Analysis: There's no road map for where Alberta's riding boundary controversy is headed next

CBC’s Jason Markusoff follows up with the UCP Gerrymandering campaign, bringing us the details behind the majority and minority reports, and how the UCP are setting the stage for politicians to redraw the ridings.

If anything, I disagree with the headline, and I say that the road map is absolutely in full colour with legends attached. Canadians understand that politicians are always motivated to change goal posts in their favour. Even a layperson will understand that an absolute priority is to reduce the effort it takes for a politician’s voters to get them re-elected, and to ensure the process repeats in their favour over and over again.

In a farcical universe, if a politician could choose to have 1 vote count as 5000, provided they had absolute understanding of how to manipulate that 1 vote, and the world accepted this arrangement, they would choose this universe. Hence there are norms in place - voluntary by design - in the assumption that the politician would not willingly destroy personal credibility to interfere with the Process designed to build and maintain Legitimacy.

Here the UCP are indeed attacking that Process, and in turn reveal that Legitimacy does not matter to them. Danielle Smith’s UCP are engaged in Institutional Combat. They are prepared to maintain and defend any system to hold power. On the other hand, the UCP will attack and destroy any system that is perceived to be a hurdle to power.

Smith has blown by political norms elsewhere, becoming the first Alberta premier to repeatedly use the notwithstanding clause, using legislation to nullify a court challenge to the referendum that separatists are pursuing, and even passing a law to make sure a former minister couldn’t name his fledgling party “Progressive Conservative.”

I would add to this list how the UCP have disarmed the Office of the Ethics Commissioner, Elections Alberta, and interfered with the Office of the Auditor General.

As hard as it may be to hear, the map charts a course to fascism.

Former AHS CEO wants podcasters held in contempt for ‘harassment’ campaign | CBC News

CBC’s Jason Markusoff and Joel Dryden follow up on the Alberta CorruptCare scandal. Here, CorruptCare continues to broil as two podcasters return to court for allegations that they carried out a campaign of harassment and intimidation of former AHS CEO, Athana Mentzelopoulos, and former AHS board member, Sandy Edmonstone. The article discusses how Edmonstone noted the similarities between the harassment he experienced, and the allegations of harassment that Globe and Mail reporter, Carrie Tait, experienced.

Edmonstone learned that “the phone number that had been associated with the photos taken of him also was associated with an anonymous X account that had posted the photos of Tait.”

CorruptCare watchers will find interesting that Bryan Ward, a lawyer associated with Quixotic capitalist, Sam Mraiche, is the subject of a contempt application. Bryan Ward being another person of interest in the other court case involving the UCP Recovery Centres, the Semashkewiches, Sam Mraiche, Sam Jaber, Jitendra Prasad, Mike Eldassouki, and others.

https://kopitalk.net/c/canada/p/347793/accusations-fly-in-newly-surfaced-legal-fight-involving-sam-mraiche

Edmonstone has also applied to cite lawyer Ward for contempt alongside Wallace and DiFiore. When the Anton Piller order was executed at the homes of both podcasters, each said that Ward was representing them, according to court records.

Ward told authorities executing the Piller order that “his firm had retained Wallace and DiFiore on behalf of a ‘third party’ client,” court records state, but that client is not identified.

It appears that Ward and Park Law are involved with “directing or facilitating the campaign directed at Mr. Edmonstone,” the contempt application against Ward alleges.

The application argues that intimidating a prospective witness, “whether carried out personally or through the direction, instruction, or facilitation of others,” amounts to contempt of court.

Ward did not respond to a request for comment by publication time.