John Bolton - Jeff Rath- DANIELLE Smith facing possible LEADERSHIP review! - PLUS： Bill 14 & the court case

00:00:00.000 I have constituency association presidents, UCP constituency association presidents calling me and saying that if Danielle does not fix this problem that I'm about to tell you guys about, that they're going to be demanding a leadership review.

00:00:16.520 Hi, it's John and welcome to the channel. Great to have you along.

00:00:19.940 I have got my big blue mug of coffee and I said on a video earlier that coming from Ontario, I used to do a radio program there where I talked a lot about politics.

00:00:30.080 I talked to a lot of politicians, but there's nothing, nothing quite like Alberta politics.

00:00:35.820 Things happen so quickly here. I moved out here 13 years ago and it is a, it's a, it's a unique place when it comes to politics.

00:00:42.780 And joining me, as you can see, I've got Jeff Rath here who was in court on Friday and Jeff, you, you got a ruling on what you were in court about.

00:00:53.720 The judge ruled against you today, found the question that was put forward by the Alberta Prosperity Project.

00:01:00.400 You were there for Mitch Sylvester, the CEO, unconstitutional and it infringed on Aboriginal rights.

00:01:08.520 Is that what I mean?

00:01:09.360 Well, let's just back up a step though, John, because there was something that happened before that.

00:01:13.640 Okay. Yeah. Oh yeah. Yeah. Okay.

00:01:15.480 And the first thing I'd like to focus on is before we got a ruling from the judge, we got a ruling from the Alberta legislature in the form of a document called bill 14.

00:01:26.240 Okay.

00:01:26.520 It basically tells the judge that he cannot rule in this case and that the case is to be dismissed without cost to all parties.

00:01:34.000 And when the judge got a letter from the province to that effect yesterday, probably around four o'clock, I think he got so angry that the legislature was interfering in his court case that he stayed up all night and wrote a 63 page decision that he released from the bench this morning to preempt the legislature, preempting his ruling on the court case.

00:02:02.220 Okay. So are you guys following me on this?

00:02:05.020 Yeah. Well, no, I know I'm following you. I was going to, I was going to come back around to that, but it's fine to start there because, I mean, I spoke with Mitch earlier about this and he's quite optimistic about what's going on here.

00:02:16.060 Yeah. I see it as, you know, I don't like anybody characterizing this ruling as a loss for us. I see it as a win, right?

00:02:23.880 Because the legislature pre-ruled to say that they're getting rid of the very section that we were in court over, which frames a very narrow question. Right.

00:02:33.240 And I think that the judge was so annoyed that the legislature took away what was going to be his favorite toy this Christmas, which was writing a very lengthy, you know,

00:02:43.340 treatise on all of the reasons that Albertans shouldn't, you know, want to separate from Canada.

00:02:49.900 He was rushed in that by the legislature, basically saying that the case was to be dismissed.

00:02:55.220 So he rushed out this decision from the bench. And I have to say, with the greatest of respect to the learned justice, for whom I do have a lot of, you know, like a great, great respect as a constitutionalist, you know, a lot of what he says in this judgment just doesn't make sense.

00:03:11.880 And, you know, I guess it's an open question as to whether anybody would appeal it, whether we'd appeal it or the Alberta justice would appeal it, because it's entirely moot at this point.

00:03:21.960 It's largely, you know, once Bill 14 gets passed, it's entirely irrelevant to use one of the judges' words.

00:03:27.540 I think Keith Wilson said it on a podcast. It's kind of a nothing burger now.

00:03:32.080 But, you know, there's some things that he did in there, you know, that I think kind of bear comment.

00:03:37.300 Like on page five, you know, he's criticising, you know, Mitch Sylvester, you know, for the forming of the question.

00:03:45.640 And he says the referendum proposal cannot take the position in this case that his constitutional referendum proponent cannot take the position in this case that his constitutional referendum proposal is just a legally inconsequential consultation with Alberta or that the substance of his constitutional referendum proposal is something other than Alberta independence.

00:04:04.280 But the problem you have is in him saying that he's completely ignoring the secession reference of the Supreme Court, which says that a referendum itself is not legally binding.

00:04:26.640 It's merely a political exercise that has no legal impact.

00:04:30.480 And then he says you've got to jump ahead to what the, you know, what the net result is going to be, you know, that you have to look at, you know, what the, you know, like you have to presume that the amendments to the Constitution that are sought under the referendum would in fact take place.

00:04:53.380 And then he says because we assume that those amendments would take place, we then have to, you know, we then on that basis say that these amendments contravene rights that are guaranteed under the, you know, under the Charter and under Section 351.

00:05:07.860 The problem with that legal reasoning from a constitutional perspective is that if we assume that the amendments took place, don't we also have to assume that the amendments took place in a legal manner within the constitutional framework, at which point they don't contravene anybody's constitutionally protected rights.

00:05:27.520 Right.

00:05:27.580 You know, it's a massive glaring, you know, logical and legal hole, you know, in his reasoning that every other error that he makes in that decision flow from.

00:05:37.300 So I don't want to get into it, you know, in detail and go, you know, from one end to another, everything that's wrong with that decision.

00:05:44.020 We're now at a point where, you know, this decision is completely irrelevant because of the fact that we've got Bill 14 coming down the pipe that's going to allow us to gather our signatures, which we're very grateful for.

00:05:58.200 We're going to have our referendum question and we're going to have our, you know, our referendum likely in October of 2026.

00:06:06.200 So, you know, we're actually very happy about where we're at and we see all of this, you know, as, you know, as a victory.

00:06:13.020 I want to ask you one, I want to ask one more question about this and then we will move on because I want to get to Bill 14 because it's, it's quite astounding.

00:06:19.760 And it was really fun to talk to Mitch this morning because you could see, you know, the grin on his face about this.

00:06:26.180 But I found this, is this unusual?

00:06:29.320 You had a judge here basically criticizing the government and you mentioned this, he said, quote,

00:06:35.100 legislating to preemptively end this court proceeding disrespects the administration of justice, unquote.

00:06:41.920 That's kind of unusual for a judge to say something like that about the government, which, you know, kind of sets the law here.

00:06:49.740 Isn't that correct?

00:06:50.380 Yeah, but I mean, I understand where he's coming from, you know, I mean, it's, you know, it's, I have to say it's extremely unusual.

00:06:58.820 I mean, I've been practicing law for, you know, going on 35 years now.

00:07:03.300 I'm in my, you know, I'm in my 35th year of practice and I've never had a court case legislated out from underneath.

00:07:10.920 I mean, as a result of winning numerous constitutional cases over the years, I've been responsible for many changes in legislation and many changes in the law where, you know, the most recent one by way of example was the Ingram case that I won where I forced the court to declare every single COVID order issued by Jason Kenney throughout the pandemic to be illegal because the Public Health Act said that Hinshaw had to be making the orders.

00:07:39.240 But really it was Jason Kenney and his cabinet that were making the orders, right?

00:07:43.580 So after the fact, they changed the legislation so that the cabinet, in fact, could order the chief medical officer of health to replace her medical opinion with whatever the cabinet told her to do, right?

00:07:57.920 But that's, you know, they're legislating after the fact, you know, to change, you know, to fix a loophole that's been created by me winning a case in court, right?

00:08:05.940 This is completely different.

00:08:07.340 I was thinking the case hasn't even concluded yet.

00:08:12.240 And the Alberta legislature, you know, has thrown a flag down on the field and, you know, is calling a timeout.

00:08:19.360 And notwithstanding the timeout, the judge said, well, to hell with you, you're, you're, you know, and again, in fairness to the judge, I agreed with them on this.

00:08:28.120 And I actually wrote a letter to the court saying, hey, you know, as far as it goes tomorrow, you know, what the legislature tabling a bill, it doesn't become law until it's proclaimed.

00:08:38.980 And, you know, we have three Treaty 7 First Nations and their legal counsel that have gone to great trouble to prepare submissions.

00:08:47.340 I think it would be disrespectful not to hear them for the completeness of the record, right?

00:08:53.080 But, you know, we're in a very, you know, and we may want to set aside time at some point in the future to discuss whether or not, you know, the legislature interfering with the judicial branch in this manner, you know, is in and of itself constitutional, right?

00:09:07.620 Because it's really unusual that something like this would happen.

00:09:11.020 But, you know, I think on balance, you know, it is constitutional and it is legal and whether judges like it or not, the legislature is the boss of them, right?

00:09:21.200 Right.

00:09:21.460 And, you know, but I think it really, really aggravated Justice Feesman.

00:09:25.420 Well, you know, it was pretty, it was pretty evident for the epilogue to this decision.

00:09:29.900 And, you know, and the fact that this decision was rushed out the way it was.

00:09:33.720 But, yeah, I was thinking about you as well, because here you are working on this case and then poof, it goes up in the air while your work's gone.

00:09:40.400 And all the, you know, the time you put into this as well.

00:09:42.900 Oh, it happens.

00:09:43.860 There's nothing, there's nothing, there's nothing a barrister hates worse than having a phenomenal trial completely, completely ruined by a good settlement.

00:09:56.520 So let's ask you about Bill 14.

00:09:59.340 Oh, my God.

00:10:00.140 So this is the real news.

00:10:01.340 Okay, let's forget about all the stuff about the Citizens Initiative Act and Justice Feesby and whatever.

00:10:07.560 Like I said, from our perspective, it's Bill 14 from an independence perspective, from a getting to get a referendum question perspective, you know, getting our signatures perspective.

00:10:20.480 It's great.

00:10:21.180 We're really happy with it.

00:10:22.520 I think the devil's in the details.

00:10:23.940 So if they, you know, all of this now is taken out of the hands of the chief electoral officer, it's on the desk of the attorney general, you know, so hopefully, you know, the attorney general does what they promised.

00:10:35.280 And that's to, you know, allow our question and our signatures to go forward.

00:10:39.020 But under this new act, he can say no, right?

00:10:41.780 Or he can refer our question back to the court for any reason.

00:10:44.940 So, you know, we're not happy with certain aspects of the bill.

00:10:48.280 But if they do what they promised and let us move forward the way that Premier Smith has said that, you know, we can, you know, that's going to be a very positive thing for Alberta independence.

00:10:58.680 The bigger problem we have now, and this is another Bill 14 issue, is we might be going to do a leadership review within the UCP in the new year.

00:11:07.960 Yeah, can we, can we, can we hold on that for just a second?

00:11:11.740 We'll come back to that.

00:11:13.420 Okay.

00:11:14.280 I want to ask you about this, because you mentioned Danielle Smith.

00:11:17.020 You were last week on this night, you were at the UCP AGM.

00:11:22.300 You stole the show for the weekend, Jeff.

00:11:24.460 You really did.

00:11:25.200 That's what people were talking about.

00:11:26.320 There were some good things that came out of it.

00:11:29.320 We've been critical of Danielle Smith at times.

00:11:31.440 You've been critical.

00:11:32.640 She has lowered the signature threshold.

00:11:35.120 She introduced Bill 14 here. 0.82

00:11:37.960 Making this court case really irrelevant, I guess is the way to put it.

00:11:42.640 So how are you feeling about what's going on here?

00:11:45.140 I don't know that she's on her side.

00:11:46.960 I think she's going to remain neutral, despite what people were saying about a radio candidate.

00:11:50.580 They misquoted her on that, by the way.

00:11:52.380 And I'm glad I had this opportunity, because apparently I've done something that I haven't done for years now,

00:11:59.500 and that is that I believed a news article that was put out by CBC, right?

00:12:03.080 She was misquoted.

00:12:04.020 She was misquoted.

00:12:04.580 But beyond that, she wasn't just misquoted.

00:12:06.780 But they say, oh, CBC had a headline wrong.

00:12:09.380 I read the entire article.

00:12:11.460 In the body of the article, they said that Danielle had said she's going to come out and be campaigning for the Federalists. 0.64

00:12:17.620 And Danielle's people said it never happened.

00:12:20.500 CBC has now retracted that and has basically admitted that they just made it up, right?

00:12:25.260 But they do say that Danielle did repeatedly repeat that slogan that drives all of us nuts, that, you know, she stands for a strong Alberta within the United Canada, right?

00:12:37.340 Yeah, exactly what she said.

00:12:38.360 The American slogan that got her booed repeatedly at the UCPA GM, I would note, right?

00:12:42.940 Yeah, and she said she thought that she thinks Canada can work. 0.94

00:12:47.220 And, of course, Alberta sovereignty within the United Canada is what she said in there.

00:12:51.080 She never said she was going to campaign against the yes side.

00:12:54.400 Right, and apparently she was taken out of context or they amplified what she was saying and twisted it into something a bit more than she said.

00:13:01.140 So to the extent that I was wrong about that, I would like to publicly apologize to Premier Smith for any comments that I made in that regard.

00:13:08.940 It was very shocking to a number of us, I think with good reason, because I think she had always said that she was going to be neutral, you know, with regard to any referendum.

00:13:17.280 And for her coming out, you know, apparently coming out on CBC and claiming that she was going to be campaigning alongside a little Tommy Lukasik and Jason Kenney was a lot, a bit much for a lot of us to take.

00:13:29.560 And as it turned out, it wasn't true.

00:13:32.520 And to that, I would, you know, I would, I would unreservedly apologize to Daniel Smith for perpetuating those awful lies told about her by CBC.

00:13:42.900 Yeah, and as frustrated as we get, and I said it here, I'm frustrated with the process, waiting and waiting and waiting.

00:13:50.600 Daniel Smith has been a good friend to this movement by doing these things.

00:13:54.720 So, you know, we owe her some gratitude, I think, in a way.

00:13:58.940 Bill 14 is going to, yeah, I know, to maybe be having signatures in January.

00:14:04.680 Yeah, no, and I mean, we're, and obviously we're happy about that to the extent that, to the extent that this is bona fide and that we're not, our, you know, our petition isn't going to end up on Mickey Amory's desk.

00:14:15.760 You know, for him to refer it back to the court or, you know, for any other reason or for Mickey Amory to not approve our petition.

00:14:23.920 And, you know, you know, that would, you know, that would cause some hard feeling.

00:14:29.320 But, you know, we're not there yet.

00:14:30.580 And I think we need to move forward like everybody's moving forward in good faith and we'll see.

00:14:34.400 That being said, though, I would note for, you know, if Mickey Amory's listening or Danielle's listening or anybody on their team is listening,

00:14:42.880 they do need to reconsider some aspects of Bill 14 because there's some real mischief in that Feesby decision about the fact that, you know,

00:14:52.440 if legislation says something can't contravene the Charter or Section 35,

00:14:59.400 his interpretation would not allow them to have a referendum on independence even under the Alberta Referendum Act

00:15:05.880 because they're moving that provision from the CIA into the Referendum Act.

00:15:10.420 So any references in the Referendum Act or any statute to not allowing referendum questions, you know,

00:15:18.480 that defend the Charter or Section 35, I think just need to be removed entirely because, you know,

00:15:25.000 at the end of the day, if the Attorney General has final discretion, you know,

00:15:28.760 the Attorney General is more than capable of determining what questions should or shouldn't go forward

00:15:34.060 without having some sort of internal limiting language within the statute, right?

00:15:39.300 Okay, so I want to come back.

00:15:40.940 I want to just mention this and then I want to move on.

00:15:42.960 As you said, leadership review.

00:15:45.400 I want to get to that because we'll run out of time here.

00:15:48.080 It does say in here, and this is on the Alberta.ca website regarding Bill 14.

00:15:52.380 I don't think it's the full thing, but it says under Referendum Act,

00:15:55.000 and maybe this is what you're talking about,

00:15:56.900 to reaffirm that a binding referendum result is not required to be implemented

00:16:00.600 if it would violate the Constitution.

00:16:02.700 A proposed amendment to the Referendum Act would state that Alberta's government

00:16:06.520 is not required to implement the results of a binding referendum

00:16:09.460 if doing so would contravene Canada's Constitution.

00:16:13.800 Is that what you're talking about?

00:16:14.700 So you would think something like that would have to be pulled out of this?

00:16:16.740 Yeah, I would want that removed because, you know,

00:16:19.560 because ultimately, first of all, Feesby's wrong, right?

00:16:22.420 He says, you know, our view as a proposal is to gather signatures and have a referendum,

00:16:27.360 which the Supreme Court says is a political exercise, not a legally binding exercise,

00:16:33.300 and one that doesn't affect the amendment of the Constitution itself.

00:16:37.220 Feesby skips it, you know, basically seems to say it does.

00:16:40.820 You look at the proposal, and then you have to assume that whatever amendments

00:16:44.820 to the Constitution Act would be enacted,

00:16:47.700 and then you have to assume that those amendments contravene the Constitution.

00:16:51.780 Well, he missed the fundamental point we were making, which is that how could an amendment,

00:16:57.420 if it's a lawful amendment, contravene anything?

00:17:00.500 Because all of the rights in the Constitution, including Section 35.1,

00:17:05.040 are subject to amendment under Part 5 of the Constitution Act.

00:17:09.600 People don't like it, but I'm sorry, that's the Constitution.

00:17:13.120 And Justice Feesby, in this decision of his, chose to ignore that.

00:17:16.280 And I don't even think really adequately address that.

00:17:19.680 But I don't want, like I said, I really want to talk about this other section.

00:17:22.640 Yeah, well, I'm going to get there, because I apologize.

00:17:26.960 I sent a text message to you at 4 o'clock this morning.

00:17:30.280 I hoped you didn't have your notifications on, or yadda yadda.

00:17:33.440 Do not disturb on taking notes.

00:17:34.480 I learned years ago, when I'd get these phone calls from the drunk tank

00:17:38.460 from various buddies of mine that were picked up for various misbehaviors,

00:17:41.780 to leave my phone turned off at night so that I wouldn't have to answer those calls.

00:17:45.160 Yeah, well, yeah, good, good.

00:17:46.680 Because it was 4 o'clock, and I went, oh, Christ, I just woke up, Jeff.

00:17:49.760 But anyway, you got back to me.

00:17:51.040 I said, can I talk to you later today after your court case?

00:17:53.420 I know you're in court.

00:17:54.440 I said, I want to talk to you about Bill 14.

00:17:56.120 It looks pretty good.

00:17:56.840 And you didn't say the devils in the details.

00:17:58.680 You found some more devils, I think, haven't you?

00:18:00.820 Well, I didn't find them.

00:18:02.740 Because I didn't get into that section.

00:18:04.740 The people that found the devils in the details were several CA presidents that I know.

00:18:10.720 And I have to say, they're hopping mad.

00:18:12.620 And I mean, I have constituency association presidents, UCP constituency association presidents,

00:18:19.760 calling me and saying that if Danielle does not fix this problem that I'm about to tell you guys about,

00:18:25.480 that they're going to be demanding a leadership review.

00:18:27.860 And this is in Bill 14, the one we're talking about here.

00:18:31.220 And this is in Bill 14.

00:18:31.800 It's on page 47.

00:18:34.060 And what it talks about is the sections of the Elections Act and the certification of people running for members of the Legislative Assembly.

00:18:43.840 And what they've done is they've struck out words that say that one of the principal officers of the registered party or applicable constituency association

00:18:52.640 and substituting the leader of the registered party.

00:18:56.700 And then clause striking out one of the principal officers and substituting the leader.

00:19:01.100 So those of us that aren't mired in, you know, sort of the day-to-day minutiae of constituency associations, how MLAs are appointed, you know, et cetera, right, wouldn't know what that meant.

00:19:14.740 Well, what it means is effectively Danielle and her team have gone from her having two clear pits for MLAs, right, to now having all 87.

00:19:24.240 So she's basically, she and her team are turning her into Justin Trudeau, where if she doesn't sign your nomination papers, right, you can't run. 0.96

00:19:35.220 So think about what that does to the caucus and what that does to MLA.

00:19:38.860 Just let me finish this point.

00:19:40.020 No, no, no.

00:19:40.860 If you're a bad little boy or girl in caucus and you're not behaving the way Danielle wants you to behave and you're not doing what the party, you know, like, not the party,

00:19:48.900 but the executive council wants you to do, like, even a sitting MLA, and I'm not going to name any names because I don't want to single people out,

00:19:55.740 but if you're an MLA that's seen as a bit of a maverick, right, Danielle can choose not to sign your nomination papers,

00:20:01.720 just the way that Justin Trudeau did when he told people running for the Liberals, well, if you're not pro-choice, you know, and you're pro-life, I'm not signing your nomination papers.

00:20:10.520 So she's literally turning the UCP, which has always been a grassroots organization, into a top-down organization like the Communist Party of the Soviet Union

00:20:20.360 or the Liberal Party of Canada, where the leader, the dear leader, you know, has a veto over every single MLA that runs

00:20:28.420 so she can refuse people's nominations and then replace people with her pick. 1.00

00:20:33.180 Let me circle back to where we were just a few minutes ago, Jeff, because you're saying these reasons she could deny signing the papers. 0.99

00:20:42.440 Deny signing the papers because you're somebody who believes in the independence movement in Alberta?

00:20:47.840 Oh, 100%.

00:20:48.840 So that's why this is maybe going in there?

00:20:51.340 Well, you know, I think that's part of it.

00:20:53.580 I mean, I think she understands that APP has been very busy taking over constituency association boards in the province,

00:20:59.500 and we have a lot of pro-independence constituency boards in Alberta now, and they don't like it.

00:21:05.980 I mean, all the Kenneyites in the cabinet, all the, you know, really all the people we want to get rid of, right?

00:21:11.480 You know, they're all holdovers from Jason and Kenney.

00:21:14.300 They're all part of the cocktail cabinet, locking us up in our homes for, you know, like forcing, you know,

00:21:19.340 not letting, you know, people like me and you take our daughters and family out for breakfast at the local Humpty's

00:21:25.540 because we haven't, you know, we haven't had our, you know, our magical shot in our arm.

00:21:29.900 I know this is very triggering.

00:21:31.200 It just takes a lot of us back, and it's like PTSD, right?

00:21:34.400 Yeah. 1.00

00:21:34.620 To think about this shit. 1.00

00:21:36.000 But that's what, you know, like all these holdover Kenneyites, like Adriana LaGrange, 1.00

00:21:40.100 even Mickey Amory was in the COVID, was part of the cocktail cabinet.

00:21:43.640 So all of these people that are holdovers from the Kenney era, you know, do not want to be replaced, obviously.

00:21:49.680 They do not want, you know, a caucus full of people that are in favor of independence.

00:21:55.020 They do not want the UCP, you know, to formally become an independence party, which is what it is now,

00:22:00.780 if you look at, if you listen to the base, right?

00:22:03.200 So they've now stuck this provision into Bill 14 so that Daniel Smith literally can become, you know,

00:22:10.940 the fascist dictator of the UCP and can act just like Justin Trudeau at deciding who gets to be an MLA

00:22:18.460 or who doesn't get to be an MLA in the same way that, you know, that Trudeau wouldn't let anybody

00:22:23.060 who was a non-feminist who believed, you know, who had religious beliefs and, you know, believed in life,

00:22:29.220 you know, couldn't be a member of parliament.

00:22:31.680 So you said leadership review.

00:22:34.940 You think that could possibly become it?

00:22:37.460 I'm hearing from constituency presidents across the province that if she doesn't back down on those clauses,

00:22:42.320 keep in mind, I mean, the bill is just tabled, so they still have an opportunity to amend the bill,

00:22:46.660 you know, at second reading or whatever.

00:22:48.720 But if she doesn't back down on those clauses, you know, that there's likely to be an SGM called,

00:22:53.620 a special general meeting called in the new year to review her leadership,

00:22:56.520 because people are not in the mood to have Danielle declare herself as the God-Empress of the UCP. 0.83

00:23:05.440 You know, we go from apologizing to Danielle Smith to, you know,

00:23:10.800 praising her for helping us move the referendum along in a way.

00:23:14.560 We have to thank her for that for sure.

00:23:16.540 Right.

00:23:17.100 And here we are again.

00:23:18.540 Well, credit where credit's due, right?

00:23:20.960 I mean, but I don't know who the hell's advising her.

00:23:23.820 That's the problem.

00:23:24.740 Like, who came up with this right idea?

00:23:26.680 Right.

00:23:27.180 Yeah.

00:23:27.380 So, you know, and from a policy perspective and a political perspective,

00:23:31.140 you have to admit it's pretty incoherent.

00:23:34.320 Right. 1.00

00:23:34.700 You know, it's like kiss them, then kick them, kiss them, then kick them. 1.00

00:23:38.320 Right. 0.99

00:23:39.680 And for the average person, Jeff, you know, I see this bill 14 and I think, oh, this is great.

00:23:44.320 I, you know, I get Mitch on and we're talking about the referendum.

00:23:47.400 This is stuff that's buried, the devil's in the details.

00:23:50.360 It's buried in there unless you're reading all through this, but now it's out in the open.

00:23:54.140 It could be amended as well.

00:23:55.280 So, this might change.

00:23:57.160 Yeah.

00:23:57.560 And I hope it will be.

00:23:58.720 I mean, I don't think the independence movement needs to have an open fight with Danielle. 0.98

00:24:03.340 Again, I keep saying it.

00:24:04.540 We would dearly love Danielle to come over to our side and lead Alberta in independence and become the first prime minister of Alberta. 0.97

00:24:12.240 Right.

00:24:12.420 We bear her, I personally bear her no ill will.

00:24:15.720 But, you know, when you see things like this and people are calling you and pointing them out and explaining to you why they're so insidious.

00:24:25.040 You know, I think I have an obligation to discuss them in public and to talk to people about what this is doing and to please, you know, beg Danielle and the team around her to, you know, to try to internalize the fact that, you know, the more they try to dictate to people within the party, the worse her political position becomes. 0.89

00:24:44.900 I mean, this is even like that silly motion that she tabled, you know, that led to Daryl Smith or Daryl Comick running against Rob Smith for president.

00:24:54.860 You know, where she's trying to limit, you know, she did, she limited speech and debate at the AGM. 1.00

00:25:00.180 You know, this wouldn't have been anywhere near a big story, like, you know, in terms of my having to go to the mic and ask people to stand on their feet.

00:25:06.420 If we just had a debate in the normal course about independence and then took a straw poll amongst our members in the normal course as to how many people favored independence and who didn't, that was the one thing Danielle didn't want. 0.92

00:25:18.220 Because, of course, all of a sudden, if it's clear that 85 or 90 percent of your base are firmly in favor of independence, you've got to drop that stupid slogan, strong Alberta within the United Canada, right? 0.89

00:25:29.500 He didn't want to do that. 0.98

00:25:30.580 She's not ready to do that.

00:25:32.480 She's not ready to have Nahid Nenshi accuse her of being a leader of a separatist party.

00:25:38.080 Well, she is, right?

00:25:39.900 Get over it.

00:25:40.960 And the thing is, I've got it.

00:25:43.240 I want to wrap up here in a second, Jeff, because I'm running short on time.

00:25:46.060 And the thing is, because you didn't have the discussion, now we can say 85 to 90 percent of the people in the party want independence.

00:25:52.940 And there's no proof that it's not true.

00:25:55.260 So, I mean, you could have straightened off this a week ago.

00:25:57.360 Well, and there's lots of proof there is.

00:25:58.020 And on top of it, you know, we wanted to have the debate and the discussion because I still want to hear from, you know, Premier Smith and others, you know, why they think staying in Canada is so much better for Albertans.

00:26:10.340 Because we know, you know, eliminating, you know, what the benefits are, eliminating federal income tax, eliminating federal corporate income tax, GST, excise tax, carbon tax, industrial carbon tax.

00:26:21.900 You know, all of those things that they're doing, having a strong and stable currency, you know, where they're not doubling the money supply every 10 years and robbing us of our savings and the equity in our homes.

00:26:32.400 Right. Right. So those are all, you know, if our kids want a future for all of us that have really analyzed this and have really thought about this, the only future for our kids and our grandkids is if we can get Alberta out of Canada.

00:26:44.800 Because the way Canada is going, they're going to drag Alberta down with them and they're in the process of doing it.

00:26:49.380 Does the Premier not have a duty?

00:26:52.320 I think you've said the words fiduciary duty in the past to do what's best for the people of Alberta.

00:26:59.200 And of course, and seeing that being independent would be better and best for the people of Alberta is not her duty to at least, you know, entertain the idea, you know, more or at the very least, you know, as was suggested by a former professor of I, Leon Craig, who, you know, six or seven years ago wrote to Jason Kenney and calling on Kenney to appoint a minister of independence preparedness.

00:27:24.480 Yeah. Right. You know, why is it Danielle doing that? You know, you know, you know, failing to plan is planning to fail. Right. And, you know, and that's what she's doing. 0.83

00:27:34.520 And then on top of it, you know, she keeps lying to people. And again, I promise to be nicer, but I'm sorry, but I think this is, you know, what she was doing that she was, I was elected on a mandate to, you know, fix Canada and elect.

00:27:47.240 She was not B.S. She was not elected to fix Canada. She was elected on Rob Anderson's free Alberta strategy mandate.

00:27:54.940 So, you know, that was her whole platform, Alberta pension coming home, collect taxes in Alberta, policing, you know, on and on and on, right.

00:28:04.000 Equal end equalization, the sovereignty act, you know, that was all free Alberta strategy.

00:28:09.340 That's what she campaigned on. So she actually campaigned on getting Alberta ready for independence. 0.97

00:28:16.260 And now she's claiming the opposite, you know, so it's, you know, it's pretty, you know, pretty confusing to everybody watching this as to what side of Danny's mouth she's talking about on any day of the week.

00:28:28.480 So let's let so in a couple of minutes, can you here's the day.

00:28:33.340 Okay, we started off, you know, maybe going back to yesterday, we had this Bill 14 come up.

00:28:38.700 But today, kind of a defeat in court, but Bill 14's here.

00:28:43.040 So your summary of the way things are going, how are you feeling?

00:28:46.240 No, no, I refuse to acknowledge I was defeated.

00:28:49.400 I keep saying it. I know you were going to say that.

00:28:51.420 In a normal case, we would appeal.

00:28:53.680 And I think that there's so many significant holes in Justice Feesby's decision that we would prevail on appeal, right?

00:29:01.320 You know, so we don't, you know, we're not likely to appeal because the decision's now moot and irrelevant because of Bill 14.

00:29:07.500 So on that basis, I am allowed to claim victory.

00:29:11.140 Okay.

00:29:11.580 And I didn't mean, I didn't mean to insult you.

00:29:14.480 I knew I was going to.

00:29:15.420 No, no, you're not.

00:29:16.140 You got defeated in court.

00:29:18.160 But yeah, but overall, you're feeling pretty good about the way things are going.

00:29:21.780 Yeah, we're feeling great about it.

00:29:23.460 And I just hope that Danielle understands that her base does not want, you know, Justin Trudeau as our leader, right?

00:29:30.500 So this idea that she wants to have a veto over every MLA on a going forward basis. 1.00

00:29:36.560 I mean, I'm telling you, if she persists in that, there's going to be a revolt at the constituency association level, and she will lose her party, right?

00:29:46.840 So, no, that's how serious it is.

00:29:49.320 I mean, my phone's been ringing off the hook over this, right?

00:29:52.040 Okay.

00:29:52.460 So, you know, and I hope she hears me on that.

00:29:54.820 And I mean, again, I bear her no ill will.

00:29:57.260 I just would like to see some coherence coming out of her policy shop.

00:30:01.860 And I don't think the people in and around her right now, I think they're in reactive mode to too many things.

00:30:07.760 And they're not thinking clearly, and they're not behaving in a coherent manner.

00:30:11.420 Okay. 1.00

00:30:11.640 You know, and that's, you know, and that's been clear since they signed that stupid MOU that makes zero sense. 0.99

00:30:16.440 Yeah. 0.98

00:30:16.840 Well, Jeff, it's great talking to you.

00:30:18.120 You've got to wrap things up here.

00:30:19.800 You're going to hear about it.

00:30:21.320 I think I've got, you know, there's a lot of headlines in this video for sure.

00:30:25.780 It's always a pleasure to talk to you, and certainly we're going to be talking.

00:30:28.680 I mean, I said to Mitch this morning, the first time I asked him about how do we organize now?

00:30:33.180 How do we get the signatures?

00:30:34.600 All along, we've been talking to you and Dennis and Mitch about we've got to move to the next.

00:30:40.560 Getting to the signature, we're very close now, so we can start talking about getting.

00:30:44.340 Yeah, we've got to start.

00:30:45.060 Now we've got to start appointing canvassers, and we've got to get ready to go out and start getting physical signatures.

00:30:51.180 And we're very excited about that.

00:30:52.820 And then the other thing is we're going to be really accelerating, you know, our pace of town halls.

00:30:57.140 Like, we're hoping to do 100 town halls a month now.

00:31:00.220 And, you know, oh, yeah, we're going to be rocking and rolling.

00:31:05.400 It's, you know, we're full speed ahead.

00:31:07.260 It's exciting.

00:31:08.060 Jeff, always a pleasure.

00:31:09.180 You have a great weekend.

00:31:10.220 I always appreciate your time.

00:31:12.120 Thanks so much for talking to me.

00:31:13.300 You and Mitch and Dennis are great to this channel.

00:31:15.620 I just love talking to you guys.

00:31:16.820 It's really fun.

00:31:18.080 Again, have a good weekend, you and your family.

00:31:20.500 And thanks a lot for doing this.

00:31:21.940 Yeah, you bet, John.

00:31:22.680 Thanks for having me on.

00:31:23.360 If you like the video, give it a thumbs up, subscribe to the channel, ring the bell for notifications.

00:31:28.300 Jeff, do it again.

00:31:29.680 We'll see you in the next one.

00:31:31.380 Get the mug in there.

00:31:32.280 All right.

00:31:32.640 All right.

John Bolton - December 06, 2025

Jeff Rath- DANIELLE Smith facing possible LEADERSHIP review! - PLUS： Bill 14 & the court case

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript