Blog

75% of Blairmore residents want a coal mine — so why are outside activists allowed to block it?

The people of Blairmore already had their say. They want the coal mine.

While celebrity activists from outside the region push for a province-wide referendum to stop a proposed coal mine in Alberta’s Crowsnest Pass, locals in Blairmore voted nearly 75 percent in favour of the project. But apparently, that democratic result only counts if the “right” people vote the “right” way.

On tonight’s episode of The Gunn Show, longtime energy advocate and Oil Sands Strong founder Robbie Picard talks about his work amplifying the voices of the people who actually live in the region and stand to benefit from the jobs, investment and economic activity tied to the proposed mine.

Instead, the debate has been hijacked by celebrity opposition campaigns led by musicians like Corb Lund and George Canyon, whose province-wide citizen initiative petition seeks to override the wishes of the local community through a referendum driven largely by outside activists.

Picard argues this fight is about more than coal. It’s about whether rural Albertans still have the right to shape their own economic future without being steamrolled by urban activists, celebrities and political pressure groups who parachute in for the headlines and leave locals to deal with the consequences.

If “local voices matter” is more than just a slogan, why are the people of Blairmore being ignored after already voting overwhelmingly in favour of the project?

And why is Alberta’s resource economy subjected to veto campaigns, while the communities that depend on these projects are treated like their opinions don’t count?

Robbie Picard joins me to discuss the growing backlash from rural Albertans who are tired of being talked down to by people who don’t live there, don’t work there and won’t suffer the economic fallout if these projects are killed.

Keep reading

Homeland Security ‘Drawing Up Plans’ to Suspend International Flights Into Sanctuary Cities Until They Stop Protecting Illegal Aliens

The Trump administration is considering plans to suspend immigration and customs processing at airports in Democrat-run sanctuary cities.

Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin said the administration is drawing up plans to halt processing at airports in Democratic-run jurisdictions that refuse to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement.

Mullin confirmed the plans in an interview on Fox News host Sean Hannity.

“We’re currently drawing up plans to say listen, in these sanctuary cities, where the local, radical left Democrats aren’t allowing us to do our job and enforce federal laws, then we shouldn’t be processing international flights into their cities either,” he explained.

“Because they don’t want us to enforce immigration, but they want us to process immigration at their facilities? Nothing about that makes sense to me.”

The proposal would impact some of the country’s busiest international gateways, including airports in New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, Seattle, Boston, Denver, Philadelphia, and Newark.

Keep reading

Carney says majority will not be enough for Alberta to secede, citing the Clarity Act

Bloc Québécois MPs are calling on Prime Minister Mark Carney to drop the Clarity Act, arguing it complicates secession referendums by adding conditions beyond a simple majority vote. Carney, however, said the Clarity Act does not apply to the current Alberta independence question and defended the Act’s requirements.

During Question Period in the House of Commons on Tuesday, Carney said the 50 per cent “plus one” threshold, a standard measure of majority support, does not automatically apply to questions of provincial independence, as set out in the Clarity Act.

The Act, passed in response to a 1998 Supreme Court ruling on Quebec secession, states that even if a majority votes to leave the federation, Parliament must determine whether the result reflects a “clear majority,” taking into account factors such as voter turnout and the size of the margin.

Bloc MP Christine Normandin pressured Carney in the House of Commons on Tuesday after he declared that he would use the Clarity Act to interfere in an Alberta referendum to separate from Canada.

“Any province or Quebec has the right to ask its citizens the question of its choice in a referendum. Citizens have the right to answer freely, and the majority wins with 50% of the votes plus one,” Normandin said in French. “ This concerns only two groups, the government that asked the question and the citizens who answered it. That is democracy. It’s that simple.”

Carney stated that the current question before the Alberta government is a “question on the question” and the Clarity Act wouldn’t apply, but that a “clear majority” on a secession question would need to be recognized by parliament for a province to leave confederation.

Keep reading

Report: Zohran Mamdani’s Harlem Grocery Store Already Received $25M in Taxpayer Funds, Bringing Total to $55M

Socialist New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s chosen site for a $30 million, government-owned grocery store in East Harlem was approved for a $25 million taxpayer-funded facelift several years ago, setting up the total price tag at a whopping $55 million.

The proposed location is La Marqueta, a food-forward market located between East 111th and East 119th streets under the elevated Metro North tracks on Park Avenue. The purpose of the city-run store would be to offer super low prices because the store would not pay rent or taxes. 

“That same site, however, already won approval from the city’s Economic Development Corporation nearly a decade ago for a $25 million project to redevelop La Marqueta — bringing the total price tag of the market’s proposed makeover to a staggering $55 million, city officials confirmed,” New York Post first reported. 

Stephen Zagor, adjunct associate professor of food studies at Columbia Business School, told the outlet the $30 million price tag was already “an outrageous number,” and “you’d expect the doorknobs and cash registers to be solid gold.”

“And to think there is another $25 million allocated years ago for the rest of La Marqueta, which is well past its prime, I’d think they would have to revisit that,” Zagor added.

Anthony Pena, president of the National Supermarket Association, said city leaders have “not been transparent and open about anything they are doing” and noted that Mamdani never mentioned the location’s previous project in the report. 

Mamdani has allocated approximately $70 million for five government-run stores, one for each borough. Pena said the final cost raises questions about why the city would be spending so much on the East Harlem location specifically. 

“They are going to spend $10 million on a 20,000-square-foot store and $30 million on a 9,000-square-foot store,” Pena said. “There is a massive disconnect right now and there are more questions than answers.”

The Economic Development Corporation (EDC) confirmed to the Post that the $25 million deal and the $30 million store are two separate investment items. 

Keep reading

Petition to Ban Hunting and Fishing in Oregon Reaches Threshold to be on the Ballot This Fall

Back in February, we told you about a petition that was being circulated by progressives in Oregon, to essentially ban hunting and fishing in the state. It’s actually worse than that. They are trying to ban the killing of animals in the state, so this would not only affect hunting, but also the raising of animals for food.

Well, the leftists got their signatures and this is actually going to be on the ballot in Oregon this fall. Do you think this is what the pioneers who settled Oregon had in mind?

These people are completely insane.

The New York Post reports:

‘Animal cruelty’ ballot initiative criminalizing hunting and fishing moves forward in Oregon

A wild new “animal cruelty” ballot proposal would put hunters and fishermen on the hook.

Controversial legislation that would outlaw killing or “injuring” any animal — even while shooting or catching your dinner — is one step closer to landing on the ballot in Oregon, officials said Wednesday.

The measure, Initiative Petition 28, has garnered 120,000 signatures, more than the roughly 117,000 it needs to go to vote in November, The Oregonian reported.

Along with banning hunting and fishing, the legislation would also prohibit slaughtering livestock and using animals in rodeos and for scientific research.

It would also prohibit operating a commercial poultry business and castrating or neutering livestock, among other practices.

Hunting advocates said the legislation misses the mark — by a mile.

“[It’s] an all out assault on Oregonians’ way of life,” gubernatorial candidate Sen. Christine Drazan (R-Canby) told the Statesman Journal.

“It criminalizes ranchers, farmers, meat producers and threatens to kill thousands of jobs. It would mean the end of hunting and fishing in Oregon, killing not only traditions and ending access to an essential source of food, but butchering natural resource-based industries that support hunting and fishing,” she said.

Do these people have any idea what they’re doing?

Keep reading

Doing The Math: UC Faculty Urges Return To Standardized Testing After Shocking Decline In Skills

Years ago, I wrote a column denouncing the decision of the University of California system to drop standardized testing in the cause of greater racial diversity. Now, hundreds of UC mathematics faculty have called for a return to such testing after reports showing a thirtyfold increase in students with math skills below high school level.

It was heralded as a way to preserve diversity after voters in California repeatedly rejected race-based admissions and the Supreme Court appeared ready to bar such practices (commonly proven with reference to standardized test differentials among applicants).

Now, many professors in the California system have come to the same conclusion as some of us who denounced the move years ago. They have witnessed the drop in academic skills and abilities among incoming students.

These tests not only have the most significant predictive value for performance but also play an important role in the advancement of minority students. Former University of California President Janet Napolitano, however, overrode those conclusions.

Napolitano responded to such criticism with a Standardized Testing Task Force in 2019. Many people expected the task force to recommend the cessation of standardized testing. The task force did find that 59 percent of high school graduates were Latino, African-American or Native American but only 37 percent were admitted as UC freshman students.

The Task Force did not find standardized testing to be unreliable or call for its abandonment, however.

Instead, its final report concluded that “At UC, test scores are currently better predictors of first-year GPA than high school grade point average (HSGPA), and about as good at predicting first-year retention, [University] GPA, and graduation.”

Not only that, it found: “Further, the amount of variance in student outcomes explained by test scores has increased since 2007 … Test scores are predictive for all demographic groups and disciplines … In fact, test scores are better predictors of success for students who are Underrepresented Minority Students (URMs), who are first generation, or whose families are low-income.”

In other words, test scores remain the best indicator for continued performance in college.

That clearly was not the result Napolitano or some others wanted.

So, she simply announced a cessation of the use of such scores in admissions.

The system would go to a “test-blind” system until it developed its own test.

Keep reading

The Democracy Fund to testify before Senate: Bill C-9 threatens free speech & religious liberty

TDF will appear before the Senate of Canada to warn that Bill C-9 threatens freedom of expression, removes protections for religious speech, and creates sweeping new hate-related offences despite existing laws already addressing such conduct.

OTTAWA: Tomorrow, on Thursday, May 28, 2026, Mark Joseph, Executive Director of The Democracy Fund, will testify before the Senate of Canada on Bill C-9, the “Combatting Hate Act.”

TDF argues that Bill C-9 is unnecessary and dangerously overbroad. The legislation would:

  • Criminalize the display of additional symbols under s. 319, even though existing Criminal Code provisions already address such conduct
  • Eliminate the religious defence under s. 319(3)(b) and (3.1), potentially exposing religious teachings on marriage, sexuality, morality, and scripture to criminal prosecution
  • Create a sweeping new stand-alone “hate-motivated offence” that turns any violation of the Criminal Code or any other Act of Parliament into a serious crime if “motivated by hatred.”
  • Add redundant intimidation and obstruction offences already covered by existing mischief, disturbance, and intimidation laws.

“Bill C-9 represents a major expansion of state power over speech and conduct,” said Mark Joseph, Executive Director of The Democracy Fund. “By removing the religious defence, it will criminalize the public expression of sincerely held religious views believed by millions of Canadians. The new hate-motivated offence will criminalize minor conduct and invite prosecutorial overreach despite existing laws already punishing such crimes. This Bill will not reduce social conflict; it will chill debate, strain judicial resources, and undermine Charter Rights.”

You can read TDF’s brief by clicking here.

Keep reading

Justice Department investigating whether Trump accuser E. Jean Carroll committed perjury, sources say

The Justice Department is conducting a criminal investigation into whether author E. Jean Carroll committed perjury in connection with her civil lawsuits against President Trump, sources familiar with the matter said.

The investigation is being led out of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Illinois, one of the sources added. 

Carroll sued Mr. Trump in two civil lawsuits accusing him of sexual assault and defamation. In 2023, a jury found Mr. Trump liable for sexual assault and defamation for comments he made in 2022. Carroll was awarded $5 million in damages.

A second jury in 2024 found him liable for defamation in connection with comments he had made about Carroll in 2019, awarding her $83.3 million in damages. Both judgments were upheld on appeal.

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, who represented Mr. Trump on some of the litigation, is recused from the case, one source added.

The investigation was reported earlier by CNN. The theory of the case hinges on whether Carroll lied when she said in a 2022 deposition that she received no outside funding for her lawsuit, a source told CBS News.

It was later revealed that billionaire Reid Hoffman, co-founder of LinkedIn, helped pay for some of her legal expenses.

CBS News has reached out to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Illinois for comment on the investigation, as well as to Roberta Kaplan, the attorney who represented Carroll for the two lawsuits.

Carroll accused Mr. Trump of sexually assaulting her in a New York City department store dressing room during an encounter in the mid-1990s, an account which she published in a 2019 story for New York Magazine. In 2019, Carroll sued Mr. Trump for defamation, but the case stalled in court.

She then filed a second defamation lawsuit in 2022, adding a claim of rape under New York’s Adult Survivors Act.

Mr. Trump has repeatedly denied the sexual assault allegations.

Hoffman’s financial backing for Carroll’s lawsuit was first revealed in legal papers filed by Mr. Trump’s attorneys in April 2023, just ahead of the trial in the first defamation lawsuit, according to the New York Times.

When Mr. Trump’s attorneys brought the issue up on appeal, the appeals court found that Carroll had “plausibly represented” in her deposition “that she had forgotten about the limited outside funding counsel obtained.” 

Keep reading

New American Strikes Target Iranian Military Site That Reportedly Fired Drones at US Cargo Ship

The elusive peace and the ubiquitous clashes.

After the peace negotiations between the US and Iran seemed to be hours away from the signing of a successful peace agreement, disagreements ended up pushing it back into tough negotiations.

So, after a skirmish in the Strait of Hormuz a few days ago, today (27), another exchange of fire involved US and Iranian forces.

Three blasts were heard over the Iranian port city of Bandar Abbas on the Strait of Hormuz, according to Fars News, as air defenses were ‘activated for a few minutes’.

Reuters reported:

“The U.S. military carried out ​new strikes overnight in Iran targeting a military site that ‌officials believed posed a threat to U.S. forces and commercial maritime traffic in the Strait of Hormuz, a ​U.S. official told Reuters on Wednesday.

The official, who spoke ​on condition of anonymity, said the U.S. ⁠military has also intercepted and shot down multiple ​Iranian drones that posed a similar threat.

The U.S. military ​strikes, which have not been previously reported, came during negotiations to end a three-month-old war that has killed thousands and ​sent global energy prices sharply higher since it ​began on February 28 with U.S. and Israeli attacks.”

Keep reading

Texas Sues Discord, Seeks Mandatory Age Verification

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued Discord on Friday. The lawsuit alleges the platform enabled child predators, deceived parents, and violated the state’s Deceptive Trade Practices Act.

But the remedy Texas is asking the court to impose goes far beyond fixing Discord’s broken safety systems. Paxton wants a judge to order mandatory age verification for every user on the platform under the Securing Children Online through Parental Empowerment Act, Texas’ SCOPE law.

That means before you can type a message, join a server, or talk to anyone on Discord, you would need to prove your identity to the state’s satisfaction. Government ID uploads. Biometric face scans. Third-party verification services that cross-reference your private records.

The SCOPE Act doesn’t specify which method, just that the platform must use a “commercially reasonable” one. All of that requires surrendering personal data that goes well beyond confirming you’re over 18.

This is the pattern now. Age verification laws are the vehicle through which governments are dismantling anonymous access to the internet and they’re doing it one platform at a time, one state at a time, always framed as protecting children.

More than 25 US states now require age checks to access some form of online content. The Supreme Court upheld Texas’s age verification law for adult websites last year.

The EU is rolling out its Digital Identity Wallet by the end of 2026. Australia banned under-16s from social media entirely. Discord is just the latest target.

“Discord has allowed and invited all kinds of nihilistic violence and evil,” Paxton said. “We live in a time where the dangers children face online have never been greater, and every parent in Texas deserves to know their child is protected.”

Paxton filed the lawsuit in Collin County state district court, part of a burst of tech company litigation from his office ahead of his US Senate GOP runoff against John Cornyn, which he won yesterday.

We obtained a copy of the lawsuit for you here.

Earlier this year and last, his office has gone after Snapchat, TikTok, and Roblox on similar grounds. Texas joins Nevada, Indiana, and New Jersey in suing Discord specifically, with Florida investigating separately.

Keep reading