Video: Golfer attacks NHL fighter, learns valuable lesson: 'You're not a tough guy!'



It's not often civilians get an up-close and personal look at a professional athlete's skills, but one golfer made sure not to pass up his opportunity when he met one on the golf course.

The Alberta Springs Golf Course in Red Deer, Alberta, Canada, was at the center of controversy over the Fourth of July weekend when it produced an unexpected viral video featuring two groups of male golfers.

A man and his friend — the friend allegedly too drunk to put his ball on the golf tee — were apparently holding up another group of golfers behind them for over 20 minutes before an altercation broke out, the video shows.

'You're gonna get booted the f**k out of here!'

The second group finally had enough and told the first group to either move out of the way or simply drop back behind them so there was no delay.

"Drive the f**k up there or you're gonna get booted the f**k out of here!" one man yelled.

After the man filming suggested calling the police to remedy the situation, one of the golfers holding up the second group pleaded with him and stated that his friend was indeed going to play on.

As the second group continued to complain about the delay, the seemingly intoxicated golfer — still struggling to place his ball — exploded in rage after he was told that if he did not speed up he would be thrown in the lake. He soon found out he should have heeded that warning.

RELATED: UFC and Trump agree to big, beautiful event that will change American history

 

  

 

"F**king cry about it!" the man yelled back from the tee box.

Instead of simply hitting his ball, the man threw his hat to the ground and started slapping his legs while screaming, "You're a f**king pussy!"

"Let's f**king go, man!" he continued, before barreling at one of the men in the second group, who was wearing a light blue golf shirt.

As promised, the large man easily handled the golfer and tossed him into the nearby lake. Soaking wet, the man emerged from the lagoon to continue the brawl. The man in blue grabbed then him by the collar and punched him in the face several times.

"Bang! Bang!" the man in blue yelled as he punched the drenched golfer. Unfortunately, the possibly drunk man continued this cycle another two times before being thrown to the ground.

The fight was overwhelmingly one-sided, likely due in part to the fact that the man in blue turned out to be former NHL tough guy Nick Tarnasky, as noted by Barstool Sports and the Toronto Sun.

RELATED: I played against the best, but never a man. Here’s why.

  Photo by Eliot J. Schechter/NHLI via Getty Images

 

Listed at 6'2", 230 pounds, Tarnasky played five years in the NHL, averaging almost 100 penalty minutes per season. He was known as a tough player during his time with the Tampa Bay Lightning and Florida Panthers, and his stats certainly back that up.

At just 40 years old, it is not hard to see why Tarnasky was easily able to handle the golfer. He played for the San Diego Gulls as recently as 2017 in the AHL, the NHL's minor league, so it has only been eight years since he laced up his skates professionally.

As it turns out, he is still in fighting shape.

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

Why tariffs beat treaties in a world that cheats



President Trump’s tariffs are set to snap back to the “reciprocal” rates on Wednesday — unless foreign countries can cut deals. So far, the only major players to reach agreements in principle are the United Kingdom and, ironically, China.

Others aren’t so lucky. The European Union, Japan, and India all risk facing a sharp increase in tariffs. Each claims to support free trade. India has even offered a so-called zero-for-zero deal. Vietnam offered similar terms.

Free trade is a myth. Tariffs are reality. The Trump administration should raise them proudly and without apology.

The Trump administration should be skeptical. These deals sound good in theory, but so does communism. In practice, “true” free trade — like true communism — has never existed. It’s impossible. The world’s legal systems, business norms, and levels of development differ too much.

Economists may still chase unicorns. But the Trump administration should focus on tilting the board in our favor — because someone else always will.

Free trade is a mirage

Start with the basics: Different countries are different. Their economies aren’t equal, their wages aren’t comparable, and their regulations certainly aren’t aligned.

Wages may be the most obvious example. In 2024, the median annual income for Americans was around $44,000. In India, the median annual income was just $2,400. That means American labor costs nearly 20 times more. And since labor accounts for roughly a third of all production costs, the math practically begs U.S. companies to offshore work to India.

RELATED: Trump’s tariffs take a flamethrower to the free trade lie

  Photo by JOHANNES EISELE/AFP via Getty Images

It’s China in 2001 all over again.

Back then, the average U.S. wage was about $30,000. China’s? Just $1,100. When China joined the World Trade Organization, American manufacturers fled en masse. Since 2001, more than 60,000 factories have disappeared — and with them, 5 million jobs.

The result: decimated towns, stagnant wages, and hollowed-out industrial capacity. And don’t blame robots or automation. This was policy-driven — an elite obsession with free trade that delivered real pain to working Americans.

 

We’ve run trade deficits every single year since 1974. The inflation-adjusted total? Roughly $25 trillion. And while U.S. workers produce more value than ever, their wages haven’t kept up. They’ve been undercut by cheap foreign labor for decades.

Equal partners? Think again

What if the other country is rich? Can free trade work between economic peers?

Not necessarily. Even when GDP levels match, hidden differences remain. Take regulation. America enforces labor standards, environmental protections, and workplace safety rules. All of those raise production costs — but for good reason. American-made goods reflect those costs in their price tags.

Meanwhile, competitors like China or Mexico cut corners. They dump waste, abuse workers, and sidestep accountability. The result? Cheaper products — on paper. But those costs don’t vanish. They just get pushed onto others: polluted oceans, exploited laborers, sicker consumers.

This is why the sticker price on a foreign good doesn’t reflect its true cost. The price is a lie. Cheapness is often just corner-cutting with a smile.

National strength means self-reliance

Rather than debating whether free trade is possible, we should ask whether it’s good for America.

Should we outsource core industries to foreign nations with no loyalty to us? Should we depend on countries like China for our pharmaceuticals, our electronics, or even our food?

The founders didn’t think so. The Tariff Act of 1789 wasn’t about boosting exports — it was about building an independent industrial base. A sovereign nation doesn’t beg for favors. It builds.

We aren’t just an economy. We are a people — a nation united by heritage, language, faith, and trust. That matters more than quarterly profits.

Free trade is a myth. Tariffs are reality. The Trump administration should raise them proudly — and make no apologies for putting America first.

‘Stone-cold communism’: Canadian government seizes hospice center when staff refuses to allow euthanasia



Canada is one of a handful of countries that have legalized active euthanasia — the practice of ending a patient’s life by administering a lethal drug or substance, usually by a physician, at the patient’s request. People in Canada don’t even need a terminal illness to request euthanasia — just an incurable condition they claim causes unbearable suffering.

While this culture of death is already disturbing enough, Canada has now taken to forcing hospice centers to offer euthanasia as an option, even when those facilities are morally or ethically opposed.

On a recent episode of “The Glenn Beck Program,” Glenn invited Delta Hospice Society Executive Director Angelina Ireland to the show to share the gruesome story of how her palliative care company became a victim of Canadian fascism.

  

Public-private partnerships, Glenn explains, are the tools of fascists. “They let you do your own thing … and as long as you abide by all of [the government’s] rules you're fine, but the minute you disagree, you don't have a say; they'll throw you out on the streets so fast your head will spin,” he says.

That’s exactly what happened to Ireland’s Delta Hospice Society, which she describes as a 34-year-old privately run palliative care nonprofit that cares for the chronically and terminally ill until “their natural end.” To open the center, the founders raised “$8 million” and obtained “a 35-year land lease with the public health authority.” However, they also received federal dollars to fund “operating costs.”

“Everything went fine until this thing they call the state euthanasia program — called MAID [Medical Assistance in Dying] — came into law,” says Ireland, “and then the province basically came to us and said, ‘You're going to have to start providing euthanasia … because you're getting public money.”’

“We said absolutely not,” she tells Glenn, “at which point … the fascism kicked in. I just call it stone-cold communism.”

When the government “canceled the service agreement,” Delta Hospice Society stood firm and said, “We’ll be fine without your money.”

But that was apparently “the wrong answer,” says Ireland, “because then they went after the lease” that the company “had 25 years left on” and “canceled it.” The buildings Delta Hospice Society had built entirely with private funds were promptly seized.

“They evicted us … from our buildings; they expropriated those assets, which were valued at $8.5 million, kicked us out, and took our stuff,” says Ireland.

But the worst part came next.

“Then they started to operate our hospice, and they put in the euthanasia,” she says.

Although Ireland went to “three very, very prominent lawyers” to explore her options to fight the seizure, all of them told her, “You're not going to win.”

“They advised us again and again and again to just move on, take our punches, take the licking from the government, and move on,” she tells Glenn.

While Delta Hospice Society remains operational, it is still without brick-and-mortar buildings.

The seizure of Ireland’s palliative care facilities over refusing to kill patients, says Glenn, is yet another example of the spirit of death that powers this ever-increasing fascism. Whether it’s the intifada-preaching Islamists, the radical leftists and their love of abortion and sterilizing gender-confused children, or the governments legalizing euthanasia and other assisted suicide practices, the common denominator is that they “take glee in death.”

Ireland agrees, calling Canada’s experience with the legalization of euthanasia a “culling.”

“It's a Canadian cull,” she says. “They're killing the sick, the old, the mentally ill, the disabled veterans, the homeless, the poor, and now they're going after the children.”

“It's truly a national horror for Canadians.”

To hear more of Ireland’s story and more about the dire predicament of Canada, watch the clip above.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Here are the top 3 LEAST patriotic members of Congress



While millions of Americans across the country are gearing up for their Fourth of July festivities, here are three members of Congress who likely won't share their enthusiasm.

3. Jasmine Crockett

Democratic Rep. Jasmine Crockett of Texas has had several standout moments during her political career. Like many others in her party, Crockett has had her fair share of criticisms of the Trump administration, and she's even gone so far as to root for other countries over the one she was elected to represent.

'I can go through pretty much the entire South and tell you that they're broke and rely on a lot of welfare from the government.'

During a February interview on "The Breakfast Club," Crockett said she was "rooting for" Canada and Mexico over the United States because they were standing up to the "crazy regime from Mar-a-Lago."

“The fact that I’m rooting for Canada and I’m rooting for Mexico a lot is really wild, but they are really the ones that are speaking truth to power right now," Crockett said.

RELATED: Jasmine Crockett says Trump impeachment inquiry 'absolutely' on the table

  Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Crockett has also displayed disdain for Republican constituencies in particular, calling red states "deplorable" for not embracing the radical gender ideology her party touts. On a separate occasion, Crockett called red states "broke," accusing them of being too reliant on "big blue states."

"Down in Alabama, who's broke, down in Louisiana, who's broke — I can go through pretty much the entire South and tell you that they're broke and rely on a lot of welfare from the government," Crockett said. "To be perfectly honest, it is tax dollars from these big blue states. ... We're in the 'find out' phase."

Of course we cannot forget the infamous "hot wheels" comment Crockett made toward Republican Gov. Greg Abbott of Texas back in March, apparently mocking him for his disability. Crockett notably refused to apologize for her remarks.

2. Rashida Tlaib

Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan has reliably railed against America, specifically the concept of American sovereignty, throughout the span of her political career.

'Impeach the motherf**ker.'

Tlaib has repeatedly called for ICE to be abolished, claiming its sole purpose is to terrorize illegal aliens even though they broke the law by entering the country illegally. Rather than celebrating the country she represents on the Fourth of July, Tlaib insisted that America consists of "broken systems rooted in racism that allow folks to be harmed and killed."

RELATED: Rashida Tlaib flips out when asked to condemn 'Death to America' chants by anti-Israel protesters in her district

  Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

Like some of her other Democratic colleagues, the Palestinian-American has also spent much of her career focused on other parts of the globe outside the United States.

Tlaib has become known for her advocacy and support for Palestine over Israel, the country that is regarded to be America's ally in the region. When Tlaib takes a break from calling to "impeach the motherf**ker," referring to Trump, she is likely being censured by the House for "promoting false narratives" about the Hamas attack against Israel on October 7.

1. Ilhan Omar

Democratic Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar's political career is a treasure trove of anti-American sentiment. One of the most glaring instances of blatant disregard for Americans is the "some people did something" scandal of 2019.

Omar was speaking at a fundraiser for the Council on American-Islamic Relations when she downplayed the deadliest terrorist attack ever to take place on American soil.

'We're a country built on stolen land and the backs of slaves.'

"CAIR was founded after 9/11 because they recognized that some people did something and that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties," Omar said at the fundraiser.

Although Omar's comments sparked outrage, the congresswoman doubled down and made the atrocity about herself.

"I think it is really important for us to make sure that we are not forgetting, right, the aftermath of what happened after 9/11," Omar said in an interview following the scandal. "Many Americans found themselves now having their civil rights stripped from them. And so what I was speaking to was the fact that as a Muslim, not only was I suffering as an American who was attacked on that day, but the next day I woke up as my fellow Americans were now treating me a suspect."

RELATED: The US is now 'one of the worst countries' because of Trump's actions, says Ilhan Omar

  Photo by Kent Nishimura/Getty Images

This wasn't just a one-off Freudian slip for Omar. Rather, the Somali native has a steady track record of spewing anti-American rhetoric. Omar has called Americans she disagrees with "stupid" and even said the United States has "turned into one of the worst countries."

Omar herself admits she grew up in a dictatorship in Somalia, but she still insisted that the recent Army parade to celebrate the 250th anniversary of America's founding somehow demonstrated that the U.S. is worse than the country she is originally from.

Her bias against the United States and in favor of foreign countries has been a topic of conversation for her entire career, and it can be best demonstrated by comparing her own statements about American independence and Somalian independence.

Omar, a representative for the United States, celebrated Somalian independence in a Tuesday post on X depicting a man waving her native flag.

However, her praise seems to be reserved exclusively for Somalia. Back in 2018, she posted a critical statement to mark America's independence.

"We shouldn't revise history," Omar wrote. "We're a country built on stolen land and the backs of slaves. Independence Day allows us to reflect on how far we've come and how much farther we have to go. Leveraging our voice to fight for justice is as American as it gets. Happy 4th of July."

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

Britain Shows How The Bar For Assisted Suicide Keeps Getting Lower

[rebelmouse-proxy-image https://thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Screenshot-2025-07-02-at-5.18.32 PM-1200x675.png crop_info="%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Screenshot-2025-07-02-at-5.18.32%5Cu202fPM-1200x675.png%22%7D" expand=1]The passage of the Leadbeater bill sends a devastating signal: Some lives are no longer worth the cost of care.

'51st state': Trump teases annexation again after Canada quickly caves on major tax



President Donald Trump threatened U.S.-Canada trade talks on Friday over the northern nation's digital services tax, which required foreign and domestic large businesses such as Netflix, Amazon.com's Prime Video, and Spotify to pay a levy of 3% on revenue earned from offering online services to users in Canada.

"We have just been informed that Canada, a very difficult Country to TRADE with, including the fact that they have charged our Farmers as much as 400% Tariffs, for years, on Dairy Products, has just announced that they are putting a Digital Services Tax on our American Technology Companies, which is a direct and blatant attack on our Country," Trump noted in a Truth Social post.

"They are obviously copying the European Union, which has done the same thing, and is currently under discussion with us, also," continued the president. "Based on this egregious Tax, we are hereby terminating ALL discussions on Trade with Canada, effective immediately."

'Canada is a very tough country to deal with.'

Canada — the top buyer of American goods, importing $349.4 billion last year, and 75.9% of whose total exports went to the U.S. — made abundantly clear that it wasn't too attached to the tax, which the Parliamentary Budget Office estimated would increase federal government revenues by over $5.2 billion over five years.

Within hours of Trump's post, the Department of Finance Canada announced that it was rescinding the digital services tax to advance broader trade negotiations with the United States.

Canadian Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne noted that "rescinding the DST will allow the negotiations to make vital progress and reinforce our work to create jobs and build prosperity for all Canadians."

U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick thanked Canada on Monday for removing the tax, noting that it was "intended to stifle American innovation and would have been a deal breaker for any trade deal with America."

RELATED: Canada's solution to reliance on US? Increasing commitments in Europe

 Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

"In our negotiations on a new economic and security relationship between Canada and the United States, Canada's new government will always be guided by the overall contribution of any possible agreement to the best interests of Canadian workers and businesses," said Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney. "Today’s announcement will support a resumption of negotiations toward the July 21, 2025, timeline set out at this month’s G7 Leaders’ Summit in Kananaskis."

The Canadian Liberal Party under former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau first promised the tax ahead of the 2019 federal election, saying it would "make sure that multinational tech giants pay corporate tax on the revenue they generate in Canada," even though critics indicated that Canadian consumers would end up paying the taxes.

The Digital Services Tax Act went into force on June 28, 2024, prompting condemnation stateside as well as an official complaint under the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement from former U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai.

John Dickerman, vice president of the Washington, D.C.-based Business Council of Canada, suggested to Canadian state media days after Trump's re-election that the tax was likely doomed.

"The first Trump administration ... was very clear on digital services taxes. They believed that digital services taxes were a very clear indication that a country was specifically targeting the U.S. and targeting U.S. companies. It will be a 'with us and against us' scenario," said Dickerman. "I think there will be very little room for negotiation on DST."

Trump leaned on Canada to axe the tax just in the nick of time. The first payments were due on Monday and retroactive to 2022, meaning a number of American corporations were on the hook for billions of dollars.

The Canadian government indicated that Carney and Trump have agreed to resume negotiations "with a view towards agreeing on a deal by July 21, 2025."

"Canada is a very tough country to deal with, I will say that," Trump told Fox News' "Sunday Morning Futures." "Hopefully we'll be fine with Canada. I love Canada. Frankly, Canada should be the 51st state."

Blaze News has reached out to the White House for comment.

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

With Abortion And Euthanasia Votes, The U.K. Rejects The Basis Of Every Human Freedom

Once a nation ceases to respect the source of human dignity, it doesn't take long to stop respecting the rights that dignity demands.

Canada's solution to reliance on US? Increasing commitments in Europe



If Donald Trump's "51st state" cracks have gotten under Mark Carney's skin, he wasn't showing it when he kicked off the G7 summit Monday.

Sitting next to the American president, Canada's prime minister played the consummate host, with conciliatory remarks stressing how much the participant nations have in common.

'We are actively seeking to strengthen transatlantic security, particularly by becoming a participant in rearming Europe.'

"All of us around this table are reinforcing our militaries and security services for the new world," he said. "But we all know that there can be no security without economic prosperity, and no prosperity without resilience. And ... that resilience comes from cooperation, cooperation that starts around this table."

Two-percenter

Still, Carney has lately made it clear that he'd like to place some distance between him and his tablemate. Last week, he pledged that the country would boost defense spending to the tune of an additional $9.3 billion this year in order to be less "reliant" on the protection of its big brother to the south.

Carney's increase would bring Canada's defense spending in line with NATO's benchmark of 2% of GDP for the first time since NATO established the benchmark in 2006. In the last two decades, Canada has rarely exceeded 1.5% and has usually hovered around 1%.

The last time Canada's defense spending met the 2% threshold was in 1987, when former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney sought to rebuild Canada’s military. At the height of the Cold War in the 1950s and 1960s, Canada was spending well over 4% of its GDP on national defense.

But will Canadians actually benefit from Carney’s spending spree?

RELATED: Listen up, America: Everything you've been told about Canada is a lie

  Lillian Suwanrumpha/Dave Chan/Toronto Star/NurPhoto/Bloomberg/André Ringuette/Douglas Elbinger/Getty Images

'Deep decline'

In his announcement last Monday, Carney was typically vague about where the money will go, while hinting that Canada is on the market for new military allies and relationships:

Canada can work towards a new international set of partnerships that are more secure, prosperous, just, and free. We can pursue deeper alliances with stable democracies who share our interests, values, principles, and history, and we can help create a new era of integration between like-minded partners that maximizes mutual support over mutual dependency.

On one point, Carney was blunt: The Canadian Armed Forces are a military in deep decline. "Our military infrastructure and equipment have aged, hindering our military preparedness,” he said. “I'll give an example or two: Only one of our four submarines is seaworthy. Less than half our maritime fleet and land vehicles are operational."

Continental affair

So where are these "like-minded partners" who will help Canada get back into fighting shape? Not on this side of the Atlantic. Carney has openly mused about Canada becoming a member of the European Union and contributing to its defense force, and this looks like a big step in that direction.

Does this mean that Carney will join European leaders like U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron in providing missiles to Ukraine for its war with Russia? Is that how he plans to spend Canadian tax dollars? It might not seem like a good deal to Canadians.

Last month, however, Carney expressed his intention for Canada to join ReArm Europe, a major European defense buildup. He has also continued his predecessor Justin Trudeau's policy of sending billions of dollars in military and civil aid to Ukraine, even though the country is on the brink of defeat.

Carney said:

We are actively seeking to strengthen transatlantic security, particularly by becoming a participant in ReArm Europe. This will help diversify our military suppliers with reliable European partners and integrate the Canadian defense industry as full participants in 150 billion euros of Europe's rearmament program.

To these ends, the Canada EU summit later this month will be more important than ever, and Canada will arrive at this summit with a plan to lead with new investments to build our strength in service of our values. This will include our support for new NATO defense industrial pledge, which will be negotiated at the NATO summit.

'Blank check' from Pierre

At a news conference on Monday, Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre essentially gave Carney a blank check and promised his support to help the liberals achieve the military spending target.

“After a decade of liberal cuts, mismanagement, and back-office bureaucracy of boondoggles and wasted money on bungled projects, our military has never been weaker," said Poilievre.

"Now, more than ever, we need a strong military that will reassert our sovereignty in the north, take back control of our Arctic waters," Poilevre added, noting that he wanted to fight the increasingly woke policies that have infected Canada’s military and bring back the “warrior culture.”

But he stood shoulder to shoulder with Carney on spending. “We support getting back to the 2% target as soon as possible, and we will support additional money for our military,” Poilievre said, even as he promised to ferret out “waste in bureaucracy, consultants, foreign aid, corporate welfare, and other areas.”

Despite his tough talk, Poilievre admitted he had yet to see the Liberal government's budget for the increased spending.

Dead bird walking: RFK Jr. is the only hope for 399 healthy ostriches on Canada's chopping block​



MAHA Man to the rescue?

Hundreds of healthy ostriches owned by a small family farm in Canada are marked for death — unless U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. can win them a stay of execution.

'What thugs could show up to kill your almost 400 animals that you've raised for 35 years?'

Karen Espersen and Dave Bilinski's Universal Ostrich Farms in the Kootenay region of British Columbia has become an international touchstone for hysteria over avian flu, government overreach, and the property rights of farmers.

Cull me, maybe

On Dec. 19, 2024, the couple noticed that one of their ostriches had symptoms of what appeared to be pneumonia. That bird recovered, but 69 other ostriches, introduced to the farm after 2020, died of apparent avian influenza.

Just under two weeks later, federal agents from the Canada Food Inspection Agency descended upon the farm to conduct tests on two of the dead ostriches. When they confirmed bird flu as the cause, they issued a cull order for the remaining 399 birds to be killed.

This is in keeping with the CFIA's policy of "stamping out" any bird populations in which avian flu is detected.

Yet Espersen and Bilinski claim that there have been no further incidences of sickness, something they credit to natural herd immunity. The CFIA, however, ignored their requests to have the healthy birds tested.

MAHA on a mission

Universal Ostrich Farms' lawyer argues that the CFIA has no reason to order the cull, as the farm's ostriches are not raised for their meat. Instead, their genes are used in valuable antibody studies.

When Espersen and Bilinski conducted their own testing, a local veterinarian identified the cause of death as resulting from pseudomonas, a bacteria that can be found in soil and water. This prompted the CFIA to issue an order restricting the farm owners from conducting any further testing at the risk of receiving a $200,000 fine and six months in jail.

 Katie Pasitney. Photo: David Krayden

It was then that Espersen and Bilinski's daughter Katie Pasitney — who has since become the farm's spokesperson — reached out to RFK Jr., who immediately responded to the farmers’ plight. The Make America Healthy Again architect sent a letter to the CFIA, urging the Canadian government to allow science and not politics to govern its decision about culling the ostriches.

“It’s our hope that this collaboration will help us understand how to better protect human and animal populations and perhaps lead to the development of new vaccines and therapeutics,” Kennedy said in a post to X accompanying the letter, reported by a host of mainstream media.

Stay of execution?

That letter apparently moved Canadian Agriculture Minister Heath MacDonald, because he announced that the government was reconsidering its decision to kill the birds. But he has been silent since that announcement.

Since then, it has been a standoff between the CFIA and the farm, where about 50 journalists and activists are camping out in order to dissuade the government from killing the birds.

RELATED: 'Karma is a b****': Trump taps epidemiologist targeted by Biden admin and censored online to run NIH

 Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call Inc. via Getty Images

Speaking to Align on Wednesday, Pasitney said she is attempting to enlist a host of prominent people to express their support for the farm in person.

“We were inviting Elon Musk and we were inviting RFK out, trying to get that word out there a little bit more with education and awareness about how big this issue is. … RFK is still monitoring the issue, as well as Dr. Oz. So that is kind of an interesting situation."

  

Pasitney said the number of people staying at the farm fluctuates from 50 during the week to over 100 on the weekends.

“Just this last weekend, we had over 200 here. ... People come and go and take pictures of the big, beautiful, prehistoric ostriches. And it's really nice to be able to meet so many kind people who all ... feel like we deserve the change that we're fighting for,” she tells Blaze Media.

Like a thief in the night

According to Pastiney, communication with the CFIA is not so open.

“We don't even personally hear from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency any more. They don't email. … There's no communication [except via] a media release that they went and sent out to all the media,” Pasitney said.

The CFIA's message, however, remains chillingly clear: The culling could happen at any time.

"You can imagine the shock and trauma and the anxiety that a family would feel, living on the edge of their seat every day, not knowing if they're going to show up. … I guess they hire vendors to do it, but what thugs could show up to kill your almost 400 animals that you've raised for 35 years?”

But for Pasitney and her parents, this goes beyond the personal.

Not only does the "stamping out" policy destroy the livelihood of farmers, said Pasitney, it's also tampering with nature's built-in mechanism for controlling pandemics.

“We're wiping out natural immunity, herd immunity, which has existed for millions of years," said Pasitney. "If we do lose our natural immunity, we're setting ourselves up for a catastrophic bad chain of events in the future."

'Judicial tyranny': Federal court blocks 'Liberation Day' tariffs — but Trump could have last laugh



A New York-based federal court has temporarily handicapped the Trump administration, removing some of its leverage in trade wars with foreign powers.

A three-judge panel at the U.S. Court of International Trade on Wednesday voided and permanently blocked President Donald Trump's "Liberation Day" 10% baseline tariff on goods imported from most countries as well as his reciprocal tariffs on scores of individual nations.

The court unanimously held that while the president has authority to respond to national emergencies with tariffs, embargoes, and sanctions, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act he invoked "does not authorize the President to impose unbounded tariffs."

'The Worldwide and Retaliatory tariffs are thus ultra vires and contrary to law.'

The court suggested that letting Trump impose unbounded tariffs might run afoul of the Constitution's separation of powers, as the Constitution assigns Congress the power to regulate foreign commerce and impose tariffs. Critics have stressed, however, that Congress has over the years delegated much of this authority to the president and the executive branch — authority largely unchallenged until now.

"The Worldwide and Retaliatory Tariffs do not comply with the limitations Congress imposed upon the President's power to respond to balance-of-payments deficits," the court said in its opinion. "The President's assertion of tariff-making authority in the instant case, unbounded as it is by any limitation in duration or scope, exceeds any tariff authority delegated to the President under IEEPA. The Worldwide and Retaliatory tariffs are thus ultra vires and contrary to law."

RELATED: Trump's reciprocal tariffs — and decades of devastating fees the world pushed on America

  Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

The decision halts Trump's existing IEEPA tariffs and prevents him from increasing tariffs, including the paused 145% tariff on imports from China and the recently threatened 50% tariffs on imports from the European Union. It also scraps Trump's orders applying 25% duties on Canadian and Mexican products.

The Trump administration immediately appealed the decision.

'The judicial coup is out of control.'

Since the Court of International Trade had effectively resolved two lawsuits before it in a single opinion — a lawsuit brought by the Liberty Justice Center on behalf of several businesses and a lawsuit filed by a gang of blue-state state attorneys general — the government asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to consolidate its appeals.

Jeffrey Schwab, director of litigation at the Liberty Justice Center, said in a statement, "This ruling reaffirms that the president must act within the bounds of the law, and it protects American businesses and consumers from the destabilizing effects of volatile, unilaterally imposed tariffs."

Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield, one of the Democrats who fought to axe the tariffs, celebrated the ruling, stating, "President Trump's sweeping tariffs were unlawful, reckless, and economically devastating."

White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller noted on X, "The judicial coup is out of control."

Miller added Thursday, "We are living under a judicial tyranny."

RELATED: Why voters are done compromising with the 'America Last' elite

  Photographer: Yuki Iwamura/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Regardless of whether the government is successful in its appeal, the Trump administration has other ways of pursuing its desired tariffs, including under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, Section 232 of Trade Expansion Act of 1962, Sections 301 of the 1974 Trade Act, and Section 338 of the Trade Act of 1930.

Alec Phillips, managing director at Goldman Sachs, indicated that the president is authorized under Section 122 to tackle a balance-of-deficit, reported MarketWatch. Since that particular law does not demand a formal investigation or process, Trump could use it to immediately impose tariffs of up to 15%. The downside is that Section 122 tariffs are only good for 150 days.

Alternatively, the administration could apply tariffs under Section 301, although doing so would require investigations to set the stage.

"This would take longer, likely several weeks at a minimum and probably a few months to complete several investigations," said Phillips. "There is no limit on the level or duration of tariffs under Sec. 301."

'We already expect additional sectoral tariffs.'

Michelle Schulz, managing partner at Schulz Trade Law PLLC, told CNBC's "Squawk Box Europe" on Thursday, "We have had section 301 tariffs on Chinese goods even under the previous administration, which were pretty harsh. So I can imagine that the administration will look at these provisions again and see if they can use 232, or 301, or some other mechanism whereby they can enforce the tariffs."

According to Phillips, Section 338 enables Trump to impose tariffs of up to 50% on imports from nations that discriminate against the United States. While an available tool in the president's kit, it has reportedly never been used before.

Finally, Section 232 tariffs — which Trump has used for steel, aluminum, and automobiles and which were unaffected by the court's ruling — can be expanded to cover other sectors.

"We already expect additional sectoral tariffs — pharmaceuticals, semiconductors/electronics, etc. — and uncertainty regarding the IEEPA-based tariffs could lead the White House to put more emphasis on sectoral tariffs, where there is much less legal uncertainty," said Phillips.

Blaze News reached out to the Department of Commerce for comment but did not receive a response by publication.

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