National
Crowning the Captain of a Sinking Ship: Who Will Be the Next Liberal Leader?

The Fight to Lead a Party on the Brink of Irrelevance
It’s December 31st, New Year’s Eve, and as we wrap up this catastrophic year, let’s take a moment to reflect on the political dumpster fire we find ourselves in. I hope you’ve got a stiff drink because the election year ahead is shaping up to be a circus. And at the center of the big top? Justin Trudeau, clinging to power like a toddler to his binky, while whispers of resignation swirl around him. But let’s be honest—do we actually think he has the guts to step down? Not a chance.
Let’s get this straight: if Trudeau does bail, he’s leaving a flaming wreckage for someone else to clean up. That’s his legacy—eight years of virtue-signaling, fiscal recklessness, and divisive identity politics, all culminating in a Liberal Party that’s circling the drain. And now, when the going gets tough, the golden boy might just pack it in? How noble. But really, would it surprise anyone? The man has all the grit of a soggy croissant.
So who’s going to take the reins of this sinking ship? Let’s take a look at the cast of characters who might have the stomach—or lack of self-awareness—to step up.
Mark Carney: The Globalist Banker
Alright, Canada, let’s get serious for a moment and talk about the Liberals’ latest pipe dream: Mark Carney as their next leader. Yes, Mark Carney—the globalist banker who’s spent more time cozying up to billionaires at Davos than he has walking the streets of Moose Jaw. If this is the Liberals’ idea of a “fresh start,” then we’re in for even more of the same elitist nonsense that’s driven this country into the ground.
Who is Mark Carney, really? He’s not a leader. He’s a technocrat, a former central banker whose claim to fame is lecturing the world on fiscal responsibility while ignoring the very real struggles of ordinary people. He’s the poster boy for the World Economic Forum’s brand of top-down control, someone who believes in “stakeholder capitalism”—which is just code for bureaucrats and corporations running your life. And yet, somehow, the Liberals think this guy is the one to rebuild their tarnished reputation? Give me a break.
Carney’s entire career has been about serving the global elite. He’s a Goldman Sachs alum, for crying out loud. Do you honestly believe someone with that pedigree is going to step into the ring and start fighting for the working class? Of course not. He’ll push the same disastrous policies that have gutted the middle class—more taxes, more spending, more “green” initiatives that make heating your home a luxury.
And let’s not forget the optics. This is a man who’s spent years flying around the globe, hobnobbing with world leaders and lecturing them on climate policy. Does he even know what Canadians are going through right now? Has he ever set foot in a grocery store and winced at the price of a loaf of bread? My guess is no. But sure, Liberals, tell us how this guy is going to connect with voters in rural Saskatchewan or Northern Ontario. The man probably thinks “double-double” is a stock market term.
Then there’s the political reality. If Carney goes head-to-head with Pierre Poilievre, it’s not going to be a contest—it’s going to be a massacre. Poilievre has spent years sharpening his message, hammering home the Liberals’ failures, and building a grassroots movement. Mark Carney? He’s the kind of guy who speaks in 15-minute monologues filled with jargon nobody understands. It’s not just that he’s out of touch—it’s that he doesn’t even know what being in touch looks like.
This isn’t leadership. It’s desperation. The Liberals are throwing Carney into the mix because they have no other options, no fresh ideas, and no connection to the struggles of everyday Canadians. He’s not the answer; he’s a symptom of the problem. The party that brought you eight years of Justin Trudeau now wants to hand the reins to a man who’s even more disconnected, more elitist, and more out of step with what this country actually needs.
Mark Carney as Liberal leader? Please. If this is their plan, then the Liberals have already lost, and Canada will be better off for it. Good riddance.
Dominic LeBlanc: Trudeau’s Loyal Lapdog and the Wrong Choice for Liberal Leadership
Dominic LeBlanc, the latest name being floated as a potential Liberal leader. If the Liberals think this guy is the answer to their problems, then they clearly haven’t been paying attention to what Canadians actually want. Let’s not sugarcoat this: Dominic LeBlanc is Trudeau’s loyal lapdog, and putting him at the helm of the Liberal Party would be the equivalent of putting fresh paint on a sinking ship.
LeBlanc’s biggest problem is that he’s not a leader—he’s a career politician who thrives on backroom deals and political patronage. He’s spent years in Trudeau’s inner circle, defending every mistake, every scandal, and every bad policy. Canadians are fed up with the cronyism that defines this government, and LeBlanc embodies it. The man’s entire career has been about staying in Trudeau’s shadow, not standing on his own.
Now, let’s talk about his record. What exactly has Dominic LeBlanc accomplished that qualifies him to lead a country? Sure, he’s held high-profile positions—Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Minister of Fisheries—but those are titles, not achievements. His time in government has been marked by mediocrity, not bold action. When Canadians are looking for real solutions to real problems, LeBlanc offers nothing but recycled talking points and stale ideas.
Then there’s the optics. LeBlanc has been so closely tied to Trudeau’s Liberal machine that he can’t credibly distance himself from the failures of this government. He’s part of the same crew that gave us the carbon tax, the skyrocketing cost of living, and endless virtue-signaling while ordinary Canadians struggle to make ends meet. Does anyone seriously believe Dominic LeBlanc is going to suddenly chart a new course? Of course not.
And let’s not forget his style—or lack thereof. LeBlanc might be affable, even charming, but Canadians don’t need a nice guy right now. They need someone who can go toe-to-toe with Pierre Poilievre, who can articulate a vision and fight for it. LeBlanc’s affability won’t cut it in the bare-knuckle world of federal politics. He’s a backroom operator, not a front-line fighter, and that’s exactly why he’ll fail.
The truth is, Dominic LeBlanc is just more of the same. He represents the same tired Liberal brand that Canadians are desperate to move on from. If the Liberals think he’s the man to save their party, they’re not just wrong—they’re delusional.
Mélanie Joly: The Walking Diplomatic Disaster
Let’s move on to Mélanie Joly, our current Foreign Affairs Minister. The idea of Joly leading the Liberal Party is about as absurd as her recent diplomatic escapades. Competence? Let’s just say her track record doesn’t inspire confidence.
Take her visit to China—a masterclass in accomplishing absolutely nothing. Instead of tackling real issues like strained relations or economic disputes, she delivered a lecture on global security, a topic where Canada’s influence is as impactful as a paper straw in a hurricane. Critics have called her approach “parochial arrogance,” and it’s hard to disagree.
Her stance on Israel is equally troubling. At a time when Canada’s allies need consistent support, Joly’s vacillating positions have left us looking like fair-weather friends. Leadership demands decisiveness, and Joly has shown none.
Perhaps most telling, though, was her behavior during a press conference about the killing of Ripudaman Singh Malik. Laughing during such a serious moment? That’s not just unprofessional—it’s downright embarrassing.
François-Philippe Champagne: The Opportunist Extraordinaire
Next up, François-Philippe Champagne, the Minister of Innovation. If you thought we couldn’t do worse, Champagne is here to prove you wrong.
Let’s start with his judgment—or lack thereof. Champagne defended the leadership of a federal green fund under his watch despite allegations of corruption, including a $217,000 subsidy granted to the chair’s own company. When pressed, he claimed there wasn’t enough “evidence” to take action, even as the Auditor General launched a review. That’s not oversight—it’s negligence.
Then there’s his economic vision—or lack thereof. Champagne is the face of the government’s $100 billion electric vehicle strategy, a plan that critics say is wildly ambitious and hopelessly vague. Champagne, of course, blamed critics for “lacking vision and ambition.” Classic deflection.
And let’s not forget his political opportunism. Speculation about his potential run for Quebec’s Liberal Party leadership showed exactly where his priorities lie: not with Canadians, but with his own career.
Champagne represents everything Canadians are fed up with—self-serving politicians who deflect criticism and prioritize optics over outcomes.
Chrystia Freeland: Trudeau’s Economic Doppelgänger
Finally, we come to Chrystia Freeland, the former Finance Minister and Trudeau’s right hand. If you thought the Liberals couldn’t dig deeper into their fiscal hole, Freeland is here to prove you wrong.
Freeland has been at the helm of Trudeau’s disastrous economic policies, including ballooning deficits and a national debt that now makes Greece look frugal. Her resignation letter criticized Trudeau’s strategies as “costly political gimmicks,” but let’s be real—she helped craft those gimmicks. Canadians want fiscal responsibility, not a continuation of Trudeau’s tax-and-spend circus.
On top of her economic failures, Freeland’s personality is a problem. Arrogant, unlikable, and out of touch, she’s more interested in impressing global elites than connecting with everyday Canadians. Her academic pedigree might dazzle the Davos crowd, but here at home, it reeks of elitism.
Freeland isn’t a solution to the Liberals’ problems—she’s the embodiment of them.
Christy Clark: meh…
Alright, let’s get into it, folks. Christy Clark as the potential savior of the Liberal Party—now there’s a plot twist that could almost be entertaining, if it weren’t so doomed from the start. On paper, she might seem like the only grown-up in the room, but let’s not kid ourselves: the Liberal Party is so far gone, even Houdini couldn’t rescue them, and Christy Clark is no Houdini.
First off, let’s be clear about why she’s the better option. Compared to the usual lineup of Trudeau loyalists and globalist placeholders, Clark actually knows how to run something. She was the Premier of British Columbia, and say what you will about her record—because trust me, we’ll get to that—she has actual executive experience. She’s been out of the federal Liberal swamp long enough that the Trudeau stink doesn’t cling to her quite as badly. That’s about the only thing she has going for her: she’s not Dominic LeBlanc or Mark Carney. High bar, I know.
But here’s the thing: being the best option in a lineup of disasters isn’t exactly a glowing endorsement. Sure, Christy Clark is seasoned, but let’s not forget her own record in British Columbia. Yes, she balanced budgets, but she did so by relying on one-time asset sales and riding the wave of a hot real estate market. That’s not fiscal wizardry—it’s just lucky timing. And let’s not gloss over the accusations of cronyism and catering to corporate interests that plagued her government. Sound familiar? It’s Trudeau-lite with a West Coast twist.
And here’s the real kicker: even if Clark were a political genius (spoiler: she’s not), the Liberal brand is so tainted that it wouldn’t matter. Eight years of Justin Trudeau have left Canadians disillusioned, angry, and desperate for change. The scandals, the carbon taxes, the virtue-signaling—it’s all become synonymous with the Liberal Party. Clark can try to distance herself all she wants, but at the end of the day, she’s still carrying the baggage of a party Canadians are ready to toss in the trash.
Let’s also not forget that Clark isn’t exactly the fresh face the Liberals need. She’s a seasoned politician, sure, but that’s part of the problem. After Trudeau’s reign of elitist arrogance, Canadians aren’t looking for another career politician who’s part of the same broken system. Clark might be different from Trudeau, but she’s not different enough.
And then there’s the elephant in the room: Pierre Poilievre. Poilievre has built his brand on taking down exactly the kind of big-government, tax-happy policies that Clark has championed in the past. She might be able to hold her own in debates, but against Poilievre’s laser-focused messaging and grassroots momentum, Clark would get steamrolled.
The bottom line? Christy Clark might be the least-worst option for the Liberals, but that’s not saying much. Her record is spotty, her appeal is limited, and she’s tied to a party that’s become a political punchline. The Liberals can try to rebrand all they want, but with Clark at the helm, they’re just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
Final Thoughts
Alright, Canada, let’s wrap this up because, honestly, there’s only so much you can say about a sinking ship. The Liberal Party is done. Finished. Kaput. The Angus Reid poll has spoken—16% support. Sixteen percent! That’s not just a bad showing; that’s the kind of number you’d expect from a fringe party running on mandatory pineapple pizza. The Liberals aren’t just losing—they’re disintegrating in real-time, and frankly, it’s been a long time coming.
Justin Trudeau, the captain of this catastrophe, is standing on the deck of the SS Liberal, looking for a lifeboat as the iceberg rips through the hull. His approval rating is at a laughable 28%, his party is in open revolt, and his so-called successors are all lined up like passengers fighting over the last spot on the Titanic. Chrystia Freeland? Jumped ship. Mark Carney? A banker trying to steer a political dumpster fire. Dominic LeBlanc? Trudeau’s yes-man without an ounce of originality.
Let’s be clear—this isn’t a leadership race; it’s a race to see who gets to be the face of a historic collapse. The Liberal brand is so tainted, so toxic, that no amount of rebranding or fresh faces is going to fix it. Canadians are done. They’re fed up with the taxes, the spending, the hypocrisy, and the endless lecturing from a party that’s done nothing but drive this country into the ground.
And you know what? Thank God. Thank God we’re finally closing this ugly chapter of Canadian history. The SS Liberal Party is going down, and no amount of spin can save it. Here’s to 2025—a fresh start, a new chapter, and hopefully, the end of Trudeau and everything he stands for.
2025 Federal Election
Allegations of ethical misconduct by the Prime Minister and Government of Canada during the current federal election campaign

Preston Manning
A letter to the Ethics Commissioner sent April 9th, 2025
On April 4, 2025, during the current federal election period, in which employees of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) report on all aspects of the election, the unelected Prime Minister, without any consultation with or authorization by parliament but apparently with the concurrence of the Minister of Heritage, promised an increase of $150 million in the budget of the CBC on top of its $1.38 billion budget for the current fiscal year.
The CBC consistently and for obvious reasons tends to share the ideological orientation of the governing Liberal Party and its political allies, and supports many of their policy positions. It tends to ignore or oppose those of the Conservative Official Opposition which proposes dismantling the CBC.
The unelected Liberal Prime Minister promising a $150 million bonus to the CBC in the middle of an election campaign would thus strike any objective observer as unethical, damaging to public confidence in our democratic institutions, and deserving of investigation and commentary by your office.
In particular, it is respectfully requested that you address the following questions:
1. Has the Prime Minister acted unethically by promising the state owned broadcasting corporation, sympathetic to the governing party, a $150 million increase in its budget, during a federal election campaign?
2. Is the promise of a $150 million increase in the budget of the CBC, during an election period in which the CBC is expected to give objective coverage to the campaign, in effect a defacto bribe and contrary to the spirit and the letter of the Conflict of Interest Code and Act?
In addition, on April 7, 2025, again during the current election period, the Prime Minister has announced that the federal government will distribute approximately $4 billion in carbon rebate payments directly to approximately 13 million Canadians, many of whom are eligible voters, and will do so prior to the election day of April 28.
This naturally raises the following questions which it is again respectfully requested that you address:
3. Has the Prime Minister and the federal government acted unethically by authorizing the distribution, prior to election day, of almost $4 billion in rebate payments to approximately 13 million Canadians, many of whom are voters, and doing so with the suspected intent of winning the support of those voters?
4. Is the promise and delivery, prior to election day, of almost $4 billion in rebate payments to approximately 13 million Canadians, many of whom are voters, in effect a defacto attempt to bribe those voters with their own money, and contrary to the spirit and the letter of the Conflict of Interest Code and Act?
To assist in the consideration of these allegations, suppose the UN were to ask Canada to supervise a national election in a third world country where democracy is frail and elections subject to abuse by those in authority. Suppose further that the unelected president of that country, during the election campaign period, endeavored to secure:
· The support of the state broadcasting corporation by promising it a huge increase in its budget, and,
· The support of millions of voters by ensuring that they received a generous personal payment from his government just prior to election day.
In such a situation, would not the Canadian monitoring authority be obliged to strongly censure such behaviors and report to the UN that such behavior calls into question the democratic legitimacy of the election subjected to such abuses?
If we as Canadians would consider such political behaviors anti-democratic and unacceptable if practiced in a foreign country, ought we not to come to the same conclusion even more quickly and certainly when they are regrettably practiced in our own?
Please respond to questions 1-4 above prior to April 25, 2025 and please ensure that your responses are made public prior to that date.
Thanking you for your service and your commitment to safeguarding public confidence in Canada’s democratic institutions and processes.
Your sincerely,
Preston Manning PC CC AOE
2025 Federal Election
BREAKING from THE BUREAU: Pro-Beijing Group That Pushed Erin O’Toole’s Exit Warns Chinese Canadians to “Vote Carefully”

Sam Cooper
As polls tighten in Canada’s high-stakes federal election—one increasingly defined by reports of Chinese state interference—a controversial Toronto diaspora group tied to past efforts to topple former Conservative leader Erin O’Toole has resurfaced, decrying what it calls a disregard for favoured Chinese Canadian voices in candidate selection.
At a press conference in Markham yesterday, the Chinese Canadian Conservative Association (CCCA) accused both the Liberal and Conservative parties of bypassing diaspora input and “directly appointing candidates without consulting community groups or even party members.”
In what reads as a carefully coded message to the Chinese diaspora across Canada, Mandarin-language reports covering the event stated that the group “stressed at the media meeting that people should think rationally and vote carefully,” and urged “all Chinese people to actively participate and vote for the candidate they approve of—rather than the party.”
The CCCA’s latest press conference—surprising in both tone and timing—came just weeks after political pressure forced the resignation of Liberal MP Paul Chiang, following reports that he had allegedly threatened his Conservative opponent, Joseph Tay—now the party’s candidate in Don Valley North—and suggested to Chinese-language journalists that Tay could be handed over to the Toronto consulate for a bounty.
Chiang, who had been backed by Prime Minister Mark Carney, stepped down amid growing concern from international NGOs and an RCMP review.
One of the CCCA’s leading voices is a Markham city councillor who campaigned for Paul Chiang in 2021 against the Conservatives, and later sought the Conservative nomination in Markham against Joseph Tay. While the group claims to represent Conservative-aligned diaspora interests, public records and media coverage show that it backed Paul Chiang again in 2025 and is currently campaigning for Shaun Chen, the Liberal candidate in the adjacent Scarborough North riding.
The Toronto Sun reported today that new polling by Leger for Postmedia shows Mark Carney’s Liberals polling at 47 percent in the Greater Toronto Area—just three points ahead of Pierre Poilievre’s Conservatives at 44 percent. In most Canadian elections, this densely populated region proves decisive in determining who forms government in Ottawa.
In a statement that appeared to subtly align with Beijing’s strategic messaging, the group warned voters:
“At today’s press conference, we called on all Canadian voters: please think rationally and vote carefully. Do not support parties or candidates that attempt to divide society, launch attacks or undermine important international relations, especially against countries such as India and China that have important global influence.”
In a 2024 review of foreign interference, the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians (NSICOP) warned that nomination contests in Canada remain highly vulnerable to manipulation by state-backed diaspora networks, particularly those run by Chinese and Indian diplomats.
The report found that these networks have “directed or influenced Canadian political candidates,” with efforts targeting riding-level nominations seen as a strategic entry point for foreign influence.
The Chinese Canadian Conservative Association first attracted national attention in the wake of the 2021 federal election, when it held a press conference blaming then-Conservative leader Erin O’Toole’s “anti-China rhetoric” for the party’s poor showing in ridings with large Chinese Canadian populations.
At that event, CCCA’s lead spokesperson—a York Region councillor and three-time former Conservative candidate—openly defended Beijing’s position on Taiwan and Canada’s diplomatic crisis over the “two Michaels,” claiming China’s detention of Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor only occurred because “Canada started the war.”
The councillor also criticized Canada’s condemnation of China’s human rights abuses, saying such statements “alienate Chinese voters.”
The group’s views—repeatedly echoed in Chinese-language media outlets close to the PRC—resonate with talking points promoted by the Chinese Communist Party’s United Front Work Department, a political influence operation run by Beijing that seeks to mobilize ethnic Chinese communities abroad in support of Party objectives.
Shortly after denouncing O’Toole’s China policy, the CCCA publicly endorsed Brampton Mayor Patrick Brown to replace him—a candidate known for cultivating strong relationships with United Front-linked groups. Brown gave a speech in 2022 at an event co-organized by the Confederation of Toronto Chinese Canadian Organizations (CTCCO)—a group repeatedly cited in Canadian national security reporting for its alignment with PRC political messaging and its close working relationship with the Chinese consulate in Toronto.
CTCCO also maintains ties with Peter Yuen, a former Toronto Police Deputy Chief who was selected as Mark Carney’s Liberal candidate in the riding of Markham–Unionville. As first revealed by The Bureau, Yuen joined a 2015 Ontario delegation to Beijing to attend a massive military parade hosted by President Xi Jinping and the People’s Liberation Army, commemorating the CCP’s victory over Japan in the Second World War. The delegation included senior CTCCO leaders and Ontario political figures who, in 2017, helped advocate for the establishment of Nanjing Massacre Memorial Day and a monument in Toronto—a movement widely promoted by the Chinese consulate and supported by figures from CTCCO and the Chinese Freemasons of Toronto, both of which have been cited in United Front reporting.
Yuen also performed in 2017 at diaspora events affiliated with the United Front Work Department, standing beside CTCCO leader Wei Cheng Yi while singing a patriotic song about his dedication to China—as the Chinese Consul General looked on.
The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.
To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Invite your friends and earn rewards
-
2025 Federal Election1 day ago
RCMP Whistleblowers Accuse Members of Mark Carney’s Inner Circle of Security Breaches and Surveillance
-
2025 Federal Election2 days ago
MEI-Ipsos poll: 56 per cent of Canadians support increasing access to non-governmental healthcare providers
-
Health2 days ago
Trump admin directs NIH to study ‘regret and detransition’ after chemical, surgical gender transitioning
-
Business10 hours ago
China, Mexico, Canada Flagged in $1.4 Billion Fentanyl Trade by U.S. Financial Watchdog
-
Daily Caller9 hours ago
Trump Executive Orders ensure ‘Beautiful Clean’ Affordable Coal will continue to bolster US energy grid
-
2025 Federal Election20 hours ago
Tucker Carlson Interviews Maxime Bernier: Trump’s Tariffs, Mass Immigration, and the Oncoming Canadian Revolution
-
2025 Federal Election1 day ago
Bureau Exclusive: Chinese Election Interference Network Tied to Senate Breach Investigation
-
Autism2 days ago
Autism Rates Reach Unprecedented Highs: 1 in 12 Boys at Age 4 in California, 1 in 31 Nationally