British Columbia just threw out the left. Could California be next?



Some said it couldn't be done.

For much of the past two decades, the political landscape in British Columbia has been dominated by the increasingly woke, leftist New Democratic Party and supposedly moderate Liberal governments without the nerve to reduce the power of the state.

Even the emergence of Jerry Brown, derisively nicknamed 'Governor Moonbeam,' in the swinging '70s did not permanently extinguish Republican political fortunes.

That all changed Saturday night.

The Conservative Party of BC and its leader, Lorne Doerkson, humiliated NDP Premier David Eby. According to preliminary results from Elections BC, the Conservatives are leading in 63 of the 93 seats in the provincial legislature, capturing 48.06% of the popular vote.

The defeat was particularly humiliating for Eby because he had called the snap election himself, two years ahead of schedule. Instead of securing a renewed mandate, he handed the Conservatives a commanding majority and announced his resignation as NDP leader.

British Columbia has long been compared to California, not only because it occupies the West Coast of North America but because it has long been associated with crazy political leaders and even crazier political movements.

Today, British Columbia is defined by massive government spending and debt, along with urban centers struggling with homelessness, public disorder, and the consequences of permissive drug policies.

Sound like San Francisco, anyone?

But British Columbia was not always so left-wing or the very picture of economic mismanagement. And neither was California. Remember Gov. Ronald Reagan?

A Conservative comeback

Doerkson has promised a new direction for the province, emphasizing economic opportunity and a government more responsive to ordinary British Columbians.

One of the most difficult battles awaiting his administration concerns the province's increasingly contentious Indigenous land claims and the legal uncertainty surrounding private property rights.

Doerkson has promised to repeal the province's Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act. The legislation, adopted in 2019 with all-party support, was intended to bring provincial laws into alignment with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. But critics argue that the law has contributed to uncertainty about the province's obligations to Indigenous groups and the rights of other British Columbians.

Doerkson has made his position clear. Speaking after the election, he said DRIPA had failed to resolve disputes involving land and resource development and had instead contributed to continuing litigation.

Those concerns have become especially acute following a landmark ruling involving land in Richmond, a waterfront suburb of Vancouver.

In August 2025, the British Columbia Supreme Court recognized Aboriginal title held by the Cowichan Nation over approximately 732 acres of land in Richmond, including areas containing privately owned property.

The ruling raised serious questions about the relationship between Aboriginal title and conventional property ownership. Richmond Mayor Malcolm Brodie warned that the decision undermined the reliability of the province's land-title system.

“The Court's untenable decision cannot remain unchallenged,” Brodie said in the city's announcement of its appeal.

The city appealed, as did the provincial and federal governments. The Canadian government has acknowledged that the ruling could have significant implications for private property rights and that greater legal clarity is needed.

The decision did not order homeowners to vacate their properties. Nevertheless, it has alarmed property owners who believed their registered titles provided secure ownership.

For Doerkson, the controversy presents a formidable challenge. Indigenous land rights are constitutionally protected in Canada, and overlapping territorial claims have long complicated questions of ownership, development, and government authority in British Columbia.

His government will have to navigate those obligations while addressing the concerns of property owners who fear that the rules governing their homes and businesses are changing beneath their feet.

BC wasn't always socialist

One mistake commentators make is assuming that British Columbia has somehow been socialist for the past century because the last government elected under the Conservative Party banner dates to 1928.

In fact, much of the province's modern history was dominated by the BC Social Credit Party, which was conservative and populist.

Social Credit governed British Columbia for all but three years between 1952 and 1991.

W.A.C. Bennett was premier from 1952 to 1972. His son, Bill Bennett, became premier in 1975 after three years of NDP government under Dave Barrett. The Socreds remained in power until 1991, when the NDP defeated them.

The BC Liberal Party, which subsequently became the province's de facto center-right party, took power in 2001 and governed until 2017.

So the notion that British Columbia is naturally or permanently left-wing is nonsense. Conservative governments have governed the province for much of its modern history, even when they operated under different party names.

Doerkson's victory is remarkable, but it is hardly without historical precedent.

RELATED: Gavin Newsom makes damning admission about socialist takeover on undercover camera

JP Yim/Getty Images

Could California follow?

So can this kind of political phenomenon happen in woke, leftist California, a state struggling with enormous fiscal pressures and a myriad of destructive progressive social policies?

You can only push people toward the edge of a cliff for so long before they begin to push back.

California was Ronald Reagan country. He governed the state from 1967 to 1975. The Golden State supported Republican presidential candidates in nine of the 10 elections between 1952 and 1988, including Richard Nixon, Reagan, and George H.W. Bush.

Even the emergence of Jerry Brown, derisively nicknamed "Governor Moonbeam," in the swinging '70s did not permanently extinguish Republican political fortunes.

Republicans George Deukmejian and Pete Wilson subsequently governed California for a combined 16 years. Arnold Schwarzenegger, another Republican, won the governorship in the 2003 recall election and was re-elected in 2006.

California's present Democrat dominance is therefore a relatively recent development in the state's political history.

Of course, British Columbia and California have different political systems. The BC Conservatives benefited from a parliamentary system in which winning a majority of legislative seats delivers control of the government. California Republicans would have to overcome entrenched Democrat advantages in statewide elections.

But British Columbia's election demonstrates that political dominance can evaporate when voters become sufficiently dissatisfied with the people governing them.

Eby thought he could strengthen his position by calling an early election. Instead, voters delivered a Conservative majority and sent him packing. California's Democrats might want to take notice.

If British Columbia can turn its political fortunes around, why not California?

Mary Peltola, Running for Senate Against 'Self-Dealing,' Joined High-Priced Lobbying Firm After Cosponsoring Bill It Lobbied Congress To Pass

Alaska Democrat Mary Peltola is running for Senate against the "rigged system in DC that's hurting Alaska while politicians feather their own nest." Before launching her campaign, Peltola made hundreds of thousands of dollars working for a lobbying firm she joined months after cosponsoring a bill that the firm supported on behalf of a Canadian mining company, a Washington Free Beacon review found.

The post Mary Peltola, Running for Senate Against 'Self-Dealing,' Joined High-Priced Lobbying Firm After Cosponsoring Bill It Lobbied Congress To Pass appeared first on .

TAKE OFF, EH? Canada, US trade election meddling charges as Alberta rejects separation



Albertans overwhelmingly rejected a move toward independence Monday, but supporters of separation insist the issue is far from settled.

In a provincial referendum, roughly 76% of voters chose Option 1 — for Alberta to “remain a province of Canada” — while about 24% backed Option 2, which would have begun the legal process required to hold a binding referendum on separation.

'Keep your nose out of American politics,' said Hoekstra.

The results remain unofficial until October 29.

The vote was quickly dubbed a “referendum on a referendum.” Even an Option 2 victory would not have meant Alberta was leaving Canada. It would have started the process toward another, binding vote on whether the province should separate.

Premier Danielle Smith campaigned for Option 1 alongside Prime Minister Mark Carney and Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre.

American interference?

The federalist cause also received some enthusiastic help from the Canadian press. Days before the vote, the Globe and Mail published a lengthy investigation connecting Alberta separatists to American Republican political operatives and alleging that independence leaders had offered Washington access to the province's natural resources, including fresh water and oil royalties, in exchange for assistance.

But the investigation's most explosive allegations were disputed by some of its own sources.

Dennis Modry, a co-founder of the Alberta Prosperity Project, acknowledged discussing possible resource arrangements with the United States. But fellow APP co-founder Jeff Rath, an Alberta lawyer who arranged the meetings with State Department officials, insisted none of those proposals had been discussed in Washington. The Globe also acknowledged that no agreements had been reached and quoted a White House official saying that no American support or commitments had been offered.

Writing in a sharply critical response, Alberta commentator Colin MacLeod accused the newspaper of combining separate incidents and individuals into a misleading narrative of coordinated American interference.

The investigation also documented American Republican consultants promoting political software to Alberta separatists. But APP leader Mitch Sylvestre told the Globe he refused to give the consultants access to his organization's membership list, citing serious concerns about privacy.

In an exclusive interview with Blaze Lifestyle before the vote, Rath accused the Globe — which he characterized as one of the government's “propaganda arms” — of deliberately misleading readers.

“But what surprised me was, like, how blatantly they lied and how foolish the lies were,” he said, singling out the allegation about trading Alberta's water for American assistance.

“I mean, completely ludicrous. We have the St. Mary's River watershed, and we have the Milk River watersheds. They're the only rivers that flow from Alberta into the U.S. They're governed under an international agreement by an international commission. You know, there's not enough water in either one of those rivers to supply Las Vegas, let alone all of California.”

'A massive machine'

On Tuesday, Rath told Blaze Lifestyle that the defeat would not end the independence movement.

He predicted support would grow as Carney's Liberal government made life more difficult for Albertans and said he was proud of the result his side achieved against a powerful political establishment.

“We fought a battle against a massive machine,” Rath said.

Smith, meanwhile, was ready to put the question behind her.

“So tonight I want to invite every Albertan who may still feel hopeless or frustrated with the past direction of our country, to believe and hope in Canada again,” she said.

“Because although our country isn’t perfect and there is still much work to be done, I believe that Canada is on the rise again.”

RELATED: Exclusive: US ambassador says Canada walked away from 'the best trade deal' — twice

Bloomberg/Getty Images

Who's interfering with whom?

But the referendum produced an awkward bit of cross-border symmetry.

In the closing days of the campaign, Carney warned foreign governments — specifically including the United States — to stay out of Alberta's vote.

“Our expectation is, to be absolutely clear, on foreign governments, United States included, is we don't get ourselves involved in their elections, they don't get themselves in our elections,” Carney said.

At almost exactly the same time, U.S. Ambassador to Canada Pete Hoekstra was accusing Canadian politicians of edging toward interference in America's November 3 midterm elections.

“We are closely watching Canadian activities because it appears that some of this, from our perspective, in the way that we view our elections, could be inferred to be election interference,” Hoekstra said in an interview with "The Really Big Show."

Among his examples were comments from Industry Minister Mélanie Joly about designing retaliatory tariffs to hit politically sensitive U.S. states.

Hoekstra's advice to Canadian politicians was considerably less diplomatic.

“Keep your nose out of American politics,” he said.

In July, Carney appointed Maia Johnson, an American citizen and former Hillary Clinton campaign aide, as chief operating officer of the Prime Minister's Office.

One wonders what the reaction would have been if Carney had appointed a former Trump campaign operative instead. Would the Globe and Mail have been so relaxed about American political influence in Ottawa?

Instead of Making Canada The 51st State, Just Take Alberta

If Alberta votes Oct. 19 to leave Canada, Washington should be waiting with open arms for the resource-rich province and its conservatives.
Fifth Leading Cause of Death in Canada
play icon

Fifth Leading Cause of Death in Canada

'Dead people don't collect disability benefits': Is pause on euthanizing the mentally ill in Canada just smoke and mirrors?



After announcing on Wednesday that it was pumping the brakes on making the mentally ill eligible for euthanasia in Canada, Carney's Liberal government killed Conservative legislation that would have made the pause permanent.

"If the government truly believed in preventing MAID for cases of mental illness, then they would have supported our bill," Conservative MP Tamara Jansen, the author of the defeated bill, said in a statement shared with Blaze News. "But when Canadians needed action, the Liberals chose politics."

'The cost savings associated with [euthanizing] the mentally ill could reach up to CAD $63.076 billion.'

Since Canada legalized euthanasia nationwide under ex-Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in 2016, the resultant Medical Assistance in Dying program has been grossly liberalized, becoming a leading cause of death in Canada and claiming the lives of ineligible victims.

The Liberal government, now headed by globalist Prime Minister Mark Carney, expanded the program in February 2024 to enable euthanizing people suffering solely from mental illness.

While the original plan was for the mentally ill to be eligible for extermination the following month, their eligibility date was pushed back to March 2027.

Sean Fraser, Canada's attorney general, announced on Wednesday that the government would once again hold off on offering MAID to the mentally ill.

"Serious concerns remain regarding the safe and consistent evaluation of marketing authorization applications for mental illness," stated Fraser. "Canada will therefore not proceed with the planned expansion when mental illness is the sole underlying medical condition."

RELATED: Canada kills 83-year-old Christian grandmother without consent, family claims — outrage ensues

Canadian Attorney General Sean Fraser. Arlyn McAdorey/Bloomberg/Getty Images.

Conservative MP Tamara Jansen had a bill ready to codify the government's rejection of MAID for the mentally ill and to affirm that "a mental disorder is not a grievous and irremediable medical condition" that alone would satisfy the eligibility criteria for MAID.

The preamble of "The Right to Recover Act" stresses that "vulnerable Canadians should receive suicide prevention counseling rather than access to medical assistance in dying" and that "Canada’s medical assistance in dying regime risks normalizing assisted dying as a solution for those suffering from a mental disorder."

The bill was, however, defeated in a 187-141 vote in parliament on Wednesday. All but two Liberal members of parliament voted in opposition.

'They can still be killed by euthanasia in Canada if they have another medical condition.'

Fraser cited the bill's use of the term "mental disorder" as opposed to "mental illness" as the primary reason for why the Liberals voted in opposition.

"Mental disorder," he suggested, could be interpreted to include some of the neurologically degenerative diseases that presently can be provided as cause for MAID.

"Disagreement over terminology was not a reason to kill this necessary bill," said Jansen. "Conservatives were prepared to work through those concerns at committee. But with less than six months remaining before the current exclusion expires, Parliament does not have time to let technical disagreements stand in the way of action."

Nicole Scheidl, the executive director of Canadian Physicians for Life, also isn't buying the government's explanation for killing the bill.

Scheidl indicated to Blaze News that it was a way for the Liberals to "shoehorn" advanced consent for MAID into the alternative, yet-to-be produced bill that Fraser suggested will be introduced later in the parliamentary session "so that there's very limited time to debate."

"They want to shut down debate, and so they're going to hold that [mentally ill] population hostage to allow them to push through euthanasia for dementia," said Scheidl.

Fraser, whose office did not respond to Blaze News' request for comment, admitted this week that the government ultimately wants to "allow adults diagnosed with a disease such as Alzheimer’s at an early stage to make an advance request for MAID."

In the meantime, Canada can still kill the mentally ill, Alex Schadenberg, the executive director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, told Blaze News.

"Right now under the law, someone who has a mental illness — even if that mental illness is driving them to suicidal ideation — they can still be killed by euthanasia in Canada if they have another medical condition," said Schadenberg. "So if someone, let's say, had a difficult condition of diabetes, it would be the diabetes they'd be approved for."

Schadenberg cited the case of 26-year-old Kiano Vafaeian, who was euthanized on Dec. 30, 2025. His family told Global News that while diagnosed with Type 1 diabetes and partial vision loss, Vafaeian's primary struggle was with mental health issues.

"He said everything the doctors needed to hear in order to approve him," said his mother, Margaret Marsilla. "Was he actually feeling that way? I strongly believe not."

"A large number of Canadians have something that would qualify them for euthanasia," Scheidl told Blaze News. "So then if they're depressed on top of that, and they can't really think straight, and they're more inclined to choose that option, then there's nothing to protect them. There's nothing to stop it. The [MAID] assessments are not really effective at seeing if people are suicidal or depressed."

The same government that has made it easy for vulnerable people like Vafaeian to check out has boasted of the savings associated with the program.

Canada's Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer noted in an October 2020 report that 6,465 deaths under what was then a more restrictive MAID program would result in a total gross reduction in health care costs of $109.2 million in 2021.

"Their estimates were very, very low and their numbers were way off because they underestimated the number of deaths we would have," said Schadenberg.

In a study published in February 2025, researchers at Western University explored the "potential economic savings from expanding medical assistance in dying in Canada, where it is currently a leading cause of death, to include vulnerable groups that cost the government more than they contribute in taxes," including Indians, the homeless, the retired elderly, drug addicts, and the mentally ill.

"The cost savings associated with the mentally ill could reach up to CAD $63.076 billion," said the researchers, "while for the retired elderly population, the savings could be CAD $54.2 billion in the voluntary scenario or as high as CAD $1.2 trillion in a nonvoluntary scenario."

"Dead people don't cost money," Schadenberg told Blaze News. "Dead people don't collect pensions. Dead people don't collect disability benefits. And you've got a government, well, provincially and federally, that are running massive deficits. So a lot of incentive."

While the Canadian government has not officially rolled out a nonvoluntary MAID program, Scheidl noted that there is already plenty of "coercion that is happening under the umbrella of this regime."

"There are a lot of individuals who feel they have no choice," said Scheidl. "They are dealing with either caregivers who are completely burnt out and can't care for them [or] they have no other health care options. Hospice is denied to them. Palliative care is not available. Pain care is completely inadequate."

"We're wholly inadequate in our care for those who are suffering or at the end of life. But we're very, very good and very, very fast at delivering euthanasia."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Exclusive: US ambassador says Canada walked away from 'the best trade deal' — twice



United States Ambassador to Canada Pete Hoekstra says Washington has lost patience with Prime Minister Mark Carney's handling of trade negotiations — and sees little reason to make further concessions.

“We thought we had reached an agreement on two occasions with Canada. On two occasions now, Canada has walked away from an agreement,” Hoekstra said in an interview with Blaze News. “As people from our side look at it, you know, this is the best trade agreement that anybody in the world has been offered. And if that's not good enough for Canada, you know, hey, we'll wait. We'll wait for Canada to come back and … ask to go back to the negotiating table.”

'If the Canadian government wants the Canadians to see the elements of a trade deal, it's the Canadian government's responsibility to release them.'

Hoekstra suggested that repairing relations will require more than resolving differences over tariffs. Anti-American rhetoric from Canada's federal and provincial governments, he said, has changed how Washington views its northern neighbor.

Hard bargain

“We no longer necessarily view Canada as Canadians liking America. You have multiple numbers of your premiers who are saying, ‘Do not travel to the United States.’ I think you now have 11 provinces and territories that ban American alcohol. You have another that has put 50% tariffs on it. So that's 12 out of 13.”

The ambassador was particularly incredulous at Carney's characterization of the trade dispute.

“You call a trade disagreement where, for a period of time, you were getting 93% to 95% of trade across the border tariff-free … you call that a trade war, OK?”

Canada's rejection of the proposed agreement remains a source of contention. Carney has argued that American negotiators demanded concessions that would compromise Canadian sovereignty, including protections for French-language rights and Quebec culture. U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer has disputed Canada's characterization of the negotiations.

Carney has refused to release the proposed agreement, even to Official Opposition Leader Pierre Poilievre, leaving Canadians unable to examine the terms for themselves.

Asked whether Washington would make the proposal public, Hoekstra placed the responsibility squarely on Ottawa.

“If the Canadian government wants the Canadians to see the elements of a trade deal, it's the Canadian government's responsibility to release them. We have decided not to release them.”

European vacation

Meanwhile, Carney has been pursuing closer economic and political ties with the European Union. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen recently floated the possibility of making Canada the EU's first “associate member,” an arrangement whose terms have yet to be defined.

Hoekstra indicated that Washington would assess the consequences once Ottawa decides how far it intends to go.

“We're more than willing to let Canada go through this process, determine exactly what it's going to do with the EU as an associate member, and we'll then take a look at how that may impact the relationship with the United States, either militarily or economically.”

Canada's growing relationship with China is another source of friction. Hoekstra warned that steel, aluminum, and other Chinese materials could enter the United States through Canadian products, circumventing American trade restrictions.

“Transshipment is a huge irritant,” he said.

Hoekstra argued that the practice allows Chinese producers to compete unfairly with American manufacturers.

“It's not putting Canadians to work except maybe shaping the steel and the aluminum, but it's putting Americans out of work through unfair competition because they are using ... in some cases ... slave labor."

RELATED: Want to avoid fixing Canada's problems? Just blame Trump.

Bloomberg/Shauna Clinton/Getty Images

Mission to Mars?

The ambassador was less concerned about the possibility of an outright military confrontation between the two countries.

Asked about a recent New York Times interview in which Carney acknowledged considering the “extreme tail risk” of an American invasion of Canada, Hoekstra recalled an American general's response to a similar question in Vancouver.

“I think one of our generals answered that question very effectively when he was asked about this a couple of weeks ago in Vancouver. ‘Yeah, and after that, why don't you ask me about our plans to invade … the Martian soil.’”

Hoekstra's outspoken style has irritated Canadian politicians, some of whom have even supported a petition to have him sent back to Washington.

The ambassador joked that not all of the petition's supporters would be Canadian.

“If you see an American out in front of Parliament gathering signatures, it very well could be my wife.”

Replacement complete? After 74 years, Canada's state broadcaster replaces hockey with cricket



Every Saturday for three quarters of a century, Canadians could walk through neighborhoods and see "Hockey Night in Canada" on living room TVs.

For the NHL's 2026-2027 season, that tradition is finally over, replaced with a sport popular in South Asia.

'A strong option for us to consider in our schedule.'

On Saturday, Canada's public broadcaster — the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation — wasn't showing the rivalry game between the Ottawa Senators and Toronto Maple Leafs, nor did it pick up the historic Montreal Canadiens game against the Pittsburgh Penguins. Instead, it showed cricket.

Although, it turns out it didn't really have to.

As first reported by Juno News, CBC said it is experimenting with a strategy of showing a wider range of sports, specifically Olympic sports, during the time slot traditionally held by men's hockey. The CBC didn't have to go with cricket for the first Saturday of the NHL season; it chose to and ran with the top cricket league in Canada called Super60.

"As a new Olympic sport, with a major event being held in Canada, the Super60 was a strong option for us to consider in our schedule as we bridge from summer to winter sports," CBC spokesman Chuck Thompson told Juno News.

"The Canada Super60 was a unique and rare opportunity for us to offer live, world-class cricket, played in Canada on the public broadcaster," Thompson added.

The cricket matches aired at 7 p.m. and 9:30 p.m. ET, the two time slots typically assigned to a game airing from the East Coast and the Mountain or Pacific time zones, respectively.

RELATED: NHL launches 'Hot for Hockey' campaign to tap into 'hockey romance' culture — and the results are bizarre

Phillip MacCallum/Getty Images

"Hockey Night in Canada" began in 1952 and soon became an institution in Canadian television, especially when it featured former NHL coach Don Cherry and his "Coach's Corner" segment starting in 1986.

Cherry was fired in 2019, however, after suggesting immigrants to Canada do not respect the country enough to wear a poppy on Remembrance Day to honor war veterans.

At the same time, CBC had already lost national broadcasting rights to the NHL in 2014, but it continued to sublicense games on Saturday nights from Rogers, one of Canada's big-two comms giants.

This allowed "Hockey Night in Canada" to remain on the air — that is until this year when a new contract could not be reached.

"Despite best efforts, CBC and (Rogers) Sportsnet could not reach an agreement that worked for both parties," Thompson said.

This comes as the CBC boasted a $1.38 billion budget in 2024-25, up from $1.29 billion in 2023-24.

RELATED: Fans accuse Chicago Bears player of performing Muslim prayer during national anthem: 'Is this respectful?'

ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/AFP/Getty Images

Instead, Rogers has reached a 12-year sublicensing agreement with Prime Video, which will air "Wednesday Night Hockey in Canada" and some playoff games.

CBC, on the other hand, has become the official broadcast and streaming partner of the cricket league and will air select matches on television while the rest will go to CBC Gem, the network's streaming app.

"As the public broadcaster and Canada's Olympic broadcaster, we want to provide the biggest and brightest stage possible for Canadian athletes and major events held in Canada," Thompson said.

"We will be live on CBC Sports Prime Time as much as possible," he added.

The "Hockey Night in Canada" name, which belongs to the CBC, will now be applied to the Professional Women's Hockey League when the PWHL season starts in December.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

To See Why Democrat Rule Would Ruin America, Just Look At Canada

If the United States embraces an ethos of postnationalism, it will render itself impotent.

Brewery fires co-owner over supposed skepticism about mass Indian graves hoax



A Canadian brewery has fired one of its owners who may have dared to question the mass Indian graves hoax.

After spending time fighting forest fires, planting trees, then working on a bottling line, John Adair took a risk and started a brewery with several other people in Sooke, British Columbia. It turns out that the real risk wasn't starting a business in a small municipality but doing so with people who would instantly throw him under the bus to appease woke cranks.

'Show me the evidence.'

The Sooke Brewing Company announced on Thursday that "John Adair has been terminated, effective immediately," adding that his "views and actions do not reflect the values of Sooke Brewing Company, its ownership, or its staff."

Adair had apparently done the unthinkable: He allegedly wore a shirt to work on Wednesday emblazoned with the statement, "Show me the evidence."

While a shirt signaling a desire for evidence might appear innocuous to most people, the management team at the brewery deemed it "offensive" because of the day on which Adair allegedly wore it.

Since 2021, Canada has observed "National Day for Truth and Reconciliation" on Sept. 30, owing to legislation pushed by a former Liberal minister. According to the Canadian government, this federal statutory holiday — which is also known as "Orange Shirt Day" — was established to recognize so-called "survivors" of Canada's now defunct residential school system.

The residential schools — which were in many cases operated by various Catholic dioceses as well as by Anglican and Presbyterian churches — were established across Canada in the 1880s as part of a federally mandated campaign to educate poor Indian children who had no alternative local school options and to assimilate them into contemporary society.

RELATED: Trump is right about the Smithsonian. Canada shows what happens when woke history wins.

Mert Alper Dervis/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images

An estimated 150,000 children attended the schools over the course of a century.

"Orange Shirt Day" took off in the wake of the Tk’emlups te Secwepemc First Nation's announcement that children's remains had been discovered in an apple orchard near a former Catholic-run residential school in Kamloops, British Columbia.

Despite an absence of any real evidence of children's remains in that area, what followed was a literal firestorm:

  • Hundreds of churches were torched and/or vandalized.
  • Statues remembering historic figures were toppled.
  • Canada Day festivities were canceled around the country.
  • Catholic dioceses were targeted for extortion.
  • Canadian institutions lowered the national flags in memory of the supposedly missing children.
  • Then-Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and other officials in Ottawa expressed grief over the supposed discovery.

A radical parliamentarian even passed a motion with unanimous consent demanding that the Canadian government "recognize what happened in Canada's Indian residential schools as genocide." Thousands of children allegedly did die while attending the schools, but the main killer was reportedly tuberculosis, which similarly swept through non-Indian populations.

In the years since the First Nation's announcement, tens of millions of federal dollars have been wasted in hopes of recovering children's graves that simply aren't there. Not a single body has been found to date.

The Canadian self-flagellation nevertheless continues unabated, while activists lean on the Liberal government to criminalize skepticism about the unmarked graves hoax and the imagined "genocide."

Leah Gazan, a member of the socialist New Democratic Party, has a private member's bill before the House of Commons that would amend Canada's Criminal Code so that anyone who "wilfully [sic] promotes hatred against Indigenous peoples by condoning, denying, downplaying, or justifying the Indian residential school system in Canada or by misrepresenting facts relating to it" would be guilty of an indictable offense punishable by up to two years in prison.

According to City News, a photo of Adair wearing a "Show me the evidence" T-shirt taken on Wednesday was widely circulated on Threads and was also shared on Reddit, prompting outrage and an effort on Google Reviews to tank the brewery's score.

RELATED: Canadian state media backs secret plot to trap and humiliate Indian mass-grave skeptics

Artur Widak/NurPhoto/Getty Images

The woke online mob apparently figured that the shirt was referring to the unmarked graves or at least had something thematically to do with "Orange Shirt Day."

The brewing company, which did not respond to Blaze News' request for comment, said in one of multiple statements on Facebook:

We are aware of the photograph circulating online showing a member of the Sooke Brewing Company ownership group wearing an offensive T-shirt while working at the brewery on the National Day for Truth and Reconciliation. We want to be unequivocal: the message displayed on that shirt does not reflect the values of Sooke Brewing Company. The National Day for Truth and Reconciliation is a day to honour Survivors, remember the children who never returned home, acknowledge the profound and ongoing harms caused by residential schools, and reflect on the responsibility we all share in advancing reconciliation.

In the post announcing Adair's termination, the company noted, "We are committed to Truth and Reconciliation and to respectful relationships with local First Nations communities and have reached out to First Nations leadership to listen, understand their concerns, and determine the appropriate next steps to ensure something like this does not happen again."

When asked for comment, Adair told Blaze News, "Given the circumstances, I'm currently seeking legal advice before making any public statement."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!