politics. I think you're absolutely right when you said this is good versus evil. And Jordan Peterson spoke in Calgary a couple of weeks ago, and he said, like, he said Trudeau is basically an incompetent globalist, puppet, you know what I mean? But he said, Karnie is so much more evil than that. He's actually, like, he's actually a globalist leader. You know what I mean? He's leading us down this road

of evil, you know what I mean? None of which is good for us. And I agree with you what you said about Danielle went to just meet with Trump. She had a good visit with him. But somehow in the last 48 hours, all of a sudden she wants to be on Team Canada. I don't know if they started handing out, you know, bigger coins than you're handing out, Sean, or what's going on here. But I mean, These people that she's now on Team Canada with have spent the last 30 years trying to, like, proudly talking about shutting down our industry in the street, putting an end to our oil sands, which the do-goaters always call our oil sands, the tar sands. And quite frankly, for about two million years, they were the tar sands until some young

entrepreneurs from, you know, all across Canada went to Fort McMurray with, I say, their old half-tons and their young wives, and they figured out how to take tar out of sand. and now it's one of the miracles of the modern world. And I think right now, Alberta is sitting on a third of the world's energy resources. And she wants to be on Team Canada who wants to shut down our energy industry. I'm gobsmacked is the only word I can think of. It's an old-fashioned word. But I'm gobsmacked at.

How did she get from meeting with Trump talking about trying to make things work out to all of a sudden siding with Team Canada? And if I'm not mistaken, like, we sell somewhere, you know, I don't know the numbers, but 60 or 70% of what we export, maybe more, goes to America. I mean, we all know the devastation that happened to our beef industry when the BSE came along. Like, I mean, cows that were worth $500 were selling for $10 because we couldn't get across the border. So, like, I mean, like, pick a fight with Trump at your own peril. Like, if he just said, that's it.

Okay, if you want to be like that, we're just closing the borders for everything. like it would be economic devastation for us. So what, I mean, I like Trump. In fact, I love Trump. I think he's, quite frankly, I think he might be sent from God to help us get out of this, you know, mess. And I like his idea of, you know, the fifth, I don't want to be a 51st state. But he has certainly, as you pointed out, Grant, he has certainly brought the conversation to the forefront. Do I mean?

And so now we're having the conversation. And I think it's a wonderful conversation. Personally, I don't want to be in a, I wouldn't mind be in a 51st date, but I don't to be in a 51st state with the rest of the country. I want Alberta to be its own country. And then if we find that we think we'd be better off being a state, that we will, that'll be a second discussion after we decide to be in our own country.

But, you know, personally, I don't, like, why would you want to be a 51st state when you could be in the G20 anyway? Like, we could be a G10 or a G12 country. Why would you want to be a state? We'd be like, like, Alberta, especially a state in with Canada, the whole country. And it would be like being a farmer in Los Angeles,

in California. I mean, your hands, you'd be having to farm with your hands tied behind your back. So anyway, I,

I just love the fact that we're, we're having the discussion, and I guess Donald Trump has sort of brought it to the forefront and brought it to, one of the things,

one of the things that's certainly different, I think about than the 90s, and maybe, once again, I'm younger than all of the men sitting in this room,

so you can change, you can certainly poke holes in this as well, is the ability to have conversations like this and be kind of like, open about everything, right? Maybe that's always been there.

It doesn't feel like it. And then certainly, Elon Musk's taking over Twitter. You can love or hate Elon Musk. He took a, you know, they just go look at the Twitter files and realize he took something and turned it back around so that you can have this open discussion and things can start to flow. So this next four years, while it's not even that anymore, it's less than four years, with Trump down there and Elon Musk,

I go back to what Parker said on the first one, right? It's this, all the things are starting the line in this perfect storm. If Carney gets in, this conversation goes supersonic. But the only thing is with supersonic is I'm like, so if referendum isn't the way, what is the way? Is there a way? Well, I believe in the right context of referendum is the way. But you need a crisis. You need a crisis strong enough.

But like, for instance. Like Carney getting in. Like currently getting in, like Trump keeping on, no, doing contact with some of us and with a lot of us, his team, to prepare a kind of a transition to push like, again, if Trump, if the United States is the first country, do not have a referendum to acknowledge the independence of Alberta, it's a done deal. Nobody will go against what he says, not even the feds. negotiation totally turned on its head no and and and and I believe that uh what always reproach in Alberta is that we we have the curse of our blessing is that we're making so much money that no as long as I my wanton dinnelly truck and and and and and and and and and can go over my trader at Starbucks and nobody makes a big change is in a

exactly exactly so so I believe what's happening right now somehow I'm not saying I'm praying for that but somehow I'm saying that if it gets very very very tough that could be the right trigger to launch a referendum but then we need somebody in front of the parade to do that because a referendum can is one on emotions and not on fact so so so so so two things that make it for them with that that that made that that makes a that that is a sad statement well it's true it's true but the other thing when Pat said I've only known it a few hours and I like you already, but when he said the referendum isn't the answer, like, there's a process, but I mean, there's two ways to get a separate country. One, like, in this case, with the Clarity Act,

it's a vote, or it's get your guns and sort it out. And so I think the referendum is the answer. Like, we have, it's the rule of law. We, the Clarity Act has been put there to give people, the country, provinces that want to leave. It's, it's given us a process by which we can get out. All you're saying is we have to go through the process. You have to, bring the people together, you have to educate them, you have to explain to them why they'd be better off if they left or whatever. Some people want to make the case, they'll be better off if they stay. You know what I mean? But nevertheless, I think we should all agree that if we're going to have like either a separate country as Alberta or if we're going to have a 51st state,

and I think Donald Trump would agree with this too. He doesn't want, he doesn't want to send the military up here to have a 51st state. He would like us to negotiate. how we get that. But he's also, as you mentioned, with all the fentanyl, everything, he's saying, okay, you people are going to have to start acting like adults and get your act together, or I will do something other than just, you know, lecture you about this. And so I think, I think he's doing us a favor by sort of forcing the issue and saying, okay, it's time for everybody to man up, so to speak, yes. Yeah, I agree. Well, I mean, if I'm not mistaken, did I not hear Premier Smith say, Was it yesterday that she has no interest in advancing a 51st state discussion?

Is that not what the sound bite was in the news? Well, she's the one who's on the wheel in that context. I mean... No, but I mean, but she's taking a position in terms of Alberta to say there's really no appetite for that in Alberta, which is to me not what I'm hearing. I'm sure it's not what you. You gentlemen are hearing either. Well, I mean, just take a look at Jeff Rath.

Jeff Rath puts, like Rachel Parker puts out a, what is it? I don't, like she's done an interview with them now. Yeah. But the sound bite is like. The three seconds. Right, it's quick. And it explodes. And now he's talking about leading a delegation down into the States.

Yeah. And, you know, people can have their thoughts on that. But I think as an Albertan, I'm just like, I just want to know, like, I just want to hear the conversation. Is it actual, is there anything there? Or is it just? There's something there. Like Jeff Rath was on Fox News this morning.

And when you're on Fox News talking about whatever. Alberta is doing, it's like it's there. Like, I mean, Danielle must have been spending too much time talking to her friends, her newfound friends in the East. But, I mean, the fact of the matter, the issue is on the table, you know what I mean? And we need to deal with it. And I say we want to have like a respectful, you know, adult conversation among all these different views and say, okay, what are the pros and cons of each of these

different options? You know, what could go right? What could go wrong? Let's talk about it. Let's, what can we do to make most of the people? people benefit. And when you look at, when you look at Donald Trump, mostly he's a dealmaker, but most of the, I mean, I would say most of his deals, he gets a 55, 45, 45 sort of a split. It's like most deals. He's a pretty good negotiator, so he gets a little bit the best of the deal.

But at the end of the day, you don't see many people that have been that unhappy with the deal they made with him. I agree. And so I'd be happy to sit down with him and make it make a deal on how we work through this. And I mean, my personal preference would be say, look, we want out of the country. And what we want you to do is, and we talked about this earlier, and some people say, well, and I think you mentioned this earlier, would the government let you leave? Well, I'm hoping that if we do vote on independence in Alberta, we'll do it while Donald Trump or J.D. Vance are in power, and we'll send a delegation to Washington, just like Jeff Wrath. And the night before we vote, we'll have Donald Trump tweet, hey, you know, Mr. Carney, if you're there, you know, I understand

Alberta is voting on independence tomorrow. And then in capital letters, you'll put, don't make me come up there. And I mean, quite frankly, that's the message we need from America's. Don't make us come up there. You guys sort this out like adults. You've got a process by doing it. You can vote on it. If 50% plus one want it, that's what we can do. And then we'll recognize it too. I think it was you or somebody, maybe it was Michael was saying in some of those, in Caledonia they voted, but then the Spanish government didn't recognize it. But in the good news, the one good thing I'll say that Quebec did for us is the four the federal government to actually clarify the process by which you could leave the country.

And as you noticed, they didn't say what a clear question was or what the percentage had to be. And you know, there's a real good reason why they didn't do that. Because there's two sets of rules. If it's Quebec's leaving, it can be a three-minute question, and you know, 50% plus 0.01 is enough to leave. But if Alberta is leaving, it'll be a real clear question. we're leaving yes or no and you know but some of them will say oh you need 66% to leave well if they didn't need 56% to leave why do we need 60% to leave see what it mean so the reason they didn't clarify it was because there's two sets of rules but they didn't want to tell us because it

would bug us sure and and we've got to remember that we've just spent the last five years watching buses being driven through our understanding of the effectiveness of the rules yes so I mean you're right yeah but first of all the the rules don't seem to And second of all, we've got to look at this again from a post-nationalist agenda. So if there's a post-nationalist agenda to harvest Canada into a global system, the last thing they're going to do is allow in Alberta to become the kind of the pain in the ass in the middle of the country that has some kind of connection to Trump. They're not going to do it.

So I mean, that's why I raised the question about what Premier Smith has said in relation to the appetite about the 51st state. That's a signaling that there's not going to be an undertaking that's going to be advanced from the provincial government in any official way, which means that if there is a referendum, it's going to have to be done as a straw poll from the people that actually, whether it's accepted or not, and this is where we're talking about the Spanish example. And then it's going to be a case of, I think, looking to a declaration of self-determination. And that's ultimately where I think that this is going to go if there can't be some kind of political maneuvering done within the province and as a part of this nation to create the beachhead of freedom that we want to see.

That helms deep that I refer to the anchor point in Canada. And when there's a declaration of self-determination as a people, then we're looking to the UK to say, hey, let's go back to 1931 and recognize that that's what Westminster actually passed in relation to what Canada is supposed to be. We'd like you to recognize this country. And let's go to the Americans who recognize that any constitutional republic, they're going to align with and basically take a statement and say, we validate you as a nation. And I ultimately think that that's where we're going. And I'm hoping that if we have another election, that we can create the moral legitimacy in Alberta by running from from my perspective,

running MPs in every constituency in Alberta that will be, will be bearing this agenda to see the people of Canada set free starting in Alberta. And this is the conversation. When you say 1931, I hadn't heard this date until about a week ago. December 11th, 1931. Right. You know, Ben, you talked about.

of history this this this a bunch of history sorry and and and then this this this this date is being shared around underground right now in a lot of conversations and I would say I for one I'm like I'm trying to wrap my head around it when you say this is what Westminster meant can you just like expand can we just expand that for a second and explain what the heck you're talking about well I mean for me it I suppose it was a personal journey a little bit because whenever COVID happened I started to look at why isn't our country working the way that it should. I saw the social contract that we've all grown up with as Canadians being broken.

And I started to do some constitutional research. I started to explore some of them. Some of them were rabbit trails and were, I don't think, significant. And then I came across this 1931 legislation, which was essentially the British government passing a bill called the Westminster Act, 1931, that essentially stated that the sovereignty of Canada was being released from the British crown. and transferred to Canadians, to Canadians, to be housed within provincial legislatures.

And so there was a movement of that to the provincial legislatures that were in existence in 1931. And many of our provincial legislatures were in that time. And so the question then for us, and I think this is why this detailed preamble that we've had in terms of Quebec's establishment vis-a-vis up and lower in Canada is so important because I think what had happened when that occurred. If you think about where Western Canada was, I mean, my family were still pioneering in

Saskatchewan and setting up the farm and pulling up tree stumps, right? So they weren't reading, you know, bills from London that were sliding into Ottawa. They were trying to stay alive. You know, they were. You know, they were thinking about, you know, food and how cold it was, right? So this bill came out and basically it was the releasing of Canada from the British Empire to Canadians. And if I read my history deeper, which I did do, I think that was the intention of Queen Victoria before that, before her death, in 1901. And so there was this general trajectory to see Canada become its own country. yes, it came into existence in the squeeze between the American kind of imperialism, if you will, after the revolution, and also the ends of the British Empire in Canada was allowed to kind of birth and form.

But her and the British agenda was to actually see us release to be a sovereign people. And something happened in 1931 where Ontario and Quebec simply said, hey, here's a franchise that we can simply appropriate and step into and we'll perpetuate the picture of the crown here. And we're going to set up the electoral system. So we always basically have the centrality of power. And that's why we have a balanced electoral system right now. And we're going to create, we're a colony, but we're not anymore. So let's make Western Canada and everywhere else colonies of our colony. And that's why we have these equalization payments. And I think if you go back further into 1960 or 62,

we're nearly a trillion dollars since the early 60s. I'll stand correct on the exact moment. Wouldn't surprise me yet. So that is really the discussion because, you know, if anybody pulls the Westminster Act, it's still unanswered and you can still find it very easily. It's very, very clear about what was supposed to happen in that transition. So and just one last comment.

So, you know, we can go into all kinds of constitutional debates in this country going right back to the BNA Act to 1867 Constitution to 1982. I mean, the 1867 Constitution was letters patent. It wasn't actually a constitution. It just was a guiding principle for how the country was to function that was brought into the 1989 agreement. But the reality is, for where we're at right now, if you move to this declaration of self-determination. termination, all of that falls away. It's like a, it's like a, a fuel tank on a jet that's used. You just dump it. And this is, this is really kind of where the conversation is. So we want to have a, we want to create a peaceful pathway to have this conversation starting in Alberta. And I think

this is the, this is why this conversation is so powerful. But we've got to understand our history. And I think that's why part of this, this Quebec discussion, uh, is relevant for us in Alberta because we weren't formed in the West really as a nation. We're very vulnerable as a nation. The railway was built to make sure that British Columbia didn't become America at that time. Yeah, absolutely. And that's what secured British Columbia and consolidated Canada. But we have to now look at our context now and say, we now have a system that will say politely is broken. I'm going to say it's also a little bit of a racketeering mechanism because we're paying for an electoral system that is actually holding us hostage. And now it's actually hosting an ideology that is

breaking the culture of values and traditions that we want to see embedded in our families for the future. And now it's actually a duty to engage these issues. And it's not, this isn't, these aren't normal political conversations. This is about the continuance and perpetuation of our people and our way of life. And this is as serious a conversation as we can ever have in our country and we need to figure this out. And so I'm actually frankly grateful

for President Trump, despite what everyone may think about him because he's forcing this conversation into the Canadian lap and we're going to have to decide what we're going to do. And my grandfathers would be ashamed of what we've allowed to happen in this nation in terms of the breakdown of the rule of law.

Yeah. Can I just, before you hop in, Ben, I'm just wondering from a, you go back to the Westminster, right? Yeah. Giving it to people and in housing it in the provincial parliaments, correct? Yeah. In theory, could a premier just say, we actually don't need a referendum, we don't need to ask permission, we already have it in law, and we just got to go back to this date? Is that at all a coherent thought? or you're asking for a lot of troubles

if you try and approach it that way. Well, I mean, constitutionally, until 192, you could have done that. Because what happened, the state of Westminster was not only for Canada. It was for the entire Commonwealth. Okay. And the first one that grabbed it in New Zealand.

New Zealand grabbed it and said, okay, kick out the king and war-taking our stuff. And basically what London was doing is that the constitution was held in the UK Parliament and they were releasing the document, the constitution itself of every of their colonies

to the colony themselves and that was an opportunity to renegotiate, reopen, change stuff as the document was transferred from London to every colony's country and Canada didn't do it until 1982 so

so they stayed, they left the constitution, the paper work in London from 1931 to 1982 and this is what Trudeau did in 1982 he petriated that document reopened it and then a change

rules put it in a lock and through the key at the sea the way the rules were changed the Canadian constitution is locked down you cannot change it but he embedded he embedded those the imbalance

yeah of the gig if you will, into the Constitution and made it impossible to change. With the participation of Brown and Peckford,

by the way, he was the orchestrator of locking down the Constitution that it wouldn't never be able to be open again. Did I feel like I...

Okay. No, your question is. I think that question is, did Quebec ever sign the Constitution? Did Quebec ever sign it? Never. So then is it a binding agreement if not everybody signed on to it?

How can we say they locked away the key when not everybody... signed it's because the patrication has been done so legally it went from London to other war and it's done there was that chance to negotiate something and and when when they negotiated so so they they embedded in it that to change the constitution you need seven province representing at least 51% of population I understand what it says but the problem is that that internal representation

because of in 1867 it was a peace treaty between or between uh between uh lower and upper canada, they brought in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia as mediator. And then PEI joined two years later as mediators for the big two guys. They were there to balance up. But when these Atlantic province joined, they join with very special condition. I mean, P.I has still like something like three senators. There are 150,000 people. If it would have the same representation of PII in Alberta, I think we would have something like 137 MPs and 16.

senators to represent the population. And what Peckford made sure, it's called the night of the long knife, he went in the kitchen with Jean Crittier and negotiate this position on behalf of the Atlantic province and lock down the conditions

to reopen the constitution would make it not openable because not a single Atlantic province, they're on the gravy train. You know what? We always speak about the equalization payment to Quebec. When you look per capita, Newfoundland is the big winner. Like per Capitaine-Unferendant has received more money than any other Canadian.

Okay, so, so, so, yeah. But is the agreement, forgive me, this is why I got a lawyer in here, because maybe a lawyer can be like, no, it doesn't matter. If one of the provinces did not sign the document. 25% of the population. Right. Yeah. Doesn't that make it null and void, or is that not the case?

Well, I, that's an anomaly to me that, you know, I don't know the answer to that because there's got to be some explanation. The bigger question for me, though, from that perspective is, was that negotiation done in the context of understanding of the 1931 arrangement that, first of all, gave the authority to the provincial legislatures? Or was it Pierre Elliott Trudeau strong arming the provinces? Yes. And that was the thing. So I'm guessing that a lot of that negotiation happened, and they weren't actually conscious of the fact that they had the authority to form the federal government, rather than the federal government forcing them into a shoebox. But the thing with the petriation is that they had, according to the new constitution, their own right, because there were seven more than seven provinces.

There's two things about that. No, that's good. But there's two things about this. Like you said, I don't think we've got time to list all the places where the federal government has violated all the rules. Like you said, they're driving a bus through the rules. This is like your wife saying, I'm leaving. You said, well, just a minute, I want to read the prenupt show. You see, well, read it if you want, but we're leaving.

I'm going out the door. And you'll be talking to my lawyer. I mean, that's the way I feel about this. They can't break like 41 laws and then say, oh, you have to live by that law, even though we didn't live by the first 40. Like, give me a break. Like we're tired of, you know, what is it, rules for thee, but not for me? But that's the farce that we're in right now. That's the farce of this country.

Yeah, it's basically our leader, Paul Hymann calls it like an abusive relationship. They say, look, you can't just have it your way on everything. And so, like, to me, like, I mean, again, I don't think there's anybody that isn't prepared. to have an adult conversation about it. But let's be honest. Like, let's not have rules for thee and not for me or rules for me and not for thee, whatever. Let's have a reasonable discussion about this.

And, like, again, like Donald Trump is forcing to have this discussion because he said, I don't want a bunch of retards living on the north side of our border. Like, I mean, I want to get, you guys need to sit down, like adults, figure out what you're going to do. And, I mean, if we do want to be the 51st state, like I say, there is a process. and if we want to live, you know, if we want to sort of try and strive to live by the rule of law,

the rule of law says a province can vote to leave the country. And so, I mean, if we just, so even the people who want to have a 51st date, even if Donald, you know, even if Donald Trump wants to have a 51st date, I think he would agree that we have a legal process by which we're bound to live and say, okay, fine, give us time, we're going to have a referendum on independence, you know what I mean? and then, you know, then we'll see how that works, and then we'll talk to you, we'll see if we can negotiate a deal

where we're just good trading partners the way we've been for the last 30 or 40 years. If that's not working and there's something you're not happy with, well then maybe you can press us a little harder to be the 51st state. So I think there's a process here, but I think we should all be pretty careful to stick to the rules as best we can because if you get to where, like everybody just says, well, they're not living by the rules,

I'm not living by the rules. like we're heading for chaos, aren't we? Yeah, well, these, and these rules are rules that are above the dysfunction of our existing domestic laws. I mean, that's why I'm talking about self-determination. Exactly. Because that is something that's recognized in international law. Absolutely.

I think that's where this ultimately has to go. And I think we're going to work to be polite Canadians. But I don't think that anybody actually wants to live in a, in a kingdom called post-national carnivorous carnies. Carney because we're it's not going to be anything that we're going to like and I think that there'll be very very difficult confrontations if that happens and and I think more than that I think what Trump is saying is that he's not going to allow that because he's not going to host that in the same way that this is this is going to be an interesting comment he is not going to host a post nation state above his northern border in the same way that Russia was not going to allow the

Ukraine to become NATO and or the EU. And if we don't sort this out and given some of the geopolitical powers that are at play here in terms of our north and in terms of what the Americans perceive to be embedded or hosted in Canada right now in the form of Chinese troops, we're one of the, one of the realities that I think Canadians need to actually face as at least a, let's let's call it a far-reaching probability right now, is that we could have a kinetic confrontation on our soil if we don't actually deal with these issues. And so you're right, in terms of one of the deadlines

that we need to work to in this conversation is about the end of the Trump administration, and perhaps J.D. Vance will continue with that mandate. But there is a quickening pace towards Canada being taken towards post-nationalism, and we're going to have this confrontation or this discussion, if you will, in terms of self-determination or a referendum or whatever form it's going to take from within the Canadian context sooner.

And then, you know, so we'll, whether Carney calls an election now when he's, he's kind of coronated, coronated, will tell us very quickly what his intentions are in terms of a long or a short game. In my view, if he doesn't call him, an election, he's going to invoke emergency powers because Trump's so bad. And we won't even be anywhere near an election until September of 2026. And I would say that that is a signal that we're moving quickly to a post-national reality. And this conversation is going to be more relevant than we know. I agree. And I mean, Alberta, like again, Alberta has, I think, a unique

opportunity to be like if you want to call it the adult in the room and say like we're not we're not tolerating this and one of the things that bothered me when the the transmountain pipeline difficulties were going on and is 70% remember how they were the protesters were on the pipeline all the time and everything and and we didn't do anything about it it stole things for months and months and months but 70% of of the freight that gets unloaded in Vancouver goes by rail to east of Alberta. So like if you want to bring Vancouver to a stop, what you have to do is block the

stop the train at getting here. I mean, Alberta, to its credit, I think is the only rat-free jurisdiction in the free world. If nothing else, you could stop them while you checked every box car for rats. You know what I mean? But nevertheless, you could stop it.

And I suggested this to some of, like anyone who would listen to me, which is like two people. and they never passed it on. But nevertheless, like I said, Jason Kenney should have said, look, if anybody steps on that pipeline right away again, we're going to stop the trains, and we're going to turn off the gas that is coming out there. So you're going to be in a lot of trouble in a hurry.

So do me a favor. Just make sure it doesn't happen. If he had just called the Premier of BC and said, if this happens, this is what we're going to do, like they would have brought in the Army to let them keep building the thing. So some of the problems we have have been from a lack of, leadership in Alberta. And some of this stuff that they're talking about doing, you know, the different things

that they're talking about doing, they're talking about using our energy sector against us as a retaliation in the tariff wars and one thing and the other. Well, to me, Danielle Smith, instead of saying, I'm joining Team Canada, so what she needs to do is say, well, I've talked to the Rat Patrol. And if you guys mention that, again, we're going to start stopping the trains at the Alberta border for a week or two at a time. And you can see how you do in Eastern Canada with all this. And the other thing that, like, to me, that I think we have to realize is, like, Alberta has, like, I mean, we have a lot of things that we sell to the Americans.

One of them is oil, of course. And, I mean, Trump is talking about drill, baby drill. And to me, but the people I've listened to it, which is basically just podcast, he said, even if he drilled baby drilled, it would be somewhere between five and ten years before he could replace Alberta's oil. So even if that's happening, we've got ten years to deal with that. But years ago, a friend of mine was a pharmacist in Vagerville, and he had a pharmacy there, and one day this nice-looking fellow came in, said, oh, hi, I'm from Shopper's Drug Mart. I think it was Shopper's Drug Mart. We'd like to have a pharmacy in Vagerville, and we've got two choices.

We could either buy yours, or we could build one across the street and sell below your cost until you're gone. So to his credit, he said, you know, how much would you pay me? And they offered them a really nice price, and he sold it. But when you look at our beef industry, it's pretty hard. Like I think my understanding is some of those packing plants in the northwest, they run two or three days a week on Alberta beef. So like the oil industry, the beef industry, there's so many things that we're so tightly tied with us. It would be a real inconvenience for that. And you couldn't move.

I don't think you could move our feeding industry to Pascoe Washington or certainly our cow-calfe industry to the states in less than 10 years. But if you look at Frank Strach and his magna and his magna parts, car parts manufacturing. And I mean, if Donald Trump went to him and said the same thing, you know, we're sort of thinking of doing this in America, but we've got good news. If you'd like to move your plants, we'll pay the freight to move them and we'll give you a tax break. But if you don't want to do that, we're going to have works beat magna parts, and we'll be making our own in about 60 days. So you get to pick. Like, do you want to move or don't? So I look at this team Canada talking about we're going to go toe to toe with these people and say, it's like me going toe to toe with Muhammad Ali.

you say, well, like, how long would that last? Yeah. You know what I mean? And so, like, I think, like, Alberta, and I was really disappointed in Danielle. Like I said, she's a dear friend of ours. But, I mean, I thought she was doing, I thought it was brilliant when she went to Mara Lago.

They said when she went to Mara Lago, she stayed there overnight. When Trudeau went there, he had to stay at Motel 6. Like, you know what I mean? But anyway, like, it serves him right, yeah. But to me, I don't know where this last turn came. I mean, hopefully, like, some of her friends will say, look, let's get back on track here.

Like, let's work with them. You know what I mean? But I think Ontario has a lot more to lose with a fight with Trump than we do. Because he sort of needs, and I think, today I think he backed off the tariffs on us for another month, didn't he? Or did he? Or maybe not on the beef? Mexico. Mexico.

Mexico. Yeah. Okay. But are we still only at 10% because he went 10% for the oil? It was 10% on the oil, I think. But, you know, but I think let's keep calm and let's, like, let's be sure we're not the ones ratcheting this up. But, I mean, I think we have way more to lose than they do. Yes.

Well, I think the liberals want to ratchet it out. They do. They want to make an election issue. You've got Christia Freeland talking about going to the UK and France to have them help us have a nuclear covering from the UK and France for Canada to protect us. You know, you can imagine what the Americans will think of that, right? Oh, yeah. You know, so we've had a very, you know, we have an integrated brotherly relationship. And that's why the continued absence of a conversation about these issues that Trump's actually talking about is to our detriment every single day.

It's like the clock ticking on that is getting louder and louder. I know. You know, so we can talk about tariffs. It's like wrestling with an 80,000 pound gorilla. There's no point. That's not a good outcome in any event. And we'll run out of steam way faster. So again, why, you know, I would think if I were premier of this,

province, I'd be saying, look, we need to resolve anything to do with organized crime, moving anything that's illegal through this province, east-west, and north-south, and provide the assurances and accountability with those assurances to the Americans that that's the case. Because we want to do that because that's the right thing to do. The fact that it benefits the right, right? And that's really the bigger problem here in this big conversation. is because we're talking about the economic realities, but the, but the root issue here, that's the cause. The root issue is we have messed up values in this country because we can't actually, we're not actually hearing our leaders saying, why the hell wouldn't we want to

sort out organized crime that's moving this disgusting drug and creating, you know, a death culture in North America? But do you hear anybody saying that? And this, that's an economic money laundering machine. I mean, TD Bank, uh, what, in November last year, just had it got a $4 billion fine associated with money laundering. And I tweeted and I said, I wonder if they'll, I wonder if they'll ever disclose what the money laundering was for. Yeah. You know, no.

But this is our challenge and why aren't we having these conversations? But at the same time, I know for Alberta, I'm very worried. You know, I've been working for the past two or three years full time to render the province more self-sustained through a lobby effort I'm doing on energy and all the rest. I mean, the top five whole producer of the province are 44% owned by the Chinese Communist Party. Like we don't own our oil. Our beef, 87% of all our beef are slaughtered by JPL and Cargill,

American and Brazilian. So we don't control our beef. We don't control anything of our stuff. And then when we have that opportunity to demonstrate real sovereignty, well, we decide to do like window dressing with the sovereignty act. meanwhile you're not moving the provincial police you're not moving on the abidavar pre-pension plan you're not moving taking control

of your of collecting own money you're not moving on anything of that so and and then you come and you come with a budget with 5.6 billion deficit like and bring tax cut and oil prices going down and oil prices going down

it's like I do not understand like it doesn't make sense and now with the admonition that that Canada needs to spend more money on its military to protect us. Well, the question is to protect us from who? Because, I mean, the threats have been there all along and there hasn't been a discussion about it.

In fact, the Canadian military has been defanged. And if I know anything about what's going on out of the country, I mean, I've been going back and forth to this cross country now for two years. There's a lot of Canadians all across this country that feel the exact same way that we do. It's not just Alberta. And I think we need to remember that. But, I mean, one of the things that I've seen across this country

is that a lot of, most of our real Canadian military is not in the Canadian uniform anymore and they're basically watching what's going on here very carefully and are aware. Audience members, I have military guys on here quite regularly. Yeah. And one of them showed out to Chuck Prodnick, right? He's served in four tours overseas, you know,

is one of those Canadian members who's seen real duty and, you know, has been some harrowing and then some situations. And he was just on. Because, you know, like him and Jamie Sondclair, quite regular on here, and they've been very pro-Canada. And the last time he was on is the first time,

he almost cried sitting where Danny's sitting. I was like, this is a grown man who has bled and lost friends for his country. And he's saying he's Alberta first. And he's talking about a lot of the different things he's seeing the trend. He's like, this isn't good. Like these things aren't. good. And that's what the real military, as you're so eloquently pointing out, is saying,

these are not good here. This is not good. Well, I do take, sorry about it. I do take some comfort, and I'm encouraged from the conversations with many of those people, because they feel deeply the loyalty to the Canadian people. And I think when, I'd like to think when people talk about Alberta first, it's because they see that Alberta is the, is that Helms Deep for Canada. and it's the place that we can actually rightify this and get at least Western Canada back on track. But when I talk to a lot of those military people, they are very aware. They carry their obligation to the Canadian people, even though they're outside of the uniform. And I know that I would think that as they're watching this and they are aware,

they are doing the strategic risk analysis in terms of the issues that I alluded to earlier. and they have very little time coming to the conclusion of understanding what the Americans are processing through when they're looking at the inherent risk in Canada that we are hosting. And I'm pretty sure that they're watching, let's say, the grass moving and the grass, the tea leaves, if you will, around this conversation very carefully and would be prepared to stand too in the event that there was a real problem in this country. and they would defend the Canadian people. And I have a confidence in that. And I think what we need to do in this country is show the moral leadership that we need to do to actually talk about the values

in terms of how do we see our culture, values, and traditions as a people endure. And this is why I'm here today to have this conversation because unless we actually speak the truth about what's going on in the country, I don't think there's any conversations like this going on in the country. maybe they are, but I haven't heard them yet. We need to have these conversations so people actually really understand what the stakes are.

And then they can assess how long they're going to play with the notion that perhaps Premier Smith saying, well, there's not really an appetite for a 51st state. I don't want to be American. But I sure believe that we need to reforge this country for the Canada that we want because the existing one and all the latent issues that's come along with it for the last 400 years, as Ben's just alluded to, that body needs. to die and we need to reforge this. We need to rebirth this country and it starts here.

So when I hear Alberta first, I hear this is the place to start the furnace to actually see this country restored to what we want it to be because we have been, we're being hijacked by a fifth column in this country. That's what's happening. We need to understand what that means. Yeah. That's, you can hear the knocking. Yeah.

That's the knock. It's funny. I'm like. That's Mark Carney. He wants to come and talk to us. I just want to say, my son is in a military and is his girlfriend as well. They're both in the Navy. They're based in the Esquemalt.

My son is a son-operator on the Cornerbrook. So we have four subs in Canada, two that are park and being salvaged, and two that are working sometimes. One in Halifax and one in Victoria. and the corner brook is in Victoria and my son is part of the main crew and he's a sooner-up on that and sometimes like I cannot believe

I was telling you that often I pray way more that he would not be lost at sea than lost at battle and he was no last week they went there are gone for a six-month mission right now which cannot tell us what it is of course but he was telling me that now they were going like only three weeks coming back

because the batteries are not very good on it. They're changing the battery, they're going another. Like, it's ridiculous. Like, what are we doing? It's like, West Evan Mall has better submarines than are. But what a mess. It is a mess. But see, like, I think what Donald Trump's is doing.

West Endemort doesn't have the subs anymore. They sold them to the Canadian military. Yeah, okay. You tell when the last time I went to West Seveners Mall, but in any event, Donald Trump is I think you live under 50 miles from you straight west of here I think I told you that yeah but see like I think what Donald Trump is saying like kids get your act together like like literally like don't

make me come up there like I mean because like I mean and and he's doing us a favor to say that too because somebody's coming here you I mean when you talk about all the infiltration into the liberal government and where they come from and you know an army of people here of military age men that have just been coming into our country unvetted like like the enemy is among us like it truly is and I mean we need to be yeah let's recognize there was a piece of legislation signed by Stephen Harper called the Foreign Interference Protection Act that allowed foreign troops into this country to protect their investment interests yes so that was the gateway and we need to we need to cite that and let people

understand that there was actually a gateway port of entry to to provide the grounds to enter and host. But the problem is, is that no one's talking about it except the Americans, which are actually really, really quite concerned about it because they see it as a potential continental destabilization. So we better. Well, they've got 20 or 30,000 military aid Chinese people in America, too. And as you know, like nobody gets out of China without the government knowing it.

So the government knows they're here. And I mean, who knows when, who knows what their order will be? when they get it. And like one of my dear friends was his dad was a German soldier. And he got conscripted into the German army in the Second World War at 14 years old. But they would say, you know, they would go to some young soldier and say, go to the Trudeau farm and kill them all and be back here by dark. And if you're not here by dark, we'll go and get your family. And when you do get here, we'll shoot them in front of you and then we will shoot you. So be sure you're back by dark. You know what I mean? And so when you see all these young military men, from different

countries, but China and particularly, they all have family back in China that they're hoping to get here. You can be sure the order is the same. Say, well, do this if you ever want to see your mother again, if you ever want to see your sister again. So we're in really, like this is not the liberals against the PC. This is good versus evil. And we need to be very, very aware of what we're talking about. And I think everybody understands, too, when it comes to the Canadian military. What was it 10 days ago, maybe?

They had the press conference where they're talking about the requirements to get in our military, lowered permanent residence. I'm married to a permanent resident. Lovely woman from Minnesota. Yeah. So, you know, there are going to be some permanent residents in there that are going to serve our military and be wonderful? Sure.

But I mean, we're lowering the standard to what we give guns to. I know. And train to be lethal. And at the same time that they amended the entry requirements to the Canadian Armed Forces, they also passed a law to enable the Canadian Armed Forces. enable the Canadian armed forces to supplement police enforcement in this country. Yeah, so it gives them the right to, yeah. So that's the second, the second part of that punch.

So, you know, so Canadians could be, could quickly, and in the event that there were a disagreement, like the convoy, could be dealing with foreigners inside of a Canadian uniform enforcing the law with the Canadian police alongside the Canadian police. And the way my brain goes, because here in Lloyd Minster, we've actually not seen that part of it. But, you know, like, go to Ottawa and you're there for the convoy. And the first day, and I've told the story lots, the first day they got their bella clavs on, the police, they got their arms crossed, and they're very confrontational. And it took, I think, four days. By that time, they're high-fiving protests. They just, they just realized, whoa, this isn't the bill of goods that we've been sold.

And then what do they do? They changed out the police officer and it started all over again. When it was the protest here, the carbon tax protest on the east side of Lloyd, you know, there was, I don't know, was there 300 people there? Maybe. And they showed up with, I don't know, was it 30 cops, was it 50, I'm splitting hairs, and they were from anywhere but here. And you're like, they already have this tactic.

And by lowering the requirements and adding in all these different ethnicities and on and on and on into the military, we're going to have that force in the next. year or 10 that's going to be able to be enacted on our population and they're not going to care. Yeah, plus these texts have been in 1999, I believe 2000. In Quebec, I was running for my brother and we were minority partner by then with the largest event production company in Quebec. And we had a mandate we installed two big screen in Quebec City during the world commerce organization meeting. And there was a lot of protest there.

and we had our trailer, a production trader, to shoot what was happening in the wall because Quebec is, they closed the wall basically for the meeting of old Quebec. And we weren't in that production trailer and we had the Surtes, Quebec, the provincial police there. And they were looking at, we had camera looking at the crowd and they were spotting guys that they knew.

And then we had guys that we could send to make trouble, basically. So we're paying, I don't know, at the time, five, six guys, a thousand bucks a day. And the idea is that if you end up in jail, we keep on paying you a thousand bucks a day. And we're, so, so, so, so what, so when the crowd was getting a bit too excited

would send these guys, they would, they would then create havoc, and then the police will come with their, yeah, with their sticks and their big shield and their horses and tore everything, everybody out, you know? So, but, but yeah, it was the police that was calling the shot to do that. I don't know if we solved anything today.

Well, let me ask you this, Ben. How much do you think a private referendum would cost? Well, because I don't think there's going to be a governmental one. What do you mean by a private referendum first? I mean, where Canadians actually come and say, you know what, we're running a straw pole. ourselves. We'll have an auditor, a accounting firm to verify the signatures. You could use a blockchain voting mechanism to do that. And you actually took a straw poll across Western Canada, isolated Alberta, and opened it up for 10 days for a vote in terms of actually defined

questions. One of them would be... Do you want to separate or leave or independence? It's not going to be a three-minute read for that conversation. Because, you know, one of the implicit questions that's going on here in terms of this discussion about a referendum is does it need to be sponsored by the government? And I don't think it's going to be forthcoming by certainly the federal government. And I don't think now, from what I heard yesterday, from the Premier's office that it's going to be initiated here in Alberta. So there is a certain moral legitimacy to a properly run. canvassing of the province of Alberta to actually contribute to clarifying the people's position on this. And that's why I'm asking, how expensive would that be? And that's kind of the framework

that would start to support a discussion of what actually saying, you know, actually the people simply do want to be free because we don't want to live under tyranny. And we don't want to live under a mechanism that actually is making friends with tyrants for whatever reason. And one of the questions that I want to ask, it's probably a slightly controversial question, is, you know, is there an analogousness? Is there a comparison here to be made with the changes that we saw with Jason Kenney during COVID in relation to what we've seen with Premier Smith in relation to this position in the last 48 hours? I mean, it's a question. Well, and this is where Jeff Rath and what is doing with APP, right? Because we have a very special law here in Alberta that allow us

to trigger the population a referendum. The condition are very stringent to trigger that. But like that law doesn't exist in Quebec. In Quebec, when the government can trigger it. The population. So you need, I don't know what the number is. Well, that's the problem, though. The trigger is 600,000 signatures.

Yes. You know what I mean? Well, I thought it was 300,000. I don't think so. I thought it was 300,000 or 325 roughly in 90 days. Okay. That's the number that I've been told. That's a, that's a, that's a monument.

It's a monumental task. Like 400,000 people can change the government. You know what I mean? So if you're going to, you know, like, I, see, see Jason Kenny, to his credit, traveled the province in his, you know, blue halftown, you know what I mean? And when he was done, he said, oh, the people want, they want, they want, they want recall legislation.

Yeah. So he brought in recall legislation. And our, our wild rosalie recall legislation is 50% plus one of the people. people who voted in the last election. So if you're in a riding that has 15,000 votes, 7,500 people can, you know, trigger a recall of your elected official. Or in Merrick Gondek's case, I think it was, was it, 200, it was 287,000 people. Like there, they needed, like, there was a million people there,

so they needed 500,000 signatures or something to trigger recall under Jason Kenney's rules. But under our recall, where it was 50% plus one of the, the number of people have voted. I think it was 137,000 they needed. Well, they only got to 87,000, but if you only had to get to 137, you could have went to everybody and said, look, if everybody can find one more person, we can

get there. But see, can I just finish this thought before I lose it? See, I saw Tucker Carlson interviewing Donald Trump, and he said, whatever happened to Bill Barr? He said he had such impressive credentials. And Donald said he was so afraid of being impeached, which is their

version of recall, he was afraid to go out of his office. You know what I mean? And see, my friend says, you don't have to hang everybody, you just have to hang somebody and everybody pays attention. And see, one of the things that we find, and the reason our system doesn't work, like all these MLAs, they get elected, we have one, I love him. He's a dear friend of mine, you know what I mean? I'm going there to talk about CO2 and how the world needs more CO2, and I'm going to do that. Well, anyway, we're six years in, and everybody sort of knows that he wants to do something about CO2, What happens, and I was at the meeting when he told Jason Kenney you wanted to do that. Oh, yeah, when you're in caucus, you're welcome to say whatever you want.

But as soon as you're in caucus, say, well, I want to talk about CO2. Well, you could, but if you talk about that, then we'll be off message, and then you'll be hurting the government because you're getting us away from our message, which is true because Drew Barnes has mentioned CO2 a few times, and it ends up being about a one-week news story. But if you actually have recall, well, then the guy, when the premier says, well, if you say that, will be off message and then you won't be in caucus. Well, then the MLA can say, well, actually, if I don't say it, they're going to recall me and then you'll be losing a by-election in my area. So it sort of gives the people, whether they have it or not, it gives them sort of the backbone

to go and do something about some of these things. But going back to the referendum, like, you know, it's either, like even 300,000 signatures. But I can tell you, remember, was anybody involved in the oil respect petition? Like, I think it was in 2000, Was it in 2014, someone in Alberta started that oil respect member. I tried to phone today. Remember Bernard Hancock, the Roughneck? He was in Ottawa. Anyway, somebody started an oil respect campaign to respect Alberta Oil.

They were taking signatures in a petition. Bernard went with him. They delivered 34, 35,000 signatures to Ottawa. And then they just came back home. And we said, well, what do you do now? Yeah. Well, we delivered the petition. What do you want us to do?

You know what I mean? My guess is they were shredding the petitions before Bernard Hancock got back to his oil rig. You know what I mean? And so, but like to me, if we want to get people's attention, there's only one thing that actually gets elected people's attention. That's the thought that they might lose. And so like to me, I see, I get it, I've got, you know, 40-some thousand on read emails.

It's, you know, what am I at today? Yeah, well, I'm up to 50,000 on read emails. So if I haven't got back to your email, like, I apologize. But in any event, like, like, but to me, if you want to get, like, the thing that really gets the government's attention is when somebody says, well, if they don't do it, we won't do it. So here I'm going to make the pitch for our Wild Rose Party because, like, like, oil respect had 34,000 signatures. Nobody ever heard anything about it. But I can tell you, if 34,000 people in Alberta bought a Wild Rose Loyalty Coalition membership, like Danielle Smith wouldn't, like, she wouldn't be talking about her friends in Eastern Canada. anymore. She'd be talking about

a good friend up for it. Mike, yeah. No, she'd be talking about what do we have to, she'd be talking to all our MLAs saying, well, how many of those memberships got sold in your area? What do we have to do to get them back on side? So, you know, there's some things we can do here. But like just always saying, oh, yeah, like we love, you know, we love the UCP government.

We hope they're going to fix it. Sometimes you need somebody to the right of them saying, we'll do this. Well, I would argue that I don't know if I'm bang on this you guys have all been staring at it too but pierre pulleyev i can pick on him for a bit yeah if he thinks it's in his best interest he'll say it which means he's monitoring public opinion and when you said how much would it cost to do a straw poll to me that's interesting because i think daniel obviously would be paying attention to that and if all of a sudden you know every

you know when i when i get in these political circles one of the things i i always you know you go to a you go to a town hall and there's 25 people there and okay and you're like oh this is weird why is nobody here and then you put on an event the first one ever did and I had 250 no 270 people I had political people coming up to me how'd you do this I don't know I talk about real things that people care about and they want it they want to hear this stuff you have an honest conversation it's funny when when you start talking about things and you lose the censorship muzzle of like we can't talk about certain topics because if we do that people actually show up yeah and so I look at the straw poll thing and I go guys we can see

sit here and talk about things 10 years from now but if carney gets in this conversation goes supersonic which means if you go back to 2019 when uh the guy with the wexit group went from whether the numbers right or not it went from one person to 100,000 overnight the facebook group right yeah yeah and the reason why i know that wasn't all BS is because i showed up to lloyd where probably two to 300 people all showed up to listen to him talk. Yep. And we are staring down. Peter Downing, his name was, yeah.

And then he said he was going to be the leader and lost everybody. That is my recollection of that because I remember being like, this is interesting. I'm interested. This time could be coming in the next month. And you go, a straw, pull. Daniel Smith can say whatever she wants. But if 200,000, 400,000, however many 100,000 it is, see what Carney is doing. and overnight start voicing that,

she's proven, she's changed her thought. You know, she ran in the debate with, um, uh, Ezra Levant and Dennis Modry, the APP event.

And she sat there and said, you know, I think when it comes to trans kids or, or that conversation, you know, we should have a, a teared approach and I'm, I'm butchering how she said it,

but the ideal be sound. K to six should never hear that. Seven to nine, you need, you know, the introductory to sex ed. And in high school, we need, to start talking about basically the trans stuff.

Well, she just went against everything she said by talking about we're going to remove a whole bunch from school and we're going to come. Why is that? Because parents stood up in mass and said no more of this. And so we're coming to a time, or at least it feels like from my standpoint, where I think town halls are going to be overflowing if Carney gets in because people are going to be back to, well, what can we do about it? And a straw poll, I'm curious.

Is that even possible? Is there a way you raise whatever the numbers? Is it a million? Is it 10 million? Where you could actually do a citizen-led poll to show that, listen, you know, whether it's 50%, maybe it's only 26%. But right now they're trying to act like it's 2%. Yeah, it is.

And it can be done. It can be done with blockchain. It can be done in a way that is verified to ID in terms of Alberta identity or driver's license or why. whatever. And that's why I asked the question about the cost of it, because it starts to become the moral authority that supports the legitimacy to support a petition to say, basically, we wish to self-determine. Grant, I think that's a really good idea. One of the things we do in the political polling, though,

is you can get some of these polling companies, they'll phone 5,000 people. It only costs 500 bucks. But you can do a pretty random survey. And you could do that and say, these three questions then say would you be interested in donating some money to do a like a real you know abacus poll you know by blockchain or whatever so you would you would like for i would say for two thousand dollars you could probably pull somewhere around four thousand to ten thousand people you know and get a pretty good random idea and let's just say it came in at you know 50 percent were quite interested 20 percent were sort of interested 10 percent no and then if one of the questions was would you be prepared to make a

a donation to whatever you want to call the group to actually do this on a larger basis that would have like would, you know, would cost a lot of money, but it would give us what you said. It would give us the moral authority to say, look, we did a legitimate poll. These are, these are voters, you know, 40% of them voted that they want to have a referendum on independence. You know what I mean? But again, like you said, one of the things that Danielle has backed down on, like before you have a referendum, on Independence, like one of the first things you need is you need your own Alberta police force. Yes.

Because you try and have a referendum on independence in Alberta with the Royal Canadian Mount of Police. It'll be like High River. They'll be walking down the street kicking in the doors of the people who are organized in the campaign. And so the first thing we need is our own police force, which, as you know, that was almost the first thing she backed down on. I guess she's sort of trying to bring that back a little bit with some sheriffs in one thing or another. But again, she backed down on her own pension plan, which, again, Again, I think any rational person that has looked at the pension plan said we should have our own.

You know what I mean? So why are we backing down on all these things? Yeah. Yeah. So, I mean, for me, I've done some preliminary research on what that would look like to do it. You're talking about the polling thing? Yeah. I know you're actually talking about a precursor that would be a primer for the polling.

So, you know, I've done a little bit of research on that. I'm not a techie in terms of how do you run a blockchain to do this. But I think that one of the things in terms of just doing a polling, it doesn't, you know, it's too small a sample to actually validate an argument for a legitimate proposition for self-determination. So you'd actually want to get to a position where you, where you, where you, where you, where you pulled. You actually, you actually ran a, you know, a vote that people validated their ability to vote by their, you know, Alberta driver's license. And it was audited. And it isn't subject to being dismissed because it's just a polling.

I agree. To me, it's an interesting thought. When it comes to tech and all that, I go, I laugh. I'm like, we got brilliant people in this province. That's right. I'm sure that they can figure it out very quickly. The main problem is always coming out to money and how money is managed with political party and with the director of election.

no so so if you want to do everything above board um good luck because then because that well i mean well it the system is not a political party so ben what i well but yes but but if you this is exactly what what david parker got got found guilty of with with db a is that he was involved in their political discussion sorry and that automatically automatically limits you to 135 000 maximum that can apply to a certain cause. So now what you have to do is actually create a constellation of...

Well, the Alberta Prosper... The Alberta Prosperty Project could do that, though. Like, I mean, they could do this kind of a poll. See, the rules are a lot different in the six months. Rachel Notley brought in really stringent rules in the six months prior, and maybe even in the year prior to an election.

Like, and you can't hardly say anything without, you know... But I think the Alberta Prosperity Project, or some of these groups, the Free Alberta Strategy, the action, is it who's the one that Josh Andrus Project Confederation? Some of those that are just, I mean, they could, they could, I think you could do it through them. They would have the right to do it. Say we're doing a reader survey. Candice Malcolm could do it through True North or I guess she's with, is she with Keene Bexty now or something? Yeah, yeah.

Juno knows. Are you saying, like, I'm just, forgive me, this is where I, I'm like the new guy at the table. I'm like, so Sean Newman goes, listen, I'm going to invest in this technology. It's going to cost me a million dollars. I'm going to do whatever I've got to do to make that happen.

And then I'm going to put it out to the Alberta population that you're saying I could be fine for doing that? Oh, yeah. If you intervene in the political realm. But how am I interviewing? I'm trying to gauge my fellow citizens. This is where you need very good lawyer. But I think, Ben, that's the difference.

I mean, David Parker was running that as a lobbyist group that became political. different, I think, for a business, right? Wouldn't it be? Well, I mean, a private business that would... What David Parker got in trouble for was saying, like, call us, we'll pay your registration to go to the convention. You're not allowed to do that.

You know what I mean? But, I mean, like, I mean, Abiscus does polling every day. I mean, we could set up, you know, Grant and Dan's polling company, and we could do it through our polling company. You could have a polling company. You could have a polling company. You could do it. But it's a matter of convincing people to raise.

the money. But as this thing grows, I think, I like your, like, it gives you a lot of credibility. And if you, you could actually say, like, it gives you legitimacy. Yes. Yeah, exactly. And I mean, and maybe if someone were doing this cleverly, they might run in the U.S. with an audited system. Well, again, this is illegal. You cannot know, you cannot bring money from foreign money. It's the same as the Chinese. It would because of foreign interference. It wouldn't be foreign money. It wouldn't be foreign money, Ben, because it would be run in the US and the the the data inputs would be um IDs from Alberta that populated yeah like I mean to get on X now to become a paid whatever it is the blue

check mark you got to have your driver's license like this isn't you know everybody gets freaked out but yes absolutely well so you you go like oh this can't happen I'm like the technology is all around us yeah yeah and it's in and and under the wrong hands it is absolutely going to suffocate us all. Yeah. And we'll have some form of social credit score where you can only go so far and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Well, that's true.

But under this idea, it's like, what I willingly submit my driver's license to have a vote in a straw man poll that could signal to the government, hey, there's like 44% of people. And it was $1.2 million that voted in it. Because the, if I've learned anything, from any anything

specifically politics is you need the bar to be a part of this so low that anyone can just sit at home and do it take a scam boom I'm in I vote I'm a burden great here it is so call Elon he'd probably facilitate it you're absolutely right and you mentioned like social credit scores

like if Carney gets in we'll be looking at social credit scores well that's what I mean we're looking down the barrel of a gun and acting like yeah well you know we got to do this we got to do that I'm like I'm watching this. I got some choice words rolling in my head and I'll keep it to myself. This guy has admitted he's a globalist. He's tied to the web.

He's tied to everything we don't want. And we're sitting here talking like, well, you know, if you do it this way, they could come out. It's like, I don't know, are we in more or we aren't anymore? I look at the liberal party and what it stands for and what it's trying to do to our country. And I go, I guess I've drawn a line in the sand. And I'm like, I can't have them come any more into my. my life. I can't have them destroy this place that I call home. And at some point, the citizens either are going to wake up or they're not. And if they're not, that's fine. Maybe that's just

signaling where people like us are eventually going to have to go. The other hand is like, well, if the bar to just get in and have your vote heard or have your opinion heard in Alberta is the cable on the floor, it's like people can't see it. But literally, I can just walk over it. It's almost like, well, that was it. And I can do it from my home. And we could have this poll and you go, well, what would Daniel Smith do with it? Well, I tell you what all of media would do with it, they'd have to talk about it. If it's five people, they're not

going to talk about it. If it's 50,000, they're going to talk about it. If it's 500,000, they're really going to talk about it. Because they're not going to be able to turn away from it. The problem with the referendum, we've already talked about how many hundreds of thousands of signatures you need to get in a time frame, and then you've got to give it to the government,

and then they've got to act like they're going to do something with it, and like, I'm hard on the government, any politics, because Everybody just lets me down over and over again. How much money did we spend on our, like Jason Kinney came up with that on the equalization, like the referendum on equalization? 72% of the, like we all, like he got elected on doing something about equalization, and then he didn't do anything.

When people started getting mad, by his own admission, he stayed up all night, you know, writing his speech to say that he was creating the Fair Deal panel that we're going to travel around to see if we still wanted to do what we elected them to do. And you think, well, yeah, like we didn't change. It was you that changed. Like, we elect you to do that. Now, a year later, you're staying up all night. We don't need a panel.

We don't need five years to get this. The technology is sitting all around us. So then we vote. Then we vote, 72% want to do something about it. So then he writes three sternly worded letters to Trudeau, and that's the end of it. Then we move on to something else. You think, like, it's disgraceful.

Like Victor Davis Hanson on Fox News, he said, we are increasingly being governed by people who have never studied anything in their life except how to get elected. And what Jason did was pretty clever getting elected. You know, you promised to do this. When the people started getting mad, you haven't done it. Well, you promised to do it again, and you actually start doing something that looks like you're going to do it.

And then you have a vote. Then you write a letter. And then you just change to something else and move on to something else. You know what I mean? But again, he never really did one thing as far as actually getting it changed. You know what I mean? Yeah. That referendum was a joke anyway.

Of course it was. I mean, he applied it. First, there's no campaign around it. He applied it during a municipal election, which is the last. less participation you can get. And then he put another question about the change of time. Like, you have that? What?

So you want me to know equalization and do we buy blue shirt, no? These are the two questions. Like what? I mean. But you guys, like, I know Grant, I would say you've stared at politics longer and you've pointed out to me in coffee before this. I haven't actually been in there that long. But I'm staring at two guys who've spent their life around politics.

I don't know why this surprised you anymore. I've been staring at this now for four years. They're doing the same thing over and over again, and we expect a different outcome. They're telling us where they're leading us. And it's about time we just said, okay, well, the ability to disrupt the system is right here and elsewhere. And the technology to do something about it is there. The appetite for it, if Pierre gets elected in a month's time, three months time, whatever, I think it dies down.

Like I've said that lot. I think it just dampens down. if he doesn't in the in the short term if carney stays in he waits till october he waits till 2026 he does anything in that this only the conversation only heats up more yeah yeah and you we can sit and just talk in circles sure but like at the end of the day we're like well it's gonna cost money it's like okay well the freedom convoy look at how much money it raised in a short period of time why because people were upset with what their government is doing to them because And I would say that sentiment is coming back.

And it kind of shocks me. It shocks even me how I'm talking right now because I'm like, I thought for sure I could see the path that was kind of being laid out. And the apple card has just been thrown over. And I think more and more Canadians, specifically Albertans, are starting to see it. The blanket, as you pointed out, has been pulled off. It's like, what is going on? You know, this conversation in relation to even your hypothesis there about if Polyev wins.

I mean, Polyev right now is contending for Ontario because all the red Tories and blue liberals are shifting towards Kearni. And what is he basically saying? He's pandering to Ontario and Quebec, as always happens, and we've watched all our lifetime. And he's telling Albertans that he's going to continue with equalization payments. So in other words, Albertans, you're going to pay for the continuation of this dysfunctional system. And so this is where Albertans really need to wake up and say we really need to change our federal perspective. And I don't apologize for actually talking politics on this issue because we actually need value propositions and start dealing with root issues in this country. And it needs to be in a way that displaces the tyranny that is destroying our nation.

And right now, retaliatory tariffs and globalist thinking is what is destroying our nation. I want the people of Canada to be free. I want my grandchildren to be free. And it starts here in Alberta. That's it. I would love to keep this going. But one of the things I did not see coming today was the construction zone that is just outside the studio. I can hear it's starting to pick up again.

The truth is he just got a text from his wife. I can tell them too if I stay here too long. But I appreciate you guys coming in and doing this because I think this is a discussion that isn't going away anytime soon. and I know from for me to the listener it's something that I'm going to be bringing on different Albertans to add to this discussion because I think the answer lies there with us we just have to start talking about it and once we start talking about it the conversation is going to naturally bubble the pressure isn't going away from the federal government it isn't going away from politics and if we don't talk about it now we're going to get caught flat-footed when it does

happen and then everybody's going to be going well what should we be doing well we should have been talking about it so that's what we're starting here today and I'm going to end it there because I know I can see everybody saying, let me give me well as far it, but I can hear it in the background. And I appreciate you guys coming in and doing this. And look forward to having you back on at some point to continue it on. And it went surprisingly well with the Quebecer here. Thanks gentlemen.

Thanks gentlemen for hopping in.