Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

National

Mark Carney’s Shocking Debate Meltdown

Published

1 month ago

10 minute read

The Opposition with Dan Knight
Dan Knght

From Hamas Blunders to French Fumbles, the Globalist Golden Boy Crumbles on Stage

We had the French-language Liberal leadership debate last night, and let me tell you, folks—it was a sight to behold. Picture a stage in Montreal, packed with career politicians and establishment darlings, all vying to replace Justin Trudeau. The stakes? Enormous. The Liberal Party is on the verge of collapse, Donald Trump is looming over the border with trade war threats, and Canada’s economy is circling the drain. So, naturally, this was their big moment—a chance to prove they have what it takes to lead the country.

And then there was Mark Carney. The globalist golden boy. The guy the elites have been grooming for years. Former Bank of Canada boss, UN climate czar, best friends with every billionaire and bureaucrat from Davos to Brussels. If there’s anyone who should be able to handle a debate, it’s this guy. And yet?

He crashed. Hard. Because what we saw at the French-language Liberal leadership debate was nothing short of a political car crash—one that Mark Carney, the globalist golden boy, drove straight into a ditch. You’d think the guy who ran the Bank of Canada, played footsie with the UN, and spent years circling the elite cocktail party circuit would be able to handle a few tough questions. But no. Instead, we got a masterclass in stammering, dodging, and faceplanting in real-time.

Let’s start with the Hamas gaffe—because, oh boy, this was a doozy. They’re debating Canada’s stance on Israel and Palestine, and Carney, struggling through his Google Translate French, blurts out: “We all agree on Hamas on a two state.” Wait—what? Did he just say the Liberals agree with Hamas? Even Karina Gould, Trudeau’s handpicked heir-in-waiting, had to jump in and clean up his mess: “No, we don’t agree with the solution. We’re against Hamas.” Folks, this is a guy who’s spent decades rubbing elbows with world leaders, and he just accidentally aligned himself with a terrorist organization on live TV. The guy’s supposed to be an economic genius, but apparently, he can’t even manage basic sentence structure. And in Quebec? Where fluency in French actually matters? This wasn’t just a gaffe—it was an open admission that he’s an outsider with a script, and he can’t even read it right.

Then there’s the Quebec constitution debacle. Simple question: Will you recognize a Quebec constitution and Bill 96? You know, the law that cracks down on English like it’s a public health crisis? Carney’s answer? “I’m not a lawyer. I’m not a constitutional expert either. I’m a progressive.” Oh, that’s just rich. He’s not a lawyer, folks—just the guy who ran Canada’s central bank and negotiated international finance deals. But suddenly, when he’s asked to take a stand, he’s just a humble progressive. Meanwhile, Frank Baylis, the only candidate with a spine, calls Bill 96 “discriminatory” right to the camera, while Freeland and Gould trot out their usual Charter of Rights shtick. Carney? He pivots to attacking Pierre Poilievre for cutting CBC funding. Absolutely pathetic. In Montreal, dodging this question isn’t just cowardly—it’s political malpractice.

And what about the carbon tax? This is supposed to be Carney’s big moment. He’s the UN Climate Envoy, the guy who lectures entire countries about going green. So what does he say? “I’ll be canceling it on consumers and small businesses… replacing it with a system where big polluters pay.” Oh, wonderful. Except—what system? No details, no numbers, no real plan. Just a vague promise to make “big polluters” foot the bill. Sounds nice, but where have we heard this before? Oh right—every failed Liberal climate promise since 2015. Meanwhile, Gould is throwing out “15% emissions cuts” like it’s gospel, and Freeland is hammering home how Trudeau’s carbon tax saved Canada from climate doom. But Carney? Mr. Green Energy himself? He whiffs it.

And let’s not forget Energy East. With Trump ramping up tariffs and economic pressure, they ask the big question: Should Canada revive an east-west pipeline through Quebec? Carney’s answer? “It’s possible… if it’s in the interests of the whole country.” What does that even mean? “Possible”? “If”? Baylis, to his credit, comes out swinging—promising two gas pipelines and arguing they’d be good for both the economy and the environment. Freeland and Gould talk about “resilience” and “indigenous consultation” while sidestepping specifics. But Carney? He just flails around, dropping vague one-liners about being “masters in our own house.” Quebecers hate pipelines—we all know that—but if he had a real stance, he’d say it. Instead, he hedges like a man waiting for a pollster to whisper in his ear.

Then there’s his closing statement—his last shot to sell himself as Canada’s next leader. What does he deliver? “I’m not a career politician. I’m a pragmatist… Canada’s given me everything, I’m ready to give my all.”

Oh, give me a break. This has got to be the most insulting, hollow, out-of-touch line of the night. Carney is literally running to be prime minister, and somehow, he expects us to believe he’s not a politician? That’s like a guy auditioning for American Idol and claiming he’s not a singer. No, Mark—you’re a politician now. You’re begging for votes. You’re standing on stage, pandering like the rest of them. Own it.

And beyond the blatant dishonesty, let’s talk about how flat it all was. Baylis is out there promising the “best health system in the world” and pledging his loyalty to Quebec. Gould is hyping up “innovators and dreamers,” painting some grand Liberal utopia. Freeland? She’s going full war cry—rallying 400,000 Liberals against Trump like she’s leading a resistance movement. But Carney? He sounds like an AI-generated LinkedIn post. No passion, no fire, no vision. Just another soulless technocrat, hoping to win by default.

Look, I get it—Carney is the establishment’s dream. The global elites adore him. He’s got the right credentials, the right connections, and the charisma of a soggy paper towel. The guy spent decades shuffling between central banks and UN climate panels, never breaking a sweat, never making a tough call. But last night? Thrown into an actual political fight? He flopped harder than a beached fish.

If he can’t even hold his own in a controlled Liberal debate—against his own party, in front of a friendly audience—how on earth is he going to stand up to Donald Trump? Seriously. The guy panicked over a Quebec language question and somehow accidentally implied the Liberals support Hamas. Hamas! You think this man is ready to stare down the White House? To negotiate trade deals? To lead a country in crisis? Please.

If the Liberals are looking for a leader with real backbone, they’d better think twice before crowning this guy. Because if this performance was any indication—Carney’s not the future. This wasn’t a leader. This was a clipboard-carrying bureaucrat trying to convince us he’s Winston Churchill.

And if this is what the Liberals want to put up against Trump, Poilievre, or even a toaster with a personality, they’re in for a brutal, humiliating, can’t-look-away kind of reality check.

Subscribe to The Opposition with Dan Knight .

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Related Topics:

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

Follow Author

More from this author
2025 Federal Election / 1 hour ago

London-Based Human Rights Group Urges RCMP to Investigate Liberal MP for Possible Counselling of Kidnapping

2025 Federal Election / 4 hours ago

Beijing’s Echo Chamber in Parliament: Part 2 – Still No Action from Carney

2025 Federal Election / 4 hours ago

Fixing Canada’s immigration system should be next government’s top priority

2025 Federal Election

London-Based Human Rights Group Urges RCMP to Investigate Liberal MP for Possible Counselling of Kidnapping

Published on March 31, 2025

By

 

Hong Kong Watch says MP Paul Chiang’s remarks about delivering rival Joe Tay to the Chinese Consulate may amount to criminal conduct under Canada’s Criminal Code.

On Monday, more than 40 Hong Kong diaspora organizations across Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, and Germany issued a joint statement condemning Chiang’s remarks and calling for immediate action from Prime Minister Mark Carney.

A London-based human rights organization has written to RCMP Commissioner Mike Duheme urging Canada’s national force to launch a criminal investigation into Liberal MP Paul Chiang, following his alleged remarks suggesting that Conservative candidate Joe Tay be delivered to the Chinese Consulate in Toronto to collect a bounty placed on his head by Beijing’s national security police.

In a letter sent Monday, Hong Kong Watch said Chiang’s comments could violate Canada’s Criminal Code and the recently enacted Foreign Interference and Security of Information Act. The letter warns that the incident marks a serious international escalation in transnational repression and could constitute a breach of democratic integrity during an election campaign.

“We believe that Mr. Chiang’s comments may cross into criminality, and must be investigated by Canadian law enforcement authorities,” the letter states. “Mr. Chiang’s conduct would appear to fit within the parameters of counselling to commit the indictable offence of kidnapping, per Section 464 of the Criminal Code.”

The remarks in question stem from a January meeting between Chiang and Chinese-language journalists. Chiang reportedly said Tay’s election while under an arrest warrant in Hong Kong would cause “great controversy” and then added, “You can claim the one million dollar bounty if you bring [Joe Tay] to Toronto’s Chinese Consulate.” Tay, a Canadian citizen, is currently wanted under a warrant issued by Hong Kong police under the territory’s National Security Law. The law has been widely condemned by Western governments for its use in targeting dissidents abroad.

The RCMP letter, authored by Hong Kong Watch interim director Ed Simpson, urges authorities to investigate whether Chiang’s remarks amount to counselling to commit an indictable offence.

“It is without question that Mr. Chiang’s comments are an attempt to intimidate Mr. Tay and his supporters and to silence him during an election,” the international NGO director wrote. “It is without question that there are implicit threats of violence and an illegitimate reward in the form of a bounty. And it is certainly without question that the intimidation and threats are for the benefit of a foreign entity, namely the authoritarian Communist Party government in Beijing.”

It also cites Section 20 of the Foreign Interference Act, which prohibits inducing or attempting to induce actions on behalf of foreign entities through intimidation, threats, or violence.

Amid the controversy, new information has surfaced that highlights the wider risk facing diaspora communities in Canada. Laura Harth, campaign director for SafeGuardDefenders—the international NGO that exposed the existence of Beijing’s covert “overseas police stations”—confirmed to The Bureau that Chinese authorities have claimed dozens of “persuasions to return” involving Canadian residents over the past decade.

“Exclusively per Chinese Party-State media sources, at least 27 individuals were persuaded to return from Canada between 2014 and 2023,” Harth said. Her organization has tracked numerous instances in which citizens worldwide of Chinese origin were pressured to return to China through tactics ranging from threats to family members to covert surveillance and harassment.

This morning Tay revealed he has already engaged the Royal Canadian Mounted Police for personal protection, citing growing safety concerns — even before Chiang’s remarks became public.

“This situation has left me fearing for my safety,” he said.

In response, Dennis Molinaro, a former Canadian national security analyst, said such concerns were entirely justified.

“Tay would certainly have rational concerns. China has been targeting the diaspora in Canada for decades. It isn’t new,” Molinaro said. “They engage in rendition, such as through FOXHUNT and SKYNET. It’s serious and well known — and certainly [MP Paul] Chiang knows about it, being a former police officer.”

The growing scandal has sparked alarm among rights groups from Canada’s democratic allies. On Monday, more than 40 Hong Kong diaspora organizations across Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, and Germany issued a joint statement condemning Chiang’s remarks and calling for immediate action from Prime Minister Mark Carney.

This morning in Toronto, Carney told national campaign reporters that Chiang still has his “confidence” despite what he called a “terrible lapse in judgment,” adding that the incident should serve as a “teachable moment.”

The statement from 40 Hong Kong diaspora groups described Chiang’s remarks as an endorsement of Beijing’s transnational repression tactics and a betrayal of the democratic values that Canada is meant to uphold. It also warned of a broader pattern of threats facing Hong Kong activists abroad.

“Such statements undermine the values of democracy and free speech that Canada stands for,” the groups said. “Furthermore, it is deeply concerning that neighbors of certain Hong Kong activists residing in the UK and Australia have received letters offering rewards in exchange for turning these activists over to the local Chinese embassy.”

“It is imperative that Canada remains a bastion of support for those fighting against authoritarianism,” the statement concluded, “rather than complicit in its enforcement.”

The groups called on Carney to respond without delay and to affirm Canada’s commitment to human rights and democratic accountability. “A response to this matter is urgently needed,” the statement said.

The Bureau has reached out to the RCMP and the Liberal Party of Canada for comment on this breaking story. The RCMP acknowledged receipt of the inquiry but has not yet issued a formal response. A spokesperson for the Liberal Party provided a statement from Chiang in which he apologized for his remarks, calling them a “terrible lapse in judgment” and affirming that “it will never happen again.”

As the international spotlight on Canada’s snap election sharpens, Hong Kong Watch warned that the implications of inaction are growing more serious by the day.

“As Canadians prepare to vote on April 28, you must provide reassurance that the RCMP is capable of countering foreign interference,” director Ed Simpson wrote. “It is totally unacceptable that foreign governments, amplified by some in Canada, make threats against political candidates. After years of revelations of Beijing’s interference in our democracy, it is long past time for Canada to take action.”

The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Continue Reading

2025 Federal Election

Beijing’s Echo Chamber in Parliament: Part 2 – Still No Action from Carney

Published on March 31, 2025

By

The Opposition with Dan Knight Dan Knight

As Michael Chong reveals Canadians coerced by China, Mark Carney continues to protect Paul Chiang—proving once again the Liberal swamp won’t police its own, even when national security is on the line.

This is no longer just a political scandal—this is a national disgrace. Joe Tay, the Conservative candidate targeted by Paul Chiang’s shocking comments, has now broken his silence—and it’s nothing short of damning.

In his official statement, Tay pulls no punches. He calls Chiang’s words what they are: “threatening public comments… intended to intimidate me.” Not debate. Not disagreement. Intimidation. And Tay makes it crystal clear: “no apology is sufficient.” Why? Because this isn’t some offhand gaffe—this is the exact playbook of the Chinese Communist Party, imported straight into Canadian politics.

Let that sink in. A Canadian MP, standing on Canadian soil, echoed a bounty issued by a hostile foreign regime. And the man targeted—Joe Tay—says it plainly: “Suggesting that people collect a bounty from the Chinese Communist Party to deliver a political opponent to the Chinese Consulate is disgusting and must never be condoned.”

Disgusting—and yet, here we are. Paul Chiang is still in the Liberal fold. Mark Carney, the man who wants to run the country, says nothing. Meanwhile, Tay is left fearing for his safety—already in touch with the RCMP before the public even knew what Chiang had said.

Image

This is the state of Canadian politics under the Liberal machine: where the only people paying a price are the ones speaking out. Where the candidate who exposes foreign interference is the one who needs police protection. And the one who parrots CCP propaganda? He gets to keep his seat.

Even Michael Chong—a guy who knows firsthand what CCP intimidation looks like—is stepping in and asking the obvious question: Why is Paul Chiang still a Liberal candidate?

Chong just posted on X (formerly Twitter) that at least three Canadians have already been coerced into returning to the People’s Republic of China against their will. Against their will. Think about that. Beijing is actively running transnational repression ops on Canadian soil—and now, one of Carney’s own candidates is joking about turning a political opponent over to the CCP for a cash reward. And we’re supposed to believe the Liberals take foreign interference seriously?

Chong’s post includes actual evidence—parliamentary testimony, U.S. indictments, and RCMP-relevant keywords like “United Front,” “overseas station,” and “minutes or less.” In other words, this isn’t conspiracy talk. This is real. It’s happening. And it’s been happening under the Liberals’ watch.

And still, Paul Chiang stays in the race. No suspension. No investigation. Nothing from Carney, the security-cleared savior of the Liberal establishment.

And here’s where the hypocrisy hits terminal velocity.

Remember, Mark Carney has a security clearance. That’s been his whole pitch. That somehow he is more qualified to lead Canada because he has access to classified intelligence. Because he is in the know. He’s the grown-up in the room. The steady technocrat with one foot in the Privy Council and the other in Davos.

Well, here’s a question: What good is a security clearance if your own MPs are acting like a propaganda arm for Beijing?

Because while Mark “Bank of China” Carney sits on his classified briefings, his Liberal MP Paul Chiang is out there, on camera, floating the idea that a Conservative candidate should be delivered to a Chinese consulate to “claim the bounty” placed on his head by the Chinese Communist Party.

Let’s repeat that: A Canadian MP is echoing a CCP-issued bounty, and Carney—the man with all the intelligence, all the briefings, all the supposed national security credentials—says nothing. Not a peep. Not even a token tweet.

So what exactly is that security clearance buying us, Mark? If you’re such an expert on foreign threats, why can’t you recognize one when it’s sitting in your own caucus?

It’s a joke. The entire premise of Carney’s leadership bid is unraveling in real time. He promised Canadians he could stand up to foreign interference—meanwhile, his own candidate in Markham–Unionville is out there sounding like a CCP press secretary. And instead of showing leadership, Carney hides behind talking points, closed-door fundraisers, and his carefully curated media handlers.

Joe Tay is right. This isn’t just about intimidation—it’s about sending a “chilling signal to the entire community.” And the message from Carney is loud and clear: if you’re a threat to the Liberal regime, they’re not just coming for your policies. They’re coming for you.

Security clearance? Please. It’s not leadership if you only speak up when it’s politically convenient. And if Carney won’t condemn this, then he’s not qualified to lead a PTA meeting, let alone a country.

Subscribe to The Opposition with Dan Knight .

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Continue Reading

Trending

X