The Ben Mulroney Show - Best of the Week Part 5 - Candice Bergen, Marcel Wieder, Tom Parkin

Episode Date: May 11, 2025

Best of the Week Part 5 - Candice Bergen, Marcel Wieder, Tom Parkin Guests: Candice Bergen, Marcel Wieder, Tom Parkin, Ian Lee, Adam Zivo, David Bradley If you enjoyed the podcast, tell a friend! For more of the Ben Mulroney Show, subscribe to the podcast! https://globalnews.ca/national/program/the-ben-mulroney-show Follow Ben on Twitter/X at https://x.com/BenMulroney Enjoy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Podcasts are great because they help us make the most out of our routine. We learn about the fall of the Ottoman Empire while we drive, keep up with news while we take the dog for a walk, or turn folding laundry into a comedy show. Make the most out of your time with the PC Insider's World's Elite MasterCard, a credit card that can get you unlimited free grocery delivery and the most PC optimum points on everyday purchases. The PC Insider's World's Elite MasterCard. The card for living unlimited.

Conditions apply to all benefits. Visit PCFinancial.ca for details. Uh, excuse me. Why are you walking so close behind me? Well, you're a tall guy. You throw a decent shadow and I'm walking in it to keep out of this bright sun. It hurts my eyes.

Okay, well you know what, spec savers, you can get two pairs of glasses from $149 and oh you'll like this, one can be a pair of prescription sunglasses. Sounds great! Where's the nearest store? Not far, come on. Let's hurry then! To my count!

One, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one,

one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one, two, one Welcome to the Ben Mulroney Show Best of the Week podcast. We had so many great discussions this week, including a comprehensive look at what the trade strategy should be for Canada dealing with the US. Plus the panel was really good. Enjoy. Back to the Friday edition of the Ben Mulroney Show and it's Friday, which means it's time for our This Week in Politics panel. Today we're joined by Candice Bergen,

former leader of the Conservative Party and MP, as well as Marcel Weider, liberal strategist and president and chief advocate of Aurora Strategy Global, and in full disclosure, I have a business relationship, as well as a friendship with Marcel and Aurora, and Tom Parkin, principal at Impact Strategies and Canadian columnist and commentator. Welcome to all three of you. Thank you. Hi Ben. Candice, ladies first today, there's a story that I'll believe it when I see it, according to the US ambassador to Canada, quote, it's done. No more talk of the 51st state. I

do not believe that anyone in their right mind is capable of saying that about anything to do with Donald Trump. Yes, I can't believe anybody would have the chutzpah to try to predict what Donald Trump may or may not say at any given time. I think Donald Trump will keep using it when he thinks it will help him. Helping him might just mean he needs something and a little more attention at

some point in the States with the people he's talking to there. It could be when he senses some weakness in something that we're doing or our approach to him. So, you know, I think it definitely could pop up again. We might not see it for a while, but we definitely could see it again. There's no doubt. Marcel, we've got to be open to the possibility of good things with any new government, right?

It's a blank slate. So let's acknowledge that the tone has changed, right? It's not the tone of the past, but tone doesn't fix the economy, right? Right, but what we've seen is that at least the president and the prime minister have both been civil in terms of their discourse, and now it's going into the back rooms and beating each other up over what this deal is going to look like. Tom, you know, I watched with bated breath what happened in Washington and very happy, you know, sort of in that moment to see respect being offered to our leader. But it does, it did make me think that the bar was set pretty low.

The fact that the president wasn't insulting our prime minister and we take that as a win. Yeah, that's not a win. 9 10ths of an iceberg is underwater. So let's just remember that. Mr. Trump is not lifted the tariffs on Canada, on Canadian jobs, on Canadian products. He hasn't respected our trade deal. All this is still working.

And there's a live question, I think it's important. I think it's a fair debate for us Canadians to have is how swiftly should we try and negotiate with this man? If you listen to the European financial press, they are really of the opinion that the capital that was in the United States is moving to them. It's their finance capital in Europe. It's their turn now. The US dollar is down against the euro. Your stock exchanges are down while the DAX, the FITC are up.

Interest rates in the United States went up. They're stable, good in Europe. They figure they are the safe haven for money now. It's not just that people are moving out of US stocks and US bonds. They're moving out of US dollars. So I think we underestimate this point here and it may lead us to the conclusion we want a quick deal rather than be a little bit patient and watch whether the United States and Mr. Trump's policies are actually putting him in a corner and making his position weaker.

I think it's a good debate to be had. Well, that's gonna be my next question. I wanna stick with this conversation. And thank you for bringing that up, Tom. Because, Candice, the conservatives have signaled that they, at least on big issues like trade and Canada's competitiveness, for example, they're willing to work with this new Carney government.

But the question is, when and how do we negotiate on a trade deal? Yesterday, I had David Frum on the show suggesting that we might want to slow play it and wait until he feels the pressure of the midterms where he's not necessarily emboldened still by his win. But then on the other side, you have Ian Lee, the economist who is just on the show, who said that he appreciates that instinct, but these tariffs are going to hit us hard and fast and we may want to get out of out from under it as quick as possible. What would you recommend to the Conservative Party to support? Well, I think the fact is we do need the Americans and we do want to keep that relationship going.

Now I think and to Tom's point, if Mark Carney can sort of slow roll the trade agreement but simultaneously move forward very quickly on getting energy infrastructure built, so not just talk about it, but actually say here's how I'm going to get around C69, here's how I'm going to get around the emissions cap, here's how I'm going to get around the tanker band, because we're talking about

money, and although there may be some indication that there's money going to Europe, I can tell you, the money people are saying we're not coming money and although you know there may be some indication that there's money going to Europe I can tell you the money people are saying we're not coming to Canada until these things change because we just we don't want the same thing that happened over the last 10 years so I agree we could slow roll if we ensure that we have these kind of new processes in place so things can get built and so we have some strength. But at the end of the day, Ben, we need the Americans. We want to continue that relationship and so to say we don't need it, we can just do it with the Europeans or the Asians. I don't think it's factual. Marcel, in the spirit of bipartisanship, if the Conservatives are willing to work with the

Liberals, you know, there could be some good ideas coming from that side of the aisle in terms of how to deal with this threat and whether to deal with it now or push it down the push down the field just just long enough to weaken Donald Trump's bargaining position. Well, I think you saw during the election that Mark Carney and the liberals were prepared to use some of the same language that the conservatives talked about. Also, so I think there is an opportunity for bipartisanship in this regard. But I also think you'll get a sense on the throne speech when His Majesty delivers it on the 27th, what the game plan is going to look like in terms of how we move forward on energy

as Candice pointed out and on trade issues as well. And there's also another issue in terms of, you know, inter-provincial trade that's critical to Canada being able to have some wiggle room, as it were, in terms of dealing with the US. So if we have that aspect and a number of premiers, Ford, Houston, and others, have all the signal that they are prepared to drop the interprovincial barriers, that could help spike our economy.

Well, Tom, to bring it back again to my conversation with Ian Lee in the previous segment, one of the biggest sticking points that Donald Trump has always had with Canada has been access to our dairy market. And Mark Carney was very clear that supply management is not negotiable. It's it's not on the table for negotiation. Are we cutting ourselves off at the knees before the negotiation even begins on something that look, it's important to some people, but is it a national issue that should I mean, should we throw the baby out with the bath

water? Well, I think it's a bad idea to start negotiating before the negotiations. So everybody should and I also frankly I think it's a little bit of a bad idea to take a stand about whether we should go fast or whether we should go slow on these negotiations. I think it's a question of looking how markets are responding to Mr. Trump, looking at how American democracy is responding to Mr. Trump, and modulating the response as we go along. If you've ever been through, I've worked in the labor movement, but I've also been a manager in the labor movement, and I've negotiated deals. There's sometimes you want to do it fast, everybody's in agreement, let's do it. Sometimes you want to wait for

the pressure to build on one side or the other. And then you just got to listen. And I think that's really important. Just to make one more point, there's a very, but there's a point that's being lost on the energy debate. The West Texas International is like $58 right now. The Alberta budget assumed it was gonna be at 68, which it was before liberation day, so 70. So there's an enormous hole being torn in the Alberta budget, provincial budget. I mean, that's 25% of their income.

And it really puts into question some of the investment that Canada would be looking for. So it's a huge challenge posed by Mr. Trump to our oil sectors. I'm not sure how we get out of that. Well, Candice Bergen, Mark Carney wanted the job. He said he was the guy to do it. He said he came back. He's a man built for a crisis. So I wouldn't want the job, but he really wanted it and he got it. So before we go to break, give me some advice that you might have for the new prime minister. Well, first of all, I have to laugh because Tom, if I didn't know better, I think Tom was a politician the way he avoided your question

about supply management. But good on you, Tom. Listen, I would tell, I would encourage Mark Carney to keep doing what he has been doing, and that is adopt conservative policy, you know, truthfully. And premier CEOs have asked for this. A number of CEOs over the last several months have asked. Again, I'm going to go back to this because it's so vital. I think this energy, and not just energy, but infrastructure across the country is thwarted by things like Bill C-69, the tanker ban,

the emissions cap, the greenwashing bill. And I mean, I know it's a huge turnaround, but he shows he has the capacity to do it. He threw out the car attack. Candice, I'm going to cut you off, but I'm going to take your point, because after the break, we're going to talk about the end result of all of that,

which is a rise in separation in the West and what that means for our country moving forward. Don't go anywhere. The Ben Mulroney Show continues. Welcome back to the Ben Mulroney Show, and welcome back to my This Week in Politics panel, Candice Bergen, Marcel Weider, and Tom Parkin. We're going to cast our eyes to the West, Marcel, because there is a new poll that asks people in Alberta and Saskatchewan, would

you vote for your province to leave Canada or to stay? And a massive number, 52% in Alberta, said they definitely would vote to stay. Saskatchewan said 49%, but the numbers are still, they're still in the realm of concerning and troubling. Now we know that Danielle Smith, I mean, my words, is playing with fire here by, it feels like she's supercharging something that doesn't need any help. But I kind of understand why she might do it to help to get Alberta a better deal in confederation.

What say you, my friend? Well, I think what she's done is she's taken a page out of René Lavec's book and said basically, you know, we're going to play the separation card. Ottawa, you give into our demands. And that's a playbook that successive block and PQ leaders have used against the federal government. And so she's using this to distract

from her own internal issues. You know, as Tom pointed out, they've got a hole in their budget, they've got an issue with the Alberta Health Services and a number of other things. So playing the separation card distracts from all of these and therefore she's using this as a way of getting around it. Yeah, Candice, I've said on the show, if you don't want your car to get stolen, you don't

leave the keys in the ignition and you don't put a sign over your car that says, I'm here for the taking. And it feels like Danielle Smith may be playing that a little bit. I mean, if you're a Federalist, then you fight tooth and nail to ensure that separatists don't take hold in your region. Well, I probably would look at it a different way. I see it more as a bad marriage where one partner has said, I've had enough of you abusing me, gaslighting me,

and spending all of my hard earned money. And I don't want the family to break up. I love the family. I want the family together because we can do so much together. At some point, the one partner has to acknowledge, okay, I hear what you're saying and we need to fix it. Yeah.

And I see what Danielle is doing and I hear what Marcel, you know, it is, could be a negotiating ploy. But she also, if she just puts her, you know, thumbs in her ears and says, la la la la, it's okay. I'm not listening to you, separatist. It's going to be a big political problem for her in Alberta. So she is better to acknowledge, because these people, there's a lot of people who are very credible, they're smart, they want the country to stay together, but they are incredibly unhappy.

And so to just ignore it and say, what's wrong with you? I think we're happy, so shut up. We'll help nobody. And she recognizes that. Candace, I actually agree with everything you said, but I take issue with the lowering of the threshold to trigger one of these referenda. That's a way to get it over.

Like let's get this over with. Right. You know, it's a way for her to say, and maybe, maybe it is a negotiating ploy, but this is on the hearts and minds of people right now. Very strongly. Yeah, no, I get that in the last election. The West is feeling this deeply. And in light of, I, if Mark Carney quickly quickly moves and says we're going to get pipelines built, this could go away so quickly. Yeah. And Tom, Tom, this is going to build Tom,

I think therein lies the rub. I mean, if it's a gamble for sure, in my opinion, a big gamble, but it could pay off for her by painting Mark Carney into a corner to make sure that the onus is on him to do what the West wants for a change. What do you say to that? Yeah, he may make some of those changes to help calm some waters. But I think frankly, it's Scott Moe and Daniel Smith who are being painted into the corner.

There, I mean, Ms. Smith was completely transparent about it, just with it yesterday, when she said, well, gosh, you know, if I don't kind of encourage the separatism, the separatists in my party will split off and form another party and then the UCP will lose. So she's the one who's being painted into the corner. And if you watch what, I mean, the Alberta NDP and the Heedenshi had a very successful convention on the weekend. You watch Carla Beck in Saskatchewan, who came really from nowhere, a very appealing person to come very close to beating Scott Moe last time.

I'd be looking at those guys and what are they doing? They're very much concentrated on Canadian patriotism. We'll just watch their Twitter feed, see what they do in the news. Canadian patriotism, building an economy for their provinces in partnership and through trust, not this war game kind of attitude. So I think they better be careful what they're playing with because at some point a lot of, and I used to live in Western County, Regina. So I know the mood and I, I go out there again, another month,

my daughter lives there, but I know the mood. I know how, how it's, it's playing and it is not playing all for Daniel Smith. I think she's, I think she's in real putting herself on a real jackpot. So her friends would put her in a jackpot. Tom, I'm going to come back to you. I'm going to ask you the next question first, because it's about the NDP and sort of where it finds itself today. We said we would talk about it after the election.

Here we are. I did not expect the NDP to lose official party status, and now we hear that the federal NDP will not be able to rely on campaign reimbursements from Election Canada to fill its coffers after its worst ever election result. It's already not a party that raises money at the clip that the liberals are certainly not the conservatives. I'm just going to give you a broad question here. What's the party to do?

Well, the federal NDP has come back from incidents like this before. In 1993, it was pretty much the same deal. Elected less than official status in, I think, something like 7% of the vote. But they did a little better in 1997 and then kind of fell back 2000, still rough. But then by 2011, they were official opposition with 102 seats and 30% votes. So how do you get from here to there and what are the barriers? Well, unlike that time back in 93, there is no internal division. I mean, there was open warfare within the NDP about people concerned about Bob Ray and what the whole show that he'd left behind, people concerned about Roy Romo running

Saskatchewan cleaning up the divine mess yes but at the price of health care cuts so there's that and I only have a little bit of time left so I want to I want to give that the mic to Candice you know because it seems to me the one of the biggest differences Candice is this is a party that at least to an outside observer has turned its back on the worker in favor of a war happening half a world away. And to me, with no money and no prospect of making money, maybe those who truly believe in sort of the democratic socialism should start a new party. Well, I'm going to speak to my experience working really closely with the NDP over the last 10 years,

especially in opposition, because I was a house leader for a large part of that. I worked with NDP, good people, nice people, I don't find them to be really smart politically. There were even some things they would do internally around question period where it

was less strategic and kind of more, everybody gets their turn, which doesn't work when you have a short period of time to try to make your point on the government. Then when they made their deal with the Liberals, we obviously criticized it. In my mind, there was so much more they could have done with it, including, I think we all agree, Jagmeet Singh should have brought the government down back in December, November, and he probably would be the leader of the opposition right now. So whoever is advising them and whoever their leader is, you know, when Jack Layton was their leader, obviously they were very strong, there was some political acumen.

But I think they need to regroup and maybe get some new advisors and maybe some provincial NDP because as Tom said, some of the provincial NDP are doing much better than the federal NDP. But they better figure it out because I mean, if their goal was to beat conservatives, they sure did that, but they put themselves into oblivion. If their goal is to have some relevance in the House of Commons, they've got to change their strategy. They've got to be much more politically astute. And you know, I would advise them, you have to go after the liberals and you have to go after them hard. All right, Marcel, the last 45 seconds to you. All right. Well, I appreciate Tom's history lesson, but the reality is that times have changed.

You can't rely on union contributions as you did back in 93 to rebuild the party. It's going to be very difficult. Who wants to give money today to a party that doesn't have a status in the House? Listen, as a liberal, I experienced that provincially in Ontario. Two times we were knocked out and it certainly made a difference. Now we have party status. We have the resources to rebuild the party, which the leader, Bonnie Cromby, is doing. And we're now going to be in fighting shape. Yes, we're not the official opposition, but we had the most number of votes gained and most number of seats gained. So I see that as what's going to happen.

All right. Well, thank you very much to all three of you. I appreciate it. Have a great weekend and we'll see you next week. In the next few minutes, we really want to spend some time focusing on the Canada US relationship and how it may translate into improved economics, an economic situation north of the border. Or not. We don't know. Here is a little bit of audio, an update from the Governor of the Bank of Canada, Tiff Macklem, talking about what the impact of a prolonged trade war would be on the Canadian economy. In the near term, the unpredictability of U.S. trade policy could cause further market volatility and strains on liquidity.

In an extreme case, market volatility could turn into market dysfunction. In the medium term, a prolonged global trade war would have severe economic consequences. It would reduce growth and increase unemployment. This could in turn have important ramifications for the financial system. With debt still at high levels, some households and businesses may be unable to keep up with payments. If loan losses occur on a large enough scale,

banks could cut back on lending in response. This would exacerbate the economic downturn and put more pressure on businesses and households. Well that sounds super. Here to talk about it with us is Ian Lee, the associate professor at Carleton University at the Sprott School of Business. Ian, welcome to the show. Thanks very much for inviting me, Ben. That sounds that sounds chilling.

What Tiff Macklem just said. It is, it is for a bunch of reasons. First off, we're about one 12th the size of the U S you know, all this talk about, you know, elbows up as if we're the same size in a hockey game as the other player. We are $2.3 trillion. They're $ trillion dollars. They're so enormously larger than we are. The idea that we're equal, that we can stand up and, you know, beat the billy bully and defeat them is just beyond delusional. It truly is delusional. The Bank

of Kent has said so, not only yesterday, but in past speeches in the last 90 days that we have an asymmetric relationship just a fancy word for saying they're big and we're small and we're gonna get hit much harder from any tariffs whether they be initiated by Trump or retaliatory on our side. So what I've concluded as you know because we've talked about this before I don't believe that trying to quote, stand up to the bully and elbows up and let's put a retaliatory tariffs on Canadians to whack Donald Trump, I don't think that's the way to go.

That's just gonna cause more suffering and a greater, faster decline in our standard of living. So, Ian, I'd love to, before we move on to a question I have for you, I saw that you wrote a really great piece on the hub.ca said the Trump Carney standoff and why Canada must face hard truths on trade. So a couple of questions for you. What are those hard truths? And how quickly must we face them? Yeah. Well, the second question first, I think we have to face the mic, how about the budget or the

fall? Sorry,... speech for the front uh... the globe said this today i wrote that article two days ago in the globe's peace today i mean i'm not kidding you i thought all my goodness i could have offered the globe peace because they're saying something very very similar but that i'm not trying to say that to legitimize it and just simply saying we have very very tough decisions ok we got to do it right away what are they well first off

uh... all of our uh... parties unfortunately are still a clean to this idea that we can support for example supply management which protects eight thousand five hundred uh... dairy farmers mostly in eastern ontario where i grew up the boy and in come back a more in come back to the strontium but doesn't matter the supply management i've written papers on this and other people have, it exploits 40 million Canadians with prices that are approximately double for the milk and the dairy and the eggs. That's what supply management does, it's protectionism to protect these 8,500

dairy farmers who, StatsCan says, are multi-millionaires, mostly because of the land value. And we know that this is number one of number one at the top of the list of what's driving Donald Trump crazy. And so we've got to look at those protected industries and and say are they protecting us? I've been arguing for years by the way just very quickly that protectionism is an Orwellian term for exploitation. When you protect, what are you doing? Keeping out foreign competition like the telecom industry. So what do they do? Drive the prices up. That's what classic oligopolist or monopolist does. Keep out the competition. Hey, I can stick it to you with

price increases. So that's one thing we got to do. And secondly, Ben, I really want to get this out and I realize that people in southern Ontario especially are really not going to be happy. I think we have to at least start to discuss that we may be losing the auto industry. The one thing he's been consistent on literally for 10 years is about the unfairness of the auto industry and Canada selling all those cars to the states. And he has never wavered on that. And he's also said, I'm not backing down the 25% tariffs. Well, the CEOs of the auto industry

and former Prime Minister Trudeau have said publicly that if the tariffs aren't lifted, the auto industry in Canada is doomed. Well, he the auto industry tweeted, there's like Stellantis, I think, and GM, I think came out together. And and we're going to talk about the UK US trade deal in just a few minutes., but they were dismayed that he prioritized the selling of British-made cars in the US over American-made cars that may also have spent a little time in Canada. And I also heard Flavio Volpe a few days ago from the Auto Parts Association say that, look, one of the unintended consequences for Donald Trump, and it's maybe not unintended, he just hasn't thought about it, is these are American companies, even if it's a, even if GM has a plant in Canada, it's an American company. If that plant closes, it affects the bottom line of an American company. So who are you actually helping? You're helping Kia and Toyota, who happen to operate in the United States entirely, but they are, but they are Korean and Japanese car companies.

Ben, I'm with you completely. I'm not advocating what he's doing. Okay, listen. I am not advocating at all what Trump is doing. What I'm saying is if he does proceed because he sees us as low-hanging fruit, why? Because we're right next door. I mean, our plants are 45, 60, 70 minutes away from the U.S. border, whereas in the UK is like thousands of kilometers across the ocean. And so I think he sees it as low hanging fruit to bring back those jobs and make more cars in the rust belt, which is his base. You know, Ohio and Illinois, these are people that voted for him. This is where the Trump's base is.

But my point is, is that we've got to start, I believe, at least having a conversation of what is our plan B. If we do end up losing the auto industry, and it has been in decline for years, by the way, we're not producing the same number of cars we were 10 years ago. So it's been weak or weakening for years, but we are not talking about any serious plan B. No pivot. We don't have a pivot. No pivot. And we got a pivot to resort. This is what Australia did in the late 90s they exited autos and everyone said doom gloom they're going to decline today Australia is has higher average

income per person than Canada oh boy you know I want to I want to resources I want to spend a last little bit of time with you on this US UK trade deal because I had David Frum on the show yesterday who said there is no deal it's, it's an agreement to eventually have a deal. Yeah, I agree with him in the sense that there has been no written text that I can find that has been tabled and said here is the clause by clause document. So I agree it's more of an agreement to agree to do an agreement and it's vapor where it hasn't they may produce such an agreement but it's vaporware. They may produce such an agreement, but it hasn't materialized yet.

He also made a point that we may, as Canadians, want to slow play a deal with Donald Trump until closure to the midterms where he feels the pressure of the decisions he's made, possibly then negotiating with him from a weaker position. There's a trade-off there, and I understand a lot to completely avoid David David from is saying. And it's, it's very good logic.

The problem is this and, and I like it by the way, but the problem is this, that as those tears kick in, and I don't mean in six or 12 months, but in 30 days or 45 days or whatever, the offering is going to kick in right away. It's going to be have havoc on Southern Ontario. And it's not only the people directly employed because i know there's lots of people who think they will you know i don't work in the auto industry but there's such a multiplier and they have spin-off jobs you know and all the banks that deal with them and the rest of the shops and yeah yeah shop and so there's a huge multiplier there and it's going to be devastating and and so yes

we want to get the tears off the auto industry but we also i think that this is going to put pressure i hope enormous pressure on the prime minister to take all of those destructive policies that restricted the development of resources but imposed by the past the last government by gibbo and yeah well considered true to not being partisan at all and i thought't consult with the citizens whatsoever. I gotcha. Ian, we're gonna have to leave it there,

but thank you very much, my friend. Okay, thanks very much, Ben. Welcome back to the Ben Mulroney Show. Thank you so much for choosing to spend some time with us here on the show. We really appreciate it. We always appreciate what Adam Zivow makes time to join us and tell us what he's been working on.

He is a significant and very clear voice on what is going on in Ukraine as it relates to the war. And now with Donald Trump rising to become president again, you'll remember he promised that this would never have happened under him, and he was going to solve this conflict in a matter of days. Well, the conflict rages on. So here for an update on both of those fronts is Adam's Evo. Adam, thanks so much for joining us. Adam Foss Oh, thanks for having me on the show again. Jeff S Okay. So we've got Putin's Victory Day parade coming up. Before we get into the gist

of your article, what is Victory Day? Adam Foss Okay. So Victory Day commemorates the defeat of Nazi Germany and it's celebrated throughout Europe. In Western Europe, they celebrate on the eighth and in Eastern Europe, they celebrate on the ninth. And so during Soviet times, Victory Day was not actually that big of a big deal. So they would have a parade around every 20 years or so, but for the most part, there were just some solemn speeches. But then after the Soviet Union collapsed,

Boris Yeltsin revived the victory day parade in 1995, basically brought in a whole bunch of military hardware, had foreign dignitaries from all over the world come in, including from the West, and then made it an annual events. But it still was not overly significant up until 2008. So in 2008, Putin brings back the military hardware into the victory day parade, you know, fills it with tanks and other weapons And basically tells his government that this is not saber rattling and we're not going to attack anyone Well, lo and behold three months later. He invades georgia

So basically this parade portended the beginning or sorry the resurrection of russian militarism After that point, Victory Day became a jingoistic propaganda extravaganza. So year after year became more aggressive, more important and became central to Putin's cult of personality. When there were anti-government protests in Moscow in 2011 and 2012, the parade continued unabated and essentially provided a counter narrative saying that, hey, you know, the anti-government protesters bring chaos, we bring order and duty. So, right. So, so, so how does the Ukraine war and Russia's inability to win it in, in short order,

as was promised, how does that fit into the narrative that Putin's been trying to sell about victory day and the, and the sort of the sheer magnitude and force of the Russian military? Well, the thing is that after 2014, after Russia annexed Crimea and then launched its shadow invasion of Eastern Ukraine, Putin turned Victory Day into this, he basically said that we're fighting against the West, we're fighting against Ukraine. And he tried, he spent a lot of money creating this myth that Ukraine is filled with Nazis. Right, right. And try to essentially connect, bring back to being led by a Jew, but led by Nazis. Exactly. Right. You know, we're, we're the far right has never had more than two or 3% of the vote. So these are some very special Nazis, right? Um, and so he has this idea, he's trying to connect world war two back to his current

expansionism and reframe his aggressive foreign policy as a defensive existential struggle. And so after the full scale invasion of Ukraine, victory day was muted for a few years. They had like one tank, not so much because it was all sent to the front. But this year is the 80th anniversary of the defeat of Nazi Germany. So they went all out. You know, they have, I think about 10,000 troops in Moscow today. They brought in a whole bunch of tanks. And this is their big symbolic gesture to show that they are really committed to finishing through this war against Ukraine. and they asked Putin asked Ukraine for a three-day ceasefire saying hey, we're gonna unilaterally declare a three-day fire during the parade now

Keep of course said no, you know, we're not gonna just stop stop the war just so you can have your nice festivities And then ukraine sent hundreds of drones into russia over the course of this week including 19 drones at Moscow Those drones that were sent to Moscow all got shot down But they ended up shutting down all four of Moscow's airports for quite some time leading to 60,000 Passengers being delayed now now the significance here is that this kind of attack would have been unthinkable two, three years ago. Yeah. Right. What Russia was surrounding Kiev, no one thought that in a year or two or three years, people

would have to debate whether or not Moscow is going to get bombed by Ukraine. And now we have Putin asking Ukraine for a ceasefire to protect its parade. So I think this really reinforces the fact that Ukraine is more powerful than people assume. Yeah. And that it's able to continue to effectively resist Russian imperialism. Where are we in terms of sort of Trump's understanding of the dynamic between Ukraine and Russia? I mean, is are we still in a place where he's living in a in a fiction that Ukraine started this war? Are we still or is he finally seeing that this is a, you know, you can't

pick your allies and no ally is perfect and Ukraine certainly isn't perfect, but they are a democracy and they have an elected leader. Granted, they haven't had an election in a few years, but is he starting to see the light that maybe he was he, he assumed that the honest broker here was Putin and it should have been Zelensky? Yeah, I mean, I think he's certainly becoming more pro-Ukrainian recently, but I don't think that's because he has some renewed love for Zelensky. I think it's more so that he realizes that he's been played by Putin, which we all said was going to happen. You know, everyone that this is going to happen, you're a fool for trying to make this work. He ignored them.

And now he has egg on his face. And I think one of the main, like, you know, he was trying to negotiate this deal. He offered Russia a really sweet, you know, offering in terms of how to negotiate this war. He sent over, you know, Putin sent over a negotiator, did cough, who was very pro-Russian and the Russians still said no, right? And they gave these impossible demands. And I think that part of the turning point is that when they were in the middle of all of this, uh, Russia launched a huge bomb strike on Kiev. And that's when Trump made his infamous, you know, truth social post where he said, you know, Putin, no, don't do this,

which made him look really weak. Right? Yeah. Um, yeah. So I think now, now Trump is saying, I think he's become more hostile. I think his meeting with Zelensky, um, at the Pope's funeral center really helped. And so we're seeing a remarkable shift. And I do hope this continues because Russia is obviously not our ally. And we we're seeing a remarkable shift. And I do hope this continues because Russia is obviously not our ally. And we do have a strong interest in Ukraine's continued sovereignty. So, so how does this play out? I mean, listen, we, I'm not asking to predict the future of like a year from now, but you know, what, what do the, what do the next steps likely look like? Well, I mean, look, I don't think that I don't think that Putin's going to continue. He's not

going to stop. I mean, cause I think part of the reason why is not gonna stop is that if you do mobilizes the soldiers than you have hundreds of thousands of soldiers. Who return back home and feel frustrated by the fact that their economy is broken and they didn't really achieve much. I'm so i think you can keep on going i think that trump you know he's trying to say that we should have a 30-day ceasefire We'll see if that works But I think that if Ukraine continues to get you know the support that it needs and that includes increased support going forward That there's a chance that Russia could collapse at some point over the next few years because the Russian economy is stalling So they have high inflation which resulted in spending all of their reserves and they have high interest rates And so we're trying to starting to finally see the cracks in the Russian economy. So I don't think that they can continue doing this for much longer.

Yeah. And also like, let's, let's not forget that so many of, of the, the, so much of the opposition in Washington to Ukraine and the, and the continued funding of, of their, their military endeavors by way of American aid, as so much of that opposition comes from people who are just taking their marching orders from Donald Trump. And if Donald Trump were to do an about face, so would they. Yep, and I think the fact that they were able to negotiate

that mineral deal really helped things. I mean, that was signed. And thank God the final draft of that was actually fair in comparison to the predatory contract that Trump proposed back in January. And I think, you know, of course, that's another great sign. And let's also not forget, not for nothing, that Putin's got his Victory Day parade and and and and in Donald Trump looks like he wants to have a parade of his own. You know what? If that keeps him on slide with Ukraine, why not? Even in his parade, it's okay.

Yeah, absolutely. Well, listen, my friend, I want to thank you very much for always joining us. Very much appreciate your insights. This is the drama of the Ukraine-Russia war with the added supercharging of Donald Trump's mercurial position makes it so that we do need you to join us fairly routinely because the events, everything changes so very quickly. But we appreciate you. We hope you have a wonderful, wonderful weekend. Thank you. You too.

Welcome back to The Ben Mulroney Show and it's time for one of my favorite segments of the week. This segment keeps getting a ton of love on the podcast. It's one of the most downloaded segments that we do and ever since Dave Bradley was folded into the segment, it's added a layer of gravitas that I just am not able to provide despite my deepening baritone. If you're sensitive to adult language, I'm just warning you, it gets saucy and spicy during this segment. So you can either turn down the radio, you can go take a walk, or you can clutch your pearls and deal with it. Your choice. So some of the clips are going to play have colorful language, you know that. With that being said, it is time to play. Is this BS? Or is this real? See now that's some bullshit.

This is bullshit. Man this is some bullshit! You want answers? I think I'm entitled. You want answers? I want the truth! You can't handle the truth! You are fake news. Alright so I want you to play along at home. There aren't many guarantees in life but if you play along at home with me I can almost guarantee that you will do better than I do because I tend to do

horrible I talk myself out of the right answer because I think I'm being so smart and so I changed my mind doubt my gut instincts and I end up on the losing end of this game Dave are you ready to take us away I am ready let's do this this is an incident that is going to give academics and comedians some pretty good jokes. Harvard University returned a formal letter from U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon with extensive grammatical corrections, comments, and a suggested rewrite. The letter, intended as an official statement on cutting funding to the institution, was sent to university leadership last week. However, Dr. Emily Chow, the chair of the Department of English, proofread the letter and marked

it up before the school posted it to the HarvardX page. The school returned the letter with over 130 track changes, a style guide, and a post-it note reading, we recommend remedial writing support. The Late Night Show is going to have a field day with this one on the weekend. All right. There is no way this is real. They're trying to save their federal funding and they're going to insult the gatekeeper to that money. No freaking way. This is BS. That's what I think. What do you think at home? Lock in your answer. Is it BS or is it real?

See, now that's some bullshit. Knew it! Knew it! See, you know what that one was, Dave? That was you trying to play off of the stereotypes of hoity-toity Harvard. And you know that I have not been on the side of Harvard as it relates to their allowing the festering of anti-Semitism on their campus. And so you're playing on that. But I saw through you. I saw through your ruse. But you thought deep on that one. No, no, my gut instinct was they want their money. They are going to play nice as best they can. All right, let's move on to story number two.

A man who was shot dead three years ago in a road rage incident appeared, sort of, at his killer sentencing with a message from beyond the grave all thanks to AI. Chris Pelkey is a lifelong resident of Upstate New York he was gunned down in 2021 at the age of 37 yet at a state courthouse this week a digitally regenerated version of Pelkey spoke to the man who took his life to Gabriel Horcacitas the man shot me, it is a shame we encountered each other that day in those circumstances. In another life we could have been friends, A.I. Pelky says. I believe in forgiveness and a God who forgives. I always have and I still do.

Pelky was a devout Christian, a decorated Army veteran who served two tours in Iraq and one in Afghanistan. Horcacitas shot Pelky at a red light after Pelky left his vehicle and walked towards Horcasitas' car. So the digital regeneration used Pelky's voice profile to emulate his tone and video recordings to mimic his physical appearance, including his distinct beard. The idea to present an AI-generated victim statement from Pelky was brought to fruition by his sister, Stacey Wales. Okay, so I don't feel it's cheating because I didn't know that this story was coming up and

I had seen this story. So I know this is true, but I don't know if I like that it's true. Like I, these are not his words. Therefore, it is not a victim impact statement. And yeah, I just I don't like it. I find it manipulative. I would I'll even go one step further. He's a devout Christian and they've got any speaking from the grave. Like that to me is weird. So yeah, I know it's true. You might as well just give me my win. Is it possible this story is true? Yes, it is. Yeah, I mean, I pardon mean, pardon me, I don't like it at being used in court. I think there's plenty of great uses for voices from beyond the grave. I think this is a terrible one. Yeah, could be morally wrong.

Well, I think legally, I don't know what value it has. That being said, I feel terrible that this happened to this man. I hope that whatever justice is being doled out to the criminal, I hope he gets. But I just don't like this as a piece of something that's brought before a court. Anyway, okay, time for number three. Let's do a lighter one. Eggs are less likely to crack when they fall on their side. That's according to experiments involving over 200 eggs. Scientists said it could help with hard boiling eggs in a pot, so you drop your eggs in horizontally, which means they're less likely a crack could form

and that would unleash the eggs insides in a puffy, cloudy mess inside the pot. It's commonly thought that eggs are strongest at their ends. After all, it's how they're packaged in the carton. But when scientists squeezed the eggs in both directions during a compression test, they cracked under the same amount of force. The researchers also ran simulations and dropped eggs in horizontally and vertically from a height of half an inch. The results? The ones dropped horizontally cracked less. I could not care less about any of the words that just came out of your mouth. That was what a waste of my time. Dave Bradley, my goodness. I mean, did you look for the most insignificant story of all? Or did you, I mean, my goodness, if you came up with this yourself, you need to seek professional help. If this is where your brain goes.

Okay, so a couple of things. Now we know why eggs cost so much. Because if it's true, scientists are wasting money on dumb shiz like this. Is this true? Yeah, I'll say it's real. I'll say it's real. It's fact. Ah! God, I'm nailing today. Yeah, you are.

I'm nailing today. Okay. Yeah, that's a... What an... I mean, if I were a scientist and I was told, because guys, this is what you have to study today, I would say, I should have gone into the trades. Somebody thought they went, wait a second, which way would eggs crack less if we dropped it from a half an inch? This is so stupid. Somebody funded this study. I would put away the white coat and I would pick up a trade because at least I'd be building something. Okay, next story, please. All 19 horses in Saturday's 151st running of the Kentucky Derby are descendants of the Great Secretariat. That's according to a report by the Louisville Courier Journal. A search of

pedigrees found that each horse has some relation to Secretariat who set the fastest Derby time ever in 1973. On his way to the Triple Crown, Secretariat sired more than 660 registered foals in his lifetime. Several such sires showing up in each Kentucky Derby horse's pedigree. While most present day race horses have an all-time great somewhere in their bloodlines, it worked out this year that every single horse does have some link to Secretariat. The horses in this year's Derby vary from fourth to seventh generation descendants of Secretariat who has bred from 1974 until his death in 1989. The last of Secretariat Sire's born in 1990. Horse sperm by the way from championship level race horses it's among the most lucrative liquids in the world. It comes in at 49 million

dollars per gallon. I'm uncomfortable living in a world where that's a liquid. I'm just gonna say that. But fundamentally, I do know that about sort of the genetics of horse racing and you breed the best by finding the best. And so, like this makes sense to me this makes sense that at some point something like this was gonna happen so come on man I got a perfect streak going here I'm gonna say it's real I'm gonna say it's real

a similar event did there you go you ran the table At no point between 74 and 89 did he ever have a headache. Oh my God, I cannot believe I did that. Can we mark this on the calendar? Like I just, I, I, I, Ben pitched a perfect game. There you go. Dave Bradley, thank you very much. My goodness. Uh, yes, that's not, it's not a liquid.

It's something in between. All right. Thank you so much for playing along at home. Thanks for listening to the Ben Mulroney Show podcast. We're live every day nationwide on the Chorus Radio Network. Alright, thank you so much for playing along at home. We cast every day. Thanks for listening. The My Choice sales event is back at Nissan and the choice is yours. Choose our best-selling Rogue, always ready for adventure. Or the Dynamic Sentra, packed with safety features. Or the all-new boldly redesigned Kicks. And now during My Choice, you can choose up to $1,500 in Nissan bonus or accessory credit.

Or choose three-year prepaid maintenance. Hurry into your local Nissan dealer today. $1,500 applies to Sentra and select rogue models when leasing or financing through NCF. Conditions apply. See Nissan.ca for details.