Connect with us

COVID-19

Former Trudeau minister faces censure for ‘deliberately lying’ about Emergencies Act invocation

Published

3 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Christina Maas of Reclaim The Net

Trudeau’s former public safety minister, Marco Mendicino, finds himself at the center of controversy as the Canadian Parliament debates whether to formally censure him for ‘deliberately lying’ about the justification for invoking the Emergencies Act.

Trudeau’s former public safety minister, Marco Mendicino, finds himself at the center of controversy as the Canadian Parliament debates whether to formally censure him for “deliberately lying” about the justification for invoking the Emergencies Act and freezing the bank accounts of civil liberties supporters during the 2022 Freedom Convoy protests.

Conservative MP Glen Motz, a vocal critic, emphasized the importance of accountability, stating, “Parliament deserves to receive clear and definitive answers to questions. We must be entitled to the truth.”

The Emergencies Act, invoked on February 14, 2022, granted sweeping powers to law enforcement, enabling them to arrest demonstrators, conduct searches, and freeze the financial assets of those involved in or supported, the trucker-led protests. However, questions surrounding the legality of its invocation have lingered, with opposition parties and legal experts criticizing the move as excessive and unwarranted.

On Thursday, Mendicino faced calls for censure after Blacklock’s Reporter revealed formal accusations of contempt of Parliament against him. The former minister, who was removed from cabinet in 2023, stands accused of misleading both MPs and the public by falsely claiming that the decision to invoke the Emergencies Act was based on law enforcement advice. A final report on the matter contradicts his testimony, stating, “The Special Joint Committee was intentionally misled.”

Mendicino’s repeated assertions at the time, including statements like, “We invoked the Emergencies Act after we received advice from law enforcement,” have been flatly contradicted by all other evidence. Despite this, he has yet to publicly challenge the allegations.

The controversy deepened as documents and testimony revealed discrepancies in the government’s handling of the crisis. While Attorney General Arif Virani acknowledged the existence of a written legal opinion regarding the Act’s invocation, he cited solicitor-client privilege to justify its confidentiality. Opposition MPs, including New Democrat Matthew Green, questioned the lack of transparency. “So you are both the client and the solicitor?” Green asked, to which Virani responded, “I wear different hats.”

The invocation of the Act has since been ruled unconstitutional by a federal court, a decision the Trudeau government is appealing. Critics argue that the lack of transparency and apparent misuse of power set a dangerous precedent. The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms echoed these concerns, emphasizing that emergency powers must be exercised only under exceptional circumstances and with a clear legal basis.

Reprinted with permission from Reclaim The Net.

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

2025 Federal Election

Before the Vote: Ask Who’s Defending Our Health

Published on

The health of Canadians has been compromised by government-mandated COVID-19 injections. The upcoming federal election is an opportunity to demand change and accountability. As you decide which candidate or party is most committed to defending the health of yourself and your family, please consider the following:

The Injections Were Never What They Claimed

The Canadian government successfully mandated the COVID-19 injections by labeling them “safe and effective vaccines.” These products are still being promoted and administered across the country. However, the truth is:

  • They are not vaccines: Click Here
  • They are not safe: Click Here
  • They do not prevent infection or transmission.
  • Evidence shows they increase the risk of COVID-19 disease and death: Click Here

These Products Contain Multiple Mechanisms of Harm

  • They cause injury through multiple biological mechanisms: Click Here
  • They have surpassed all vaccines in recorded history—for all infections, for all of the past thirty years combined—in causing deaths and injuries: Click Here
  • They are chemically contaminated and adulterated with DNA: Click Here
  • In Pfizer’s case, fraud is evident: the DNA contamination includes genetic engineering tools derived from the SV40 virus, associated with cancer risks: Click Here

This Election, We Must Demand Accountability

Insist that to have your vote, candidates must:

  • Denounce the COVID-19 “vaccines.”
  • Support a full halt to their manufacturing and administration.
  • Uphold informed consent, scientific integrity, and bodily autonomy.

Your voice is important. Use it to reject censorship, harm, and medical coercion.

Continue Reading

COVID-19

The Pandemic Justice Phase Begins as Criminal Investigations Commence

Published on

Nicolas Hulscher, MPH's avatar Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

Hulscher interviews the two attorneys who filed criminal referrals in 7 states—triggering active criminal investigations into top COVID officials for murder, terrorism, and racketeering.

In this explosive episode of Focal Points, I sit down with two fearless attorneys from Vires Law Group—Rachel Rodriguez and Mimi Miller—who are leading a historic legal effort to hold top public health officials accountable for their actions during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Rachel, founder of the Vires Law Group in South Florida, entered the fight through early litigation against mask and vaccine mandates. Mimi, a former criminal prosecutor, joined Rachel in 2023. Together, they’ve now filed seven criminal referral requests to Attorneys General across the U.S. accusing Fauci and top COVID officials of serious crimes such as murder, racketeering, fraud, abuse, and terrorism. These efforts have already resulted in two active criminal investigations:

In this interview, we dive deep into the criminal referrals:


The Accused

Dr. Anthony Fauci – Former Director, NIAID

Dr. Cliff Lane – Deputy Director, NIAID

Dr. Francis Collins – Former Director, NIH

Dr. Deborah Birx – Former White House COVID Response Coordinator

Dr. Rochelle Walensky – Former Director, CDC

Dr. Stephen Hahn – Former Commissioner, FDA

Dr. Janet Woodcock – Principal Deputy Commissioner, FDA

Dr. Peter Hotez – Dean, National School of Tropical Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine

Dr. Robert Redfield – Former Director, CDC

Dr. Peter Daszak – President, EcoHealth Alliance

Dr. Ralph Baric – Professor, University of North Carolina

Dr. Rick Bright – Former Director, BARDA

Administrators of various hospital systems and care facilities.


Applicable Crimes

The Vires Law Group is seeking state criminal investigations into the aforementioned individuals. The charges outlined include:

Terrorism

Under many state laws, terrorism includes committing crimes to coerce or influence government policy or civilian behavior. The attorneys argue that public fear was deliberately manufactured to increase uptake of vaccines, drive compliance, and suppress dissent—via manipulated death counts, relentless fear-based media messaging, and denial of early treatment.

Murder & Involuntary Manslaughter

Patients were knowingly given lethal treatments such as remdesivir—despite it being pulled from an Ebola study for causing over 50% mortality. Families were denied the right to refuse treatment, and ventilators were used despite overwhelming evidence of fatal outcomes.

Aggravated Assault & Lack of Informed Consent

Patients were subjected to medical procedures—ventilators, remdesivir, and even COVID-19 vaccines—against their will or without informed consent. This constitutes unlawful bodily harm under most state statutes.

Racketeering (RICO)

The team alleges this was a coordinated scheme for profit—fueled by CARES Act incentives and PREP Act immunity—where hospital administrations financially benefited by complying with federal protocols at the expense of patient lives.

Abuse of Vulnerable Adults

Victims were elderly or incapacitated, often denied food, water, vitamins, and family visitation—all while being isolated and coerced into fatal treatment pathways.


Scope & Strategy

While the larger COVID response is under scrutiny, the petitions focus specifically on hospital homicides—where the legal case is strongest and where witnesses (survivors and next-of-kin) are actively seeking justice.

By targeting state-level criminal codes, the team bypasses federal hurdles and builds strategic, streamlined cases with clearly defined jurisdiction and causality.

The goal: create a roadmap for local prosecutors to pursue charges, without being overwhelmed or confused by federal overlap or civil legal complexities.


Victims, Whistleblowers & Ongoing Investigations

Two states have already opened active criminal investigations—though confidentiality laws prevent disclosure of details.

Over 200 victim cases are already included across the seven petitions, with many more expected to be added. These include next-of-kin statements, medical records, and evidence of systemic wrongdoing.

Former nurses, doctors, and hospital staff have come forward, risking their licenses and careers to expose the abuse, forced protocols, and fatal policies they witnessed firsthand.


Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

Epidemiologist and Foundation Administrator, McCullough Foundation

www.mcculloughfnd.org

Please consider following both the McCullough Foundation and my personal account on X (formerly Twitter) for further content.

Continue Reading

Trending

X