Connect with us

2025 Federal Election

Mark Carney’s radical left-wing, globalist record proves he is Justin Trudeau 2.0

Published

19 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By REAL Women of Canada

Despite superficial changes to the packaging, the Liberal brand under Mark Carney’s policies are the same as Trudeau’s.

By now, it has become obvious that the Liberals want the central issue of this election to be Trump’s tariffs and their supposed threat to Canada’s national sovereignty.

The Liberal leader, Mark Carney, is being portrayed as a dauntless hero, who is the only one with “the elbows” capable of taking on Trump. The Liberals have made the 2025 election the shortest in history (37 days) in order to prevent serious scrutiny and exposure of both their last ten years in power and the failures and conflicts of interest that Carney brings to the table. Most of Canada’s mainstream media want the Liberals returned to power so that they can continue to receive payments from the Liberal government’s Media Slush Fund, a.k.a. Heritage Canada. Consequently, most of Canada’s mainstream media are carefully and systematically concealing Carney’s flawed past history. Not so the U.K. media.

UK media scrutiny of Carney

The United Kingdom (UK) media has a direct lived experience of Carney when he was Governor of the Bank of England from July 1, 2013, to March 15, 2020. The British newspapers have been giving off warning signals to Canadians about Carney for some time now. They regard him as highly overblown, someone who left England in economic distress and struggling with raging inflation caused by his banking strategy of printing too much money. Carney’s climate change ideology and net-zero emissions goal has been calamitous for the U.K. As stated by Matthew Lynn (March 10, 2025), former editor of The Daily Telegraph, “Over eight years, Carney … has been a disappointing failure.  Despite his huge salary of more than £600,000 [$1.1 million] a year, more than any of his predecessors had been paid, he seemed to have little feel for the role.” Lynn went on to observe that “Carney is the epitome of a remote, globalized, technocratic elite. He is very good at self-promotion, at collecting trophy jobs and, of course, negotiating fabulously generous salaries and expenses for himself along the way. He is just not very good at delivering.”

READ: Mark Carney was an early supporter of government crackdown against Freedom Convoy

As a financial reporter, Lynn has been a long-time observer of Carney’s mediocre performance as Governor of the Bank of England, writing in The Spectator on October 16th, 2016, that Carney “has done very little to improve the British economy.  The markets have rumbled that he is not very effective – and they no longer care much whether he stays or goes. In truth, neither should anyone else.”

Benedict Smith, writing in The Daily Telegraph on March 9th, 2025, reminded his readers of Carney’s doomsaying over Britain withdrawing from the European Union (Brexit) which earned him the title the “high priest of Project Fear.” None of Carney’s dire predictions have come true, much to the chagrin of EU loving bureaucrats everywhere.

Even the left-wing Guardian echoed this, describing Carney as the “unreliable boyfriend” due to his habit of sending mixed messages—never a good idea to do when you are “in charge” of the monetary policy of a nation.

If there is a common theme to Carney’s governorships in both Canada and England, it appears to be found in his ability to make bad predictions while printing too much money which only leads to inflationary pressures once he’s left office.

Other views

It is not only the U.K. media that is critical of Carney’s performance. British Conservative MP Jacob Rees-Mogg, a pro-Brexit advocate criticized Carney’s economic predictions, telling the BBC News in November 2018 that Carney was a “second-tier Canadian politician” who “failed” to get a job at home and thus ended up at the Bank of England—not a ringing endorsement.

Not only has Carney’s experience as a competent central banker been criticized, his ability as a businessman has also been questioned. While acting as an advisor to Justin Trudeau, he was also Chairman of Brookfield Asset Management which was soliciting at that time, the federal government for $10 billion in funds as part of a $50 billion Canada-only asset fund.  Brookfield was also looking to raise $36 billion from Canadian pension funds, the largest of which are public sector, i.e., taxpayer funded, while only contributing $4 billion itself.  Because Carney was employed by the Liberal Party of Canada that conveniently did not require conflict of interest disclosures, as opposed to the Prime Minister’s Office that required such disclosures, Carney avoided being asked, let alone answer embarrassing questions on the subject.

Conflicts of interest

The biggest elephant in the room that virtually no one in the mainstream media seems to be interested in, are conflicts of interest that Carney brings to the table. Conflicts of interest come in many varieties for our would-be Prime Minister. Obviously, there are the financial conflicts that come with Carney’s investments as well as those of his wife and immediate family.

However, there are also more serious political conflicts of interest, particularly centered on Brookfield Asset Management ties with Communist China. It is being reported that in October of 2024 Brookfield secured a $256 million loan from a Chinese state-owned bank after Carney met with the deputy director of the People’s Bank of China, Zhu Hexin. The loan was in relation to Brookfield’s refinancing of its commercial property holdings in Shanghai. It is worth noting that at the time, Carney had (in September 2024) been named by former Prime Minster Justin Trudeau as chairman of the Liberal Party’s task force on economic growth. Anyone with even a modest familiarity with the way business is done in China realizes that such loans by state-owned banks are always matters of political importance, no matter the economic rationale, and are the occasion of establishing reciprocal obligations, i.e., I do you this favor today, tomorrow I will ask you a favour in return. This is a troubling fact should Carney be elected prime minister.

READ: WEF video shows Mark Carney pushing financial ‘revolution’ based on ‘net zero’ goals

Of course, the other political conflict of interest yet to be resolved is the question of multiple passports and divided loyalties. Carney has already expressed himself as a “proud European” at the World Economic Forum held in Davos in 2023, but what of being a “proud Canadian”? Dressing up in a Team Canada hockey jersey and playing Canadian Trivial Pursuit in a Liberal advertisement with Canadian born Mike Myers isn’t really a credible assurance of Carney’s patriotism. In fact, Myers himself makes a convincing poster boy for every Canadian who has gone to the United States and made his fortune thanks to American culture and enterprise. Carney and Myers share several common characteristics: both made their careers outside Canada; both have spent little time in Canada; both have multiple citizenships (Carney – Canadian, Irish, and British, Myers – Canadian, US, and British); and both are not shy about telling Canadians how to be Canadian!

Carney has a plan to build 500,000 houses. Funding for this project will be provided by his previous employer, Brookfield Asset Management and the federal government. There will be no difficulty in obtaining the taxpayers’ money for this project if Carney is elected prime minister. This housing, however, is to provide Soviet-style rental housing, built not by developers, but by bureaucrats. Under this plan, Brookfield stands to make billions of dollars over the years in rental fees and Carney will make millions of dollars since he has retained $6.8 million in shares in Brookfield. The public, however, wants to own property, not live in rental property. It seems that this project is a win-win for Brookfield and Carney, not so much for Canadians.

Carney’s potential conflicts of interest are not confined to just political and financial, as they also include conflicts brought to the table by his wife, Diana Fox Carney. Mrs. Carney has long involvement with leftist climate change causes and organizations, including being a senior advisor at Eurasia Group, a political risk consulting company, where she is a colleague of Liberal strategist and friend of Justin Trudeau, Gerry Butts, Trudeau’s former Chief of Staff.

Carney’s campaign

Carney’s efforts in the campaign raises several concerns. Right from the start Carney’s campaign has been plagued with missteps: Carney’s logo had to be changed because it too closely resembled a logo of a collection agency, MetCredit. Carney has had unpleasant interactions with reporters pressing him about disclosure of his assets and avoided answering their questions. He lied about his involvement in moving Brookfield Asset Management’s head office out of Canada to New York City, a significant financial loss to Canada. He did not know the name of the school where the tragic Montreal massacre of 1989 took place, and he has refused to participate in a debate in French on TVA, Quebec’s independent television network. Carney also refused to dismiss Liberal candidate Paul Chaing, who had recommended that his Conservative opposition, Joe Tay, be taken to the Toronto Chinese consulate to be returned to Hong Kong where there would be a 1 million Hong Kong dollar bounty on his life. Mr. Tay had made posts opposing the Beijing government. Carney recently wore a Team Canada hockey jersey emblazed with the American Nike “swoosh” symbol—Nike, of course, being a huge American corporation selling sports equipment. Why is a would-be Canadian Prime Minister being photographed wearing a symbol of a successful American corporation? Even Carney’s selection of a riding to run in, Nepean in Ottawa, was not without its problems as it involved the dumping of the current Liberal MP, Chandra Arya, who was born in India, on the pretext of his alleged foreign interference, supposedly from India. For those outside Ottawa, Nepean is considered a “safe” Liberal seat with a high percentage of federal government employees and a large population of immigrants from India.

Trust and character

Character matters, especially when Carney is asking for the trust of the Canadian electorate.  Carney himself has called his character into question.

Recent revelations of Carney plagiarizing sections of his Oxford Ph.D. thesis call into question his intellectual honesty and integrity. This is particularly troubling given the fact that Carney’s claim to being an “expert” largely rests on his doctorate qualification. Plagiarism is a form of lying, claiming someone else’s ideas as your own. And there is certainly an alarming pattern emerging of Carney lying about his accomplishments whether it is about his thesis or involvement with moving Brookfield’s headquarters to New York or having worked with former Finance Minister Paul Martin, indicating that his work with Mr. Martin led to a balanced budget. In fact, Mr. Martin balanced the budget a year before Carney’s involvement.

READ: Mark Carney accused of plagiarism in 1995 Oxford doctoral thesis

Similarly, can Carney be trusted to deal with the problems of Canada’s immigration system? Doubtful, especially when Carney added Mark Wiseman to his backroom advisors.  Wiseman is co-founder of the “Century Initiative,” a group calling for a massive increase in Canada’s immigration levels, with the ultimate goal of bringing the country’s population to 100 million by 2100. The problems with such massive immigration are many, the least of which is that this has been rejected by Canadians. A Leger poll conducted in July of 2024 found that 60% of Canadians were of the view that immigration levels were too high. Yet here we are in the spring of 2025, and Carney appears to be following Trudeau’s same mass immigration policies and listening to people such as Wiseman despite the fact that such policies are poison in Quebec as well as in the rest of Canada. Given Carney’s need for Quebec votes, one wonders about the prudence of Carney’s association with the Century Initiative project by actively courting the advice of its co-founder.

Generally speaking, one does not want to give power to people one cannot trust. To be fair, no one is perfect, and one or two missteps are to be expected. However, under the circumstances, Carney and the Liberals have amassed a significant number of serious missteps giving Canadians no reason to trust them.

Carney is not the agent of change

Carney is merely Trudeau 2.0, enacting Liberal extremist policies and willing to do anything to impose his own climate change/World Economic Forum agenda and personal ideology on a country which he has already signaled is in need of a new course, different from what the Liberals have given Canadians these past ten years. Judging from the current “news” coming from the Liberals it appears that once again the Liberals are tone-deaf to the genuine needs of Canadians and their families. Maintaining power is the Liberal Party’s only concern. Under Carney, Trudeau’s legacy is all but guaranteed to continue, only worse. Don’t forget, Carney himself was the chief economic adviser to the Trudeau government since the summer of 2020—that’s almost five years of Carney-inspired policies Canadians have been suffering through!

READ: Mark Carney is trying to market globalism as a ‘Canadian value.’ Will it work?

Despite superficial changes to the packaging, the Liberal Brand under Carney’s policies are the same as Trudeau’s because the Liberal Party is the same: same advisors, i.e., Tom Pitfield, Katie Telford, Trudeau’s former Chief of Staff, Gerry Butts; same cabinet, although slightly re-shuffled to give the appearance of “change”; and the same belief in the net-zero ideology of the Marxist-driven climate change hysteria. By appointing two former Trudeau cabinet ministers as his top advisers, Marco Mendicino as chief of staff and David Lametti, the former Justice Minister who brought in the MAID legislation, as part of the transition team, Carney is signaling to the Laurentian Elite not to worry, the only change coming is more of the same!

Reprinted with permission from REAL Women of Canada.

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

Mark Carney Vows Internet Speech Crackdown if Elected

Published on

logo

By

Mark Carney dodges Epstein jabs in Hamilton while reviving failed Liberal plans for speech control via Bill C-36 and Bill C-63.

It was supposed to be a routine campaign pit stop, the kind of low-stakes political affair where candidates smile like used car salesmen and dish out platitudes thicker than Ontario maple syrup. Instead, Mark Carney found himself dodging verbal bricks in a Hamilton hall, facing hecklers who lobbed Jeffrey Epstein references like Molotovs. No rebuttal, no denial. Just a pivot worthy of an Olympic gymnast, straight to the perils of digital discourse.
“There are many serious issues that we’re dealing with,” he said, ignoring the criticism that had just lobbed his way. “One of them is the sea of misogyny, antisemitism, hatred, and conspiracy theories — this sort of pollution online that washes over our virtual borders from the United States.”
Ah yes, the dreaded digital tide. Forget inflation or the fact that owning a home now requires a GoFundMe. According to Carney, the real catastrophe is memes from Buffalo.
The Ghost of Bills Past
Carney’s new plan to battle the internet; whatever it may be, because details are apparently for peasants, would revive a long-dead Liberal Party obsession: regulating online speech in a country that still pretends to value free expression.
It’s an effort so cursed, it’s been killed more times than Jason Voorhees. First, there was Bill C-36, which flopped in 2021. Then came its undead cousin, Bill C-63, awkwardly titled the Online Harms Act, which proposed giving the Canadian Human Rights Commission the power to act as digital inquisitors, sniffing out content that “foments detestation or vilification.”
Naturally, it died too, not from public support, but because Parliament decided it had better things to do, like not passing it in time.
But as every horror franchise teaches us, the villain never stays away for long. Carney’s speech didn’t include specifics, which is usually code for “we’ll make it up later,” but the intent is clear: the Liberals are once again oiling up the guillotine of speech regulation, ready to let it fall on anything remotely edgy, impolite, or, God forbid, unpopular.
“Won’t Someone Think of the Children?”
“The more serious thing is when it affects how people behave — when Canadians are threatened going to their community centers or their places of worship or their school or, God forbid, when it affects our children,” Carney warned, pulling the emergency brake on the national sympathy train. It’s the same tired tactic every aspiring control freak uses, wrap the pitch in the soft fuzz of public safety and pray nobody notices the jackboot behind the curtain.
Nothing stirs the legislative loins like invoking the children. But vague terror about online contagion infecting impressionable minds has become the go-to excuse for internet crackdowns across the Western world. Canada’s Liberals are no different. They just dress it up and pretend it’s for your own good.
“Free Speech Is Important, But…”
Former Heritage Minister Pascale St-Onge, doing her best impression of a benevolent censor, also piped up earlier this year with a classic verbal pretzel: “We need to make sure [freedom of expression] exists and that it’s protected. Yet the same freedom of expression is currently being exploited and undermined.”
Protecting free speech by regulating it is the sort of logic that keeps satire writers out of work.
St-Onge’s lament about algorithms monetizing debate sounds suspiciously like a pitch from someone who can’t get a word in on X. It’s the familiar cry of technocrats and bureaucrats who can’t fathom a world where regular people might say things that aren’t government-approved. “Respect is lacking in public discourse,” she whined on February 20. She’s right. People are tired of pretending to respect politicians who think governing a country means babysitting the internet.
Powerful forces want to silence independent voices online
Governments and corporations are working hand in hand to control what you can say, what you can read; and soon, who you are allowed to be.
New laws promise to “protect” you; but instead criminalize dissent.
Platforms deplatform, demonetize, and disappear accounts that step out of line.
AI-driven surveillance tracks everything you do, feeding a system built to monitor, profile, and ultimately control.
Now, they’re pushing for centralized digital IDs; a tool that could link your identity to everything you say and do online. No anonymity. No privacy. No escape.
This isn’t about safety, it’s about power.
If you believe in a truly free and open internet; where ideas can be debated without fear, where privacy is a right, and where no government or corporation dictates what’s true; please become a supporter.
By becoming a supporter, you’ll help us:
  • Expose online censorship, surveillance, and the digital ID agenda
  • Challenge restrictive laws that threaten free expression
  • Provide independent analysis on the erosion of digital rights
  • Support voices who refuse to bow to pressure from governments or Big Tech
We don’t answer to advertisers or political elites. 
If you can, please become a supporter. It takes less than a minute to set up, you’ll get a bunch of extra features, guides, analysis and solutions, and every donation strengthens the fight for online freedom.
Continue Reading

2025 Federal Election

Corporate Media Isn’t Reporting on Foreign Interference—It’s Covering for It

Published on

The Opposition with Dan Knight Dan Knight

A CCP-linked propaganda campaign boosted Mark Carney, but instead of sounding the alarm, the CBC cast him as the victim. The truth? He wasn’t targeted—he was the beneficiary.

So let’s stop pretending. The headlines, the bureaucratic spin, the carefully worded talking points—none of it changes what actually happened. This week the Canadian government just confirmed what they’ve been denying for years: the Chinese Communist Party is interfering in our elections. Not in theory. Not in the abstract. Right now. In real time.

And who’s the beneficiary? It’s not the opposition. It’s not the people calling out foreign interference. It’s not the Conservative candidates getting smeared, doxxed, or targeted by digital hit jobs. No, the beneficiary is the man now leading the Liberal Party. The man who was handpicked to replace Trudeau and keep the globalist machine running smoothly. That man is Mark Carney.

According to the SITE Task Force—the very same group tasked with monitoring foreign interference—a CCP-linked WeChat account ran coordinated messaging in Chinese-language communities across Canada. That messaging didn’t attack Carney. It elevated him. It portrayed him as a strong, capable leader, someone who would stand up to the United States. That’s not an attack. That’s not foreign meddling meant to sow chaos. That’s targeted influence designed to shape an outcome. To tip the scale.

So what did the press do with this information? CBC, CTV, the Globe and Mail—they all ran with the same disingenuous line: “Chinese information operation focused on Carney.” Focused? That’s the best they could do? He wasn’t the focus. He was the favorite. He wasn’t the target. He was the chosen candidate. The state broadcaster, which receives $1.2 billion a year in taxpayer funds, chose to frame a CCP influence operation that benefited Carney as if he were the victim. And they wonder why trust in media is collapsing.

Meanwhile, who was actually targeted? Joe Tay. A Conservative candidate. A Canadian citizen. And someone with the courage to speak out against Beijing’s repression. For that, the Hong Kong government—acting on orders from the CCP—put a bounty on his head. HK$1 million for his arrest. And then, in an absolutely disgraceful moment, Liberal MP Paul Chiang repeated that bounty in public, in Canada, saying someone could take Tay to the Chinese consulate and claim the reward.

What was Carney’s response? He called it a “lapse in judgment.” A “teachable moment.” Chiang remained a candidate until the scandal became too big to ignore and the resignation came—conveniently timed just before midnight. And not once—not once—did Carney publicly condemn the CCP. Not once did he say the name of the regime running operations to influence Canadian politics. Not once did he call out the foreign government targeting his opponents and helping him.

Why would he? He doesn’t want the interference to stop. He and the Liberals have benefited from it before—just ask Han Dong in Don Valley North—and they’re benefiting from it now. This isn’t hesitation. It’s a pattern. A Liberal MP parrots a CCP bounty and they defend him. A CCP media operation boosts their leader and they stay quiet. CSIS warns them about Beijing’s interference and they bury it. Every time, they play dumb. Every time, it’s the same excuse: no impact, no problem, nothing to see here.

But Canadians are not blind. They can see what’s happening. They can see who benefits. And they’re starting to realize that this isn’t about safeguarding democracy. It’s about safeguarding a narrative. Because when your elections are being massaged by foreign powers, and your media is too compromised to call it out, the system doesn’t just have a problem. It has a crisis.

And if we don’t deal with it now—if we let Beijing call the shots and let the CBC clean up the mess—then we’re not a democracy anymore. We’re a client state. And the country we thought we had will be gone. Quietly. Carefully. And permanently.

Subscribe to The Opposition with Dan Knight .

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Continue Reading

Trending

X