'the only Jewish guy in the running'

'We deserve the taxes from you'

What do you think?

DAILY CALLER NEWS FOUNDATION—Writing at Axios, energy writer Amy Harder says, “The climate agenda’s fall from grace over the past year has been stunning—in speed, scale and scope.” Harder quotes oil historian and S&P Global vice-chairman Dan Yergin as saying, “There’s no handwaving about how ‘We want to cooperate on climate.’ It’s, ‘We’re slamming the door on that issue.’ We’ve gone from over-indexing it to zero-indexing it.” Polling has never shown climate change as being an issue of primary concern to American voters. Americans have consistently been more worried about issues that impact their daily lives today than about warnings from modern-day P.T. Barnums like U.N. Secretary General Antonio Guterres about some nebulous “highway to hell” and “the age of global boiling. The issue had been slowly losing its effectiveness during the Biden years even as that administration tried to memorialize the movement’s objectives in policy. Even Democrat politicians have quit talking about the so-called “climate emergency” which used to be a central plank in their talking points list. When was the last time you heard New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, co-author with Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Ed Markey of the “Green New Deal” introduced in 2019, talk about the supposed need to force ordinary citizens to give up their cars, flying, and vacations and spend trillions on a nationwide network of high-speed rails to save the planet? When was the last time you heard any Democrat utter the phrase “Green New Deal,” for that matter? It simply doesn’t happen anymore. One of the motivators for the political abandonment of the climate scam by Democrats came from a pre-election analysis from the center-left Searchlight Institute last November. That memo advised Democrat candidates to avoid using the term “climate change” entirely, and to focus on the supposed cost savings to be obtained by switching to green energy solutions. Never mind that such cost savings are a myth: The truth doesn’t matter. What matters is the ability to influence voters with the message. Therein lies the central existential threat to the movement’s survival in the coming years. For decades, liberal politicians and climate advocates were able to advance the climate alarm agenda by creating, well, alarm among the public that the world is going to end if we don’t stop putting too much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Always the messaging had a deadline claiming, “We only have X number of years to stop burning fossil fuels before it’s too late!” Over the past 40 years, that deadline to act has given the term “moving the goalposts” a new green meaning. AOC claimed the drop-dead date was only 12 years in the future as she rolled out her ambition to control everyone’s daily lives in the name of climate alarm in 2019. But the very next year, in 2020, child activist Greta Thunberg moved the goalposts to a mere five years. But wait: Just a year later, Joe Biden read a script from his teleprompter that set the deadline at 10 years. It’s all so darn confusing. No doubt, these politicians and activists wish they could erase their past claims from everyone’s memory. Their trouble is, the Internet is forever. Advocates were even successful in convincing Barack Obama’s EPA to dummy up an Endangerment Finding declaring that carbon dioxide is in fact a “pollutant” that must be regulated under the Clean Air Act in order to save the planet. Never mind that CO2, otherwise known as plant food, the foundational basis for all life on Planet Earth: The truth doesn’t matter. Now, it appears that the movement is inheriting the wages of decades of deception with a sudden and stunning fall from grace. It could not happen to a more deserving bunch of people. Originally published by the Daily Caller News Foundation. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal.   The post Is the Climate Scare Narrative Headed for Bankruptcy? appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Axios: Dems Still Struggling With Basic Trans Rights Questions

When NASA launched the Pioneer probes, they were met with an intriguing mystery. At around 20 astronomical units, both spacecraft began accelerating towards the Sun.

On Sunday, a violent anti-Immigration Customs and Enforcement (ICE) mob stormed City Church — a church affiliate with the Southern Baptist Church (SBC) denomination — and disrupted Lord’s Day services out of a false assumption that the pastor there was an ICE agent and demand accountability for Renee Good’s January 7 death. Thus far, ABC and CBS have yet to say a word about this ugly scene on their flagship morning or evening newscasts. Of the five tentpole newscasts that aired Sunday night and Monday morning, only one brought it up as NBC’s Today offered a footnote in the final 35 seconds of its segment on the Minneapolis unrest. Even in that brief nod, NBC couldn’t even mention the fact that the mob had teamed up with disgraced former CNN anchor Don Lemon. ABC’s Good Morning America had other priorities on Monday when covering Minneapolis: BIAS BY OMISSION: Nothing on ABC's 'Good Morning America' about Don Lemon and an anti-ICE storming a Minneapolis church yesterday, disrupting worship. Instead, a focus on lawyers for those arrested by ICE expressing concern, "tensions rising" as the "Pentagon says 1,500 active… pic.twitter.com/2IGrqLrJ83 — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 19, 2026 As opposed to highlighting this case of their side going too far, fill-in co-host Rebecca Jarvis and correspondent Matt Rivers emphasized the possible deployment of U.S. troops and FBI agents to the city. Rivers leaned into wanting us to feel bad for illegal aliens and the Justice Department probes of Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz (D), and Good’s partner (click “expand”):  RIVERS: After more than 10 days of protests throughout the city over the deadly shooting of 37-year-old mother of three Renee Good by officer Jonathan Ross, anger is growing between state and local officials and the federal government. As the Justice Department insists that Ross’s shooting of Good was justified and no further review of his actions is warranted. DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL TODD BLANCHE [on Fox News Sunday, 01/18/26]: We are not investigating, and if, if there comes a time when we need to, we will, but it’s not now.  RIVERS: Sources telling ABC News the federal investigation is focused less on the shooter Ross and more on Good, her conduct, and possible ties to activist groups. Also facing scrutiny, the city and state’s top Democratic leaders, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frye and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz under investigation, sources say, for allegedly obstructing law enforcement activities in the state. Frey telling ABC News that he and Walz have done nothing wrong, but suspects they are being targeted for speaking out against the administration. MINNEAPOLIS MAYOR JACOB FREY (D) [on ABC’s This Week, 01/18/26]: There are other countries where you get put away for the things that you say. There are other countries where you get investigated for saying something that runs counter to what the federal government states, but in this country, it’s not that way. RIVERS: And new this morning, as the government cracks down in Minneapolis, attorneys for some of those detained tell us they’re being denied their constitutional right to legal counsel. Four separate attorneys telling ABC News ICE denied their request to meet their clients inside the federal building after they were arrested. One lawyer saying ICE told them, “if we let, you see your clients, we would have to let all the attorneys see their clients and imagine the chaos.” Attorney Robert Sicoli says he was denied access to his client as well.     ROBERT SICOLI: It is a violation of the constitutional rights. You have a right to an attorney and just because they have a system set up that doesn’t accommodate that. There’s nothing in the Constitution that talks about accommodating the government.     RIVERS: Now, DHS denied those claims, saying that all detainees received due process and access to counsel, but all four attorneys that we spoke to said that that denial is an outright lie, citing their own personal experiences as proof. Sunday on ABC’s World News Tonight with Linsey Davis (which only primarily aired in the west due to the NFL playoff game), Rivers also emphasized the possible call-up of soldiers, “tensions mounting in the city,” and fretted “residents and business owners” — like a local bar he visited — “[are] feeling the impact of ICE operations.” Monday’s CBS Mornings didn’t care either about a house of worship being derailed and that a fellow “journalist” helped egg them on. Incredibly, CBS correspondent Ian Lee covered a far-right provocateur stirring the pot as well as a new group of protesters which seemingly have nothing to do with claims of law enforcement misconduct (aside from being a heavily liberal, unionized workforce): Monday's 'CBS Mornings' didn't have a word about the anti-ICE mob and Don Lemon storming a Minneapolis church service and shutting it down. The focus was instead on "Trump's threats to crack down on protesters," "U.S. postal workers...marching to protest" ICE, "local residents… pic.twitter.com/Fknj2DV8SZ — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 19, 2026 Sunday’s CBS Weekend News didn’t mention the church storming either. Instead, anchor Jericka Duncan fretted ICE’s actions have “turn[ed] the Twin Cities into a tinderbox” and Lee hyping “tensions are intensifying” because of the administration. The piece was a farce as it included a ride-along with an affluent, white, female liberal (AWFL, or AWFUL, if you add urban in there) organizing what they probably think is an Underground Railroad grocery store for illegals. In essence, Lee’s segment served as further proof CBS News hasn’t really changed on a wholesale level: Sunday’s ‘CBS Weekend News’ also didn’t care to mention the anti-ICE mob storming a church and derailing Lord’s Day services. The lead-off story instead boasted “freezing temperatures and snow did not stop fiery protests against the immigration crackdown in Minnesota” and… pic.twitter.com/zbBQHQXl5z — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 19, 2026 A few minutes later, Duncan brought in correspondent Willie James Inman to further contribute to the pile on, painting ICE as strongly despised and the protesters supported (click “expand”): INMAN: Americans are also growing increasingly critical of the actions of federal agents and protesters in cities like Minneapolis. Sixty-one percent of respondents believe ICE is being too tough when they detain people, up from 56 percent in November. The poll also found 82 percent of Republicans believe protesters against ICE have gone too far, while 48 percent of Democrats say they have not gone far enough. Today on Face the Nation, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem blamed Minnesota leaders, including Mayor Jacob Frey for the violence. HOMELAND SECURITY SECRETARY KRISTI NOEM [on CBS’s Face the Nation, 01/18/26]: If you could set up a peaceful protest zone so that these individuals can exercise their First Amendment rights and do so peacefully, we would love that because then we can work together to make sure we are getting criminals to justice and letting people still express their First Amendment rights. INMAN: Moments later, Frey rejected that idea, saying free speech should not be limited, adding ICE agents are not making the city safer. FREY [on CBS’s Face the Nation, 01/18/26]: We are doing everything possible to keep the peace, notwithstanding this occupying force that has quite literally invaded our city. Without a Sunday NBC Nightly News due to the Rams-Bears NFL playoff game, Monday’s Today was the first time the peacock network could comment on a major newscast: On NBC's ‘Today,’ @Maggie_Vespa was the only broadcast network correspondent to mention on the lead morning shows the anti-ICE mob storming a Minneapolis church service, tacking it onto the end of her piece (skip to the last 30 seconds): “On the ground, tensions rising.… pic.twitter.com/rZ37q4RPqw — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 19, 2026 Notice, however, that her piece included this snotty shot at the beginning: Defense officials stressing to NBC News the readying of troops does not mean a deployment is definite. Still, people on the ground seeing that as a massive escalation and comes as we learned the Justice Department has opened investigations into multiple local officials. One person seemingly not under investigation? The ICE officer who fatally shot a woman here.  Also, she did not verbally attach a party ID to Frey or Walz: “Meanwhile, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey under growing pressure with the Justice Department investigating whether he and Minneapolis Governor Tim Walz have been impeding immigration enforcement, according to a senior law enforcement official and a person familiar with the matter.” To see the relevant transcripts from January 19, click here (for ABC), here (for CBS), and here (for NBC). To see the relevant transcript from January 18, click here (for CBS).

On Friday's The Situation Room, CNN hosts Wolf Blitzer and Pamela Brown were called out for spreading misinformation by DHS's Tricia McLaughlin during a discussion of immigration enforcement arrests that have been hyped by the media....like Renee Good was merely driving by an ICE protest, instead of participating. Brown brought up video a Minneapolis woman posted showing her being asked for ID by federal agents, leading McLaughlin to theorize that the woman either resembled a specific criminal alien that agents were searching for or that she had been among those illegally harassing agents. The CNN co-host then followed up: But what do you say to those who watch that and other videos that they're seeing themselves? I mean, this is not just the mainstream media. This is people are seeing these videos and they're concerned and they're concerned that a place like Minnesota is turning into a police state, and they're going up to U.S. citizens asking for ID, and, you know, and, you know, using tactics -- and what do you say to that? The two then had a back and forth in which Brown denied that it was the fault of "the media" that some are complaining about ICE actions and wrongly accusing DHS of racial discrimination: McLAUGHLIN: Yeah, I think that there's a lot of fearmongering, I think, by politicians -- BROWN: But it's not -- let me just correct you right there. Let me just -- they're watching these videos and using their independence of mind. It's not "the media." McLaughlin then insisted: Actually it is the media, and we're seeing it time and time again by saying things like "the police state." What we're seeing is rampant violence against our law enforcement, highly coordinated. We have our legal authorities. When individuals see videos like that, you have to ask the question, "Was this individual obstructing law enforcement?" which is a federal crime. "Were they assaulting law enforcement?" which is a felony. Were any of those instances occurring before this video was cut? Because you saw a very short cut, and that's what I'm talking about the media. There is not a lot of context that's being out there. After the DHS official complained about the media ignoring the lists of violent criminal aliens that DHS releases to the public, Blitzer brought up the shooting of Renee Good and called it "outrageous" that DHS Secretary Kristi Noem labeled her as a "terrorist." Here's Blitzer: "When she called this 37-year-old mother of three who was driving that car a domestic terrorist, that really was outrageous." The two then went back and forth as Blitzer seemed to hint that Good might have just got caught up in traffic after dropping off her child: McLAUGHLIN: When we say it was an act of domestic terrorism, that is in no way outrageous. What we saw on the ground there -- she had been stalking and harassing law enforcement throughout the morning, and then she went on to use her car as a deadly weapon. That's not -- BLITZER: She was driving by after dropping off her little six-year-old boy at school. MCLAUGHLIN: She was not -- that -- that's just simply not true. I have the facts on the ground. ... Blitzer then brought up video of another woman who was forced out of her car by agents and repeated her claim that she was just trying to get to a doctor's appointment, leading McLaughlin to correct the CNN anchor: That is -- she was not going to the doctor. This individual was actually arrested because she was time and time again impeding law enforcement officers. Again, a small snippet of this video. So she was an agitator intentionally, again, trying to impede federal law enforcement officers which is a federal crime and is a felony. Transcript follows: CNN's The Situation Room January 16, 2026 11:04 a.m. Eastern TRICIA McLAUGHLIN, DHS ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS: We have incredibly targeted immigration enforcement operations. So what's happening there is there is reasonable suspicion if somebody is in the vicinity of this operation of this target, then they could be asked for their identification. We've been vindicated by this, by the supreme court. September of 2025. You all saw a case out of Los Angeles where they said we can use reasonable suspicion. I think I've seen a lot on this network and other places where they're talking about this is racially based. Absolutely not. Racial animus is no place in DHS and is of course, not used. We're using what is protected under the fourth amendment of the U.S. Constitution. PAMELA BROWN: All right. Let's dive a little bit deeper into that. I want to play this video of a recent incident in Minnesota that has received attention. (video clip of woman in Minneapolis being asked for her ID and place of birth by federal agents) BROWN: So that video was filmed by a woman who, as you heard said, she is a U.S. citizen. Why exactly was she stopped? Was there reasonable suspicion -- which is a legal bar, as you noted, that a crime was committed in that situation? And why was he asking her, "Where are you born?"? What was he basing that on? McLAUGHLIN: Sure. So either this is -- and I haven't seen this video before -- so there could be two circumstances here. Either he -- this is a targeted operation and she's around the vicinity of it, around the target, there's reasonable suspicion because there might be a descriptor. Or she could be five-six, and they're looking for somebody who's five-six.  That could be part of it. They're looking for somebody that could be part of it. The other piece of it is, it could be -- I don't know if she was obstructing law enforcement, if she was assaulting law enforcement prior to this, but they either have those title eight authorities under the U.S. Code, 1357, or they have that reasonable suspicion. PAMELA BROWN: But what do you say to those who watch that and other videos that they're seeing themselves? I mean, this is not just the mainstream media. This is people are seeing these videos and they're concerned and they're concerned that a place like Minnesota is turning into a police state, and they're going up to U.S. citizens asking for ID, and, you know, and, you know, using tactics -- and what do you say to that? McLAUGHLIN: Yeah, I think that there's a lot of fearmongering, I think, by politicians -- BROWN: But it's not -- let me just correct you right there. Let me just -- they're watching these videos and using their independence of mind. It's not "the media." McLAUGHLIN: Actually it is the media, and we're seeing it time and time again by saying things like "the police state." What we're seeing is rampant violence against our law enforcement, highly coordinated. We have our legal authorities. When individuals see videos like that, you have to ask the question, "Was this individual obstructing law enforcement?" which is a federal crime. "Were they assaulting law enforcement?" which is a felony. Were any of those instances occurring before this video was cut? Because you saw a very short cut, and that's what I'm talking about the media. There is not a lot of context that's being out there. (cross talk) BROWN: Well, then, why don't you allow ICE officers -- McLAUGHLIN: We have to be very responsible. BROWN: -- to wear the cameras? McLAUGHLIN: We of course allow them to wear -- they also wear -- BROWN: So they -- they all have -- will they all have body cameras so you can have the -- McLAUGHLIN: We are working on that with the Big Beautiful Bill actually. (...) BROWN: You have to look at the polling, right. This isn't the media. This is actual polling that says, "Hey, I like what ICE is doing in terms of its target. We want to get criminals off the street who don't belong in the country," but 51 percent say ICE makes cities less safe -- just 31 percent say it makes cities more safe. On the Renee Good case, you brought up 26 percent of Americans view the shooting as an appropriate use of force while 56 percent called it an inappropriate use of force. So are you willing to consider in some cases ICE has gone too far and is losing American support? McLAUGHLIN: Pamela, in the last five weeks, we have arrested 2,500 criminal illegal aliens off the streets of Minneapolis. BROWN: No one -- people like that. MCLAUGHLIN: If I can finish -- if can make my point -- I appreciate you having me, but I do want to be able to make my point. BROWN: Sure. McLAUGHLIN: The point of the matter is I have not seen CNN cover who some of those individuals are. An individual from Ecuador who murdered his three-month-old son; an individual who was perpetuating a human slavery and human trafficking; scores and scores of murderers, child pedophiles. Why does the media not talk about that? We continue to see that people love to demonize law enforcement, vilify them as they're facing a 1,000 percent increase in assaults against them.  (...) WOLF BLITZER: When she (DHS Secretary Kristi Noem) called this 37-year-old mother of three who was driving that car a domestic terrorist, that really was outrageous. McLAUGHLIN: When we say it was an act of domestic terrorism, that is in no way outrageous. What we saw on the ground there -- she had been stalking and harassing law enforcement throughout the morning, and then she went on to use her car as a deadly weapon. That's not -- BLITZER: She was driving by after dropping off her little six-year-old boy at school. MCLAUGHLIN: She was not -- that -- that's just simply not true. I have the facts on the ground. I, I mean, if you look at it for the hours -- BROWN: Do you have more information that you can release to give the public a better understanding? McLAUGHLIN: If I can give you the facts of what happened that morning. At 9:30 a.m. Central Time, this is where that incident occurred in Minneapolis. This individual for hours before had been stalking and harassing law enforcement, impeding operations. At the time of that incident, our law enforcement approached this individual's vehicle as she was blocking at our law enforcement. That is a federal crime. (...) BLITZER: And we also saw that video of a woman being pulled out of her car as she was trying to simply go to the doctor. Is that what -- MCLAUGHLIN: That is -- she was not going to the doctor. BLITZER: Is what you're seeing there -- are these the officers are trained to do? They cut off her seatbelt, they dragged her out of the car and took her out. McLAUGHLIN: This individual was actually arrested because she was time and time again impeding law enforcement officers. Again, a small snippet of this video. So she was an agitator intentionally, again, trying to impede federal law enforcement officers which is a federal crime and is a felony. BROWN: How do you know for certain, though, that she wasn't just caught up in the protests and the traffic and the chaos and was trying to get to -- how do you know that was -- McLAUGHLIN: Because she was doing this time and time over and over and over again. We've talked to federal law enforcement on the ground -- we talked to their supervisors in this case. We know exactly what happened here, and she'll be charged as such.

During his speech at the House GOP retreat on January 6, President Trump suggested that Republicans need to be “a little flexible” on the Hyde Amendment — which prevents taxpayer dollars from funding the majority of abortions — to get a health care compromise passed where Republicans could win politically on lowering premiums.The mere suggestion enraged pro-life America, which sees the Hyde Amendment as the only firewall preventing taxpayer dollars from directly funding the slaughter of the unborn.On this episode of the “Steve Deace Show,” Deace speaks with one of Iowa’s top evangelical and political voices, Bob Vander Plaats, on why bending on Hyde could collapse the GOP coalition heading into 2026 midterms. “There are two lasting victories of the pro-life movement,” says Deace.One of them is the overturning of Roe v. Wade, and the other is the Hyde Amendment.While Deace and Vander Plaats give President Trump the win for the overturning of Roe v. Wade, as he appointed the Supreme Court justices who took up the case, they condemn his suggestion to soften on Hyde as a catastrophic loss in the fight for life.But on top of ethics, it doesn’t make sense politically.“President Trump understands better than anything [that] the taxpayer funding of abortion is not a winning issue for Democrats. This is one of those 70% issues where people don't want your tax dollars going to fund abortions. So why not land on your convictions when it's politically correct as well? Don't negotiate on this thing,” says Vander Plaats.Any Republican politician dreaming of running for president in 2028, he warns, would be wise to stay far away from the Hyde issue.“This will just not only blunt your campaign, this will decimate your campaign,” he cautions.To compromise on Hyde will only further demoralize the conservative base, which already struggles to turn out for special elections and off-year elections — even in red areas the GOP should win, adds Deace, as the right sadly lacks the kind of boots-on-the-ground apparatus that Democrats excel in mobilizing during any election.“We don't need to be giving our base less reason to vote right now,” he says.If Republicans want to at least keep the House and prevent Democrats from embarking on an “impeaching palooza,” there are “three kinds of voters” they must inspire to show up for midterms: the MAHA voter, the “Theo Von/Joe Rogan voter who thinks the whole system is corrupt,” and the “traditional conservative,” pro-life voter.Deace predicts that of the three groups, only MAHA is pleased right now. The Von/Rogan voters are entirely “off the reservation” because they no longer believe that Trump will actually drain the swamp. And the conservative pro-life voter base is teetering on the edge of giving up.If compromises are made on the Hyde Amendment, this group will almost certainly not show out for midterms.To hear more of Deace and Vander Plaat’s conversation, watch the video above.Want more from Steve Deace?To enjoy more of Steve's take on national politics, Christian worldview, and principled conservatism with a snarky twist, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Canada’s Liberal government has lost its bid to overturn a 2024 Federal Court ruling that found its use of the Emergencies Act during the Freedom Convoy trucker protest was neither justified nor reasonable.Then-Prime Minister Justin Trudeau invoked the legislation for the first time on Feb. 14, 2022, authorizing a sweeping police crackdown on protesters in Ottawa who opposed the federal government’s COVID-19 mandates.'That was a 200-page document. I don’t know how many people can read 200 pages in 20 minutes.'Trigger-happyOn Tuesday, the Federal Court of Appeal rejected the government’s appeal of a decision by Federal Court Justice Richard Mosley, who concluded that invoking the Emergencies Act was unnecessary and violated protesters’ rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Mosley found that the demonstrations, while disruptive, were peaceful and did not meet the threshold required to trigger emergency powers.The Trudeau government filed its appeal within minutes of Mosley’s ruling, arguing that the measures were justified on national security grounds. The appeals court rejected that claim.“There was no evidence that the lives, health or safety of the people living in Ottawa were endangered (as annoying, stressful and concerning as the protests were),” the court wrote.Surprised by outcomeIn an interview with Align, Freedom Convoy organizer Chris Barber — who was later sentenced to one year of house arrest for his role in the protest — said he was surprised by the outcome."I've seen over the last four years how the Crown's office or the government can use and up the level of court to find the judges they want to get what they want for a decision," Barber said. “And today, that didn’t work for them.”Barber emphasized that Justice Mosley was not sympathetic to the Freedom Convoy but nevertheless ruled against the government on legal grounds.“He was not favorable to the Freedom Convoy,” Barber said. “He was very much against us, but still he upheld the rule of law and judged things according to the Charter. And today we won that one in the appeals court."Barber also criticized the speed with which the Trudeau government appealed the original ruling.“The government appealed this decision in 20 minutes," he said. “That was a 200-page document. I don’t know how many people can read 200 pages in 20 minutes. ... As you can see yet again, the Liberal government of Canada is one of the most spiteful governments we've possibly ever had in this country — full of corruption."He added that the ruling raises serious questions about accountability within the Liberal government and asked why no officials have resigned over the unlawful use of emergency powers.RELATED: Aftermath of a slaughter: Universal Ostrich Farms vows to hold Canada accountable Katie PasitneyStanding with Katie PasitneyBarber pointed to what he described as another example of government overreach: the recent seizure of Universal Ostrich Farms, where the Canadian Food Inspection Agency took control of the property and euthanized livestock.“The mess the CFIA left on the grounds of that property is absolutely disgusting,” Barber said. “That is a government agency that basically walked in, took full, total control of their property, [and] euthanized their animals like a 1930s death squad.”He praised farm spokeswoman Katie Pasitney for continuing to demand accountability.“There’s still no accountability for the actions of the CFIA,” Barber said. “And I hope Katie continues to stand her ground and keeps speaking about that — and people wake up to what’s going on in this country.”