The specific ruling he'd overturn found the Harper-era policy that let judges dole out consecutive, 25-year blocks of parole ineligibility in cases of multiple first-degree murderers violated the charter. When asked if he respects Supreme Court decisions, Poilievre responded "yes." Hm
On case we need anymore evidence of the orange influence
Let's make sure this power hungry turd doesn't become PM.
PoiLIEvre like Harper disrespects 🇨🇦's judiciary and his base will denigrate the Judiciary like our Senate on the basis Judges & S¹enators were appointed in the past 10 yrs despite fact both have been less politicized than under Harper Yrs CPC threaten the independence of our institutions
Destroying Canada from within! Sure Poilievre will ! Testing on murderers like Trump is testing off shore prisons on deportees then today asked Bukele to build 5 more mega prisons for US citizens Maybe Poilievre would like to off shore CDNs too! Hands off our Charter!
Hm.
So Poilievre wants to pull out the not withstanding clause? Our charter of rights & freedoms is conservatives' public enemy #1.
Lol. Ok. Once he starts using this clause, where will it end?
He lies like he breathes.
"We will only use Section 33 to fight crime," Poilievre said when asked if he's willing to invoke the notwithstanding clause in other instances. So in other words, yes, when it comes to crime....which is a pretty big category!
I'm an old man..... WHERE DID ALL THESE DICKTATOR WANNABROS COME FROM??? NO CONSERVATIVES UNTIL FASCISM IS DEAD!
They've always been around, it's just that the general population wasn't as moronic as it is now. It's a long con. Years of slowly degrading education until *just* enough people - young and old - are able to easily fall for lies.
Yes, crime is pretty broad category. It notably includes "thought crime". Very slippery slope.
I LOVE that out official opposition and someone who could still be PM is talking about overriding Charter rights for vague categories of people, SUPER ENTHUSED. bsky.app/profile/gamm...
Multiple murderers are imprisoned for +25yrs already. But, as usual, PP doesn't letfacts get in the way of simplistic solutions. We can't trust PP to not use the Notwithstanding clause to violate constitutionally protected rights for other reasons. Don't give him the power to do so. #NeverPoilievre
And not one has ever been paroled.
I can't imagine a multi murderer not being declared a "Dangerous Offender" which enables keeping them in prison.
Anything can be a crime if you're thin-skinned enough (looks down south). Hey, Pierre handles criticism well, right? /s
Totally, he didn’t change his entire appearance because he was upset about being compared to Milhouse. Allegedly, of course.
Now he just looks like milhouse without glasses.
I have called him Mr Magoo... which is fitting for us older folks out there ...
LOL!! very accurate
🤣🤣🤣 especially when he tried to justify lasik by saying his glasses fell off so he had to “get the eye surgery” like… what??
I tried to find that but couldn't. Poilievre said he ditched the glasses because his wife said he looked better without them. However...
bsky.app/profile/thun...
It’s painfully true 🤣
Canada's version of an Executive Order. Makes sense.
Someone needs to ask him about very specific examples of what’s happening in America right now. See what he responds.
This is why he only answers 4 pre approved questions from hand picked media outlets and no follow ups.
Follow up question, Mr Poilievre: Do you consider providing women with safe acces to abortion a crime, or a medical procedure?
Once that door opens, everything will be fair game! Not good.
*cough cough*
We also know that this will do nothing to stop crime!
In the U.S. & other authoritarian regimes, criticizing the leader is a crime
Right! This is his plan.
this is on top of his push to (politically) 'appoint harsher judges' and this announcement comes on the day that Trump has an Oval Office celebration and floats, again, the idea of locking up citizens in a foreign mega prison. ...but hey, Pierre's totally different, he's not a MAGA guy 🙄
Here’s a 3-part thread that ventures into their thought process. I found it quite enlightening:
How many have been let out? I'm shocked that I haven't heard a reporter asking this question. This is a none issue, unless you want a precedent for using the 'Not Withstanding' clause, so you can then use it for the culture war issues, otherwise known as women's rights or minority rights issues.
That’s an easy way to get people thinking, “Oh, invoking the notwithstanding clause isn’t so bad…” & letting their guard down on future rights infringements. 😡
The Charter is what protects us from government and police overreach. No Canadian should be comfortable with that.
Funny timing, wouldn’t you say??
Very ominous
Where did this "fight crime" stuff come from? I realize we suck in a lot of ways but we aren't exactly a criminal stronghold Fight climate change, poverty and poor housing and you will probably fix the crime issue "Tough on crime" in the USA has made $$ for private prisons and not lowered crime rate
Fear and anger are the two fastest emotions to play yo make someone support you if you vaguely promise to make them feel safe. It usually isn't about any real threat but folks fall for it all the time.
Just more gaslighting
It can be looked at that way, or as spin, advertising, persuasion, whatever concept works.It shouldn't be ignored or dismissed but something to be wary of. If possible persuade people to ask questions about the veracity of the subject.
Exactly. It’s a bullshit talking point meaning something else.
Crime, pipelines, all bs smoke and mirrors. Climate change, health, building new trade relationships, food security, housing
Give them an inch, they'll take a mile Isn't that what can be said about this? Or what would they call this? A slippery slope? Nope. Not buying his lie that it will be precision targeted. #cdnpoli
![Section 33 allows Parliament or the legislature of a province to derogate from certain sections of the Charter, namely section 2 (fundamental freedoms), sections 7 to 14 (legal rights) and section 15 (equality rights). It does not apply to democratic rights (section 3 — the right to vote or sections 4 and 5 the sitting of the House of Commons or other Canadian legislatures), mobility rights (section 6) or language rights (sections 16 to 23). The unavailability of s. 33 in respect of those rights reflects the special importance attached to them by the framers of the Charter (Frank v. Canada (Attorney General), [2019] 1 S.C.R. 3, at para. 25; Conseil scolaire francophone de la Colombie-Britannique v. British Columbia, 2020 SCC 13, at para. 148). It remains unsettled whether section 33 applies to section 28 of the Charter (equality of men and women)](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:iyyzcuc24pgchmsbjnsa3wu3/bafkreigy5ux3llwkeorpoxwvbpngo27vkirq6mrap2u5i2a2hoi3lu2tqe@jpeg)
Who gets to decide when the crime has been committed or when the sentencing within our existing legal system isn’t enough? Chance this person feels they have the authority to use planes to send people they don’t like to Central American countries without due process?
Or his perception of crime
And he can make anything a crime
Oh, a good way to recriminalize abortion after he lets MPs vote "their conscience."
Correct. The 'other' pathway to trampling women's rights.
He’s not like Trump. Please don’t put in the newspaper that he’s like Donald Trump.
Give him an inch he'll take a mile.
Very broad.
and one that can easily be expanded to include... way too many things.
Some people think Abortion should be a crime like it is in some US states.
Unfortunately, security of the person is a right so healthcare is protected. Perhaps they should move to the US where they will be more comfortabe? It's a thought.
Speaking as someone watching my home go down the toilet... that's what we said here, too.
While my comment was snarky, it was sincerely meant. I will fight, litterally if need be, to protect The Charter and The Constitution Act. Women are persons under the law. We have many rights that should not be let go of for a short term false promise of less taxes.
PP can override rights by using the notwithstanding clause. That is what the notwithstanding clause does. He is promising to override prisoners' rights with this announcement. Security of the Person can also be overridden.
I am aware.
I believe he will use the Notwithstanding Clause to force people with addiction into mandatory " treatment" programs...aka put unhoused persons into custody under the guise of testing them.
I thought the entire reason why they hated Trudeau was because he overrode the charter? And now this fool comes along and says it like it’s no big deal. I can’t do the hypocrisy anymore. It’s going to kill me.
Poilievre wants to bring in mega private prisons much like Harper tried to do during his run as PM. Recall the Penetanguishene. Texas is drooling at the idea.
What other ‘criminal’ acts he doesn’t like would Poilievre use that power for once the cat is out of the bag. Looking south of the border ominously…
And that's just a start - the part he's willing to say out loud pre-election.
Crimes like "hate speech" if you are vocally against the genocide going on in Gaza
guess what else is going to be designated a crime? abortion? being trans? loving a person of the same gender?