Pinned Tweet
Over the next several months, I will offer my analysis of the campaigns, strategies, communications, and the impact I believe they will have on the critical “test driver” cohort - see the post below for context.
In the meantime, dust off your copy of the 1981 book Western Realities & Dangers, written by Larry Pratt and Garth Stevenson from the University of Alberta, and follow along if you’re interested.
In the meantime, dust off your copy of the 1981 book Western Realities & Dangers, written by Larry Pratt and Garth Stevenson from the University of Alberta, and follow along if you’re interested.
The key demographic in this referendum is swing voters. They are UCP supporters on the more moderate side of the party whom @jkenney brought into the coalition from the PCAA. Having served as a UCP constituency president during his premiership, I know many of these voters and understand what motivates them. Their votes could shift roughly 15% toward either side.
The campaigns and strategies should therefore focus on these pragmatic “test drivers” rather than the deeply committed separatists (I call them the "Better dead than reds") or staunch federalists ("True believers") whose positions and votes are already firmly set.
7
7
42
23,069
Dwayne Chomyn retweeted
Spelling bee contestant is give the word "woman".
He then asks them to define "woman".
The rest is comedy gold 🤣
He then asks them to define "woman".
The rest is comedy gold 🤣
109
1,665
7,364
398,076
Men’s rights activists are making progress. If I can’t compete against women, I don’t want to compete.
London Marathon considering major change for 2027 elite women's race by including male runners
gbnews.com/sport/london-m…
0
0
3
228
Dwayne Chomyn retweeted
.@arby's is vastly superior to A&W. Cocaine is not on the menu. You have ask for it, like you have to ask for delicious Horsey Sauce™.
Welcome to Edmonton. Two people snorting cocaine off a table in an A&W, and then proceeding to smoke meth. There were innocent people near, reportedly including children.
0
1
1
218
Dwayne Chomyn retweeted
Remarkable that this happened in Kelowna again. Last year, in this very city, a man was granted bail after he was convicted of domestic violence. Hours after getting out of court, he tracked down his estranged wife and beat her to death in a parking lot.
Kelowna man accused of attacking ex-wife 30 minutes after bail release freed again #Kelowna castanet.net/news/Kelowna/6…
18
101
432
9,457
Dwayne Chomyn retweeted
Canadian Research Chairs are allocated according to equity targets pegged to population estimates. In other words, a quota.
chairs-chaires.gc.ca/program-progra…
chairs-chaires.gc.ca/program-progra…
Thousands of (mostly American) replies, so a quick follow-up. DEI in Canada doesn't mean hiring unqualified people. Quotas are banned under the Employment Equity Act, and every hire must meet the job's qualifications.
🧵….
8
61
494
15,268
.@arby's is vastly superior to A&W. Cocaine is not on the menu. You have ask for it, like you have to ask for delicious Horsey Sauce™.
Welcome to Edmonton. Two people snorting cocaine off a table in an A&W, and then proceeding to smoke meth. There were innocent people near, reportedly including children.
0
1
1
218
Dwayne Chomyn retweeted
Not long ago the government spent about 8 cents of every dollar of revenue paying interest on the debt.
This grows to nearly 14 cents in a few years time.
The argument below enabled us getting here.
This grows to nearly 14 cents in a few years time.
The argument below enabled us getting here.
Pierre Poilievre has started saying "debt is out of control".
Governments do need to be careful about the debt they bring on.
But here's some important context as Canada diversifies trade, builds big and supports affordability.
9
21
103
5,208
To be generous to Ms. Kirbie, she must have no idea what is going on in our universities and must be unfamiliar with the research.
Canadian research documents the widespread use of DEI criteria in university hiring, including job postings that restrict eligibility by demographic characteristics. Yet we have surprisingly little evidence about how these criteria affect hiring decisions, whether applicants are penalized for expressing differing views, or whether DEI policies improve the quality of teaching and research.
The lack of curiosity about these important questions is disappointing, but probably a tell.
There are documented cases of positions being restricted to particular demographic groups. And when Ms. Kirbie has been shown job postings containing such restrictions, her apparent failure to acknowledge their significance raises a legitimate question: what evidence would it take to convince her that her assertions lack support, that these policies deserve scrutiny, and there are concerning signs we have a problem?
Canadian research documents the widespread use of DEI criteria in university hiring, including job postings that restrict eligibility by demographic characteristics. Yet we have surprisingly little evidence about how these criteria affect hiring decisions, whether applicants are penalized for expressing differing views, or whether DEI policies improve the quality of teaching and research.
The lack of curiosity about these important questions is disappointing, but probably a tell.
There are documented cases of positions being restricted to particular demographic groups. And when Ms. Kirbie has been shown job postings containing such restrictions, her apparent failure to acknowledge their significance raises a legitimate question: what evidence would it take to convince her that her assertions lack support, that these policies deserve scrutiny, and there are concerning signs we have a problem?
Thousands of (mostly American) replies, so a quick follow-up. DEI in Canada doesn't mean hiring unqualified people. Quotas are banned under the Employment Equity Act, and every hire must meet the job's qualifications.
🧵….
8
12
65
1,280
.@cbcwatcher provides a valuable service for us. Clips of QP provide more than just insights into the state of the nation and the issues of the day; they provide a window into how we treat the People’s House with such disdain— not even an effort to confront the questions being asked on our behalf.
Adam Chambers nails it: Carney’s own fiscal anchors are already broken, and Long won’t answer the question
Chambers (Simcoe North):“The Parliamentary Budget Officer has warned Canadians that the new Finance Minister and Prime Minister won’t even meet their own fiscal targets… elf refuses to meet the standards he’s imposed… Will the Prime Minister confirm that he himself approved using the credit card to run up the deficit?”
Long’s replies with zero engagement with the PBO warning, the broken anchors, or the credit-card deficit question. Just process, slogans, and attacks. Classic tell when the Carney numbers don’t hold
Carney set the rules. Chambers is holding him to them. Long’s disappearing-neck deflection is the confirmation @adamchamb @waynelong
0
1
7
279
Dwayne Chomyn retweeted
Adam Chambers nails it: Carney’s own fiscal anchors are already broken, and Long won’t answer the question
Chambers (Simcoe North):“The Parliamentary Budget Officer has warned Canadians that the new Finance Minister and Prime Minister won’t even meet their own fiscal targets… elf refuses to meet the standards he’s imposed… Will the Prime Minister confirm that he himself approved using the credit card to run up the deficit?”
Long’s replies with zero engagement with the PBO warning, the broken anchors, or the credit-card deficit question. Just process, slogans, and attacks. Classic tell when the Carney numbers don’t hold
Carney set the rules. Chambers is holding him to them. Long’s disappearing-neck deflection is the confirmation @adamchamb @waynelong
Chambers (Simcoe North):“The Parliamentary Budget Officer has warned Canadians that the new Finance Minister and Prime Minister won’t even meet their own fiscal targets… elf refuses to meet the standards he’s imposed… Will the Prime Minister confirm that he himself approved using the credit card to run up the deficit?”
Long’s replies with zero engagement with the PBO warning, the broken anchors, or the credit-card deficit question. Just process, slogans, and attacks. Classic tell when the Carney numbers don’t hold
Carney set the rules. Chambers is holding him to them. Long’s disappearing-neck deflection is the confirmation @adamchamb @waynelong
How will the credit agencies view the new Prime Minister missing his fiscal targets at the first opportunity?
14
194
574
17,755
But for X, the public would not have seen this exchange or had any insight into MIT Professor Sangeeta Bhatia’s character. The mainstream media simply had no interest in balanced coverage of this story.
It isn't a 'Brave New World'; it's business as usual being disrupted by ordinary people.
It isn't a 'Brave New World'; it's business as usual being disrupted by ordinary people.
🚨 BOMBSHELL COURT EVIDENCE EXPOSES EXPLOSIVE PRIVATE MESSAGES REVEALING COORDINATION BETWEEN KRISTIN KNOUSE AND MIT PROFESSOR SANGEETA BHATIA IN THE DAVID M. SABATINI ORDEAL.
🔱 NEW REVELATION — Court evidence exposes how Knouse and Bhatia privately celebrated Sabatini’s potential destruction of his professional career, and anticipated the revocation of his @MIT tenure.
An 80-message exchange between Kristin Knouse and MIT Professor Sangeeta Bhatia, dated August 20–21, 2021, reveals their private reactions immediately following Whitehead Institute and HHMI's severance of ties with Professor @DMSabatini.
The communications contain statements that deserve serious public examination.
🔴 1. “YOU DID IT” — “AND HE’S OUT.”
On August 20, 2021, Bhatia congratulated Knouse:
🔴 “YOU DID IT. You crossed the finish line. It's out in the open. And you're not out in the open. And you're on the faculty. And he's out.”
Knouse responded:
🔴 “You connecting me to Nancy [Hopkins]was the turning point. I will never forget that walk in Lexington.”
🔴 2. “THIS WAS THE OUTCOME I DREAMED OF.”
The following morning, as news coverage spread, Knouse discussed the possibility of Sabatini losing his MIT tenure:
🔴 “Hard to imagine MIT will be left with any choice other than to revoke tenure.”
Bhatia responded:
🔴 “You're right about tenure”
She subsequently wrote:
🔴 “This was the outcome I dreamed of but NEVER certain I would get it.”
Knouse also described her assessment of Whitehead's handling of the matter:
🔴 “And as skeptical as I was of Whitehead's end game, in the end I think the overall process was perfectly executed.”
Bhatia expressed her approval of Whitehead Institute Director Ruth Lehmann:
🔴 “I'm proud of Ruth [Lehmann]”
These exchanges occurred months before MIT's April 2022 tenure-revocation recommendation.
🔴 3. THE PROFESSIONAL CONSEQUENCES — BEYOND WHITEHEAD.
The participants also discussed Sabatini's corporate affiliations and prospects for future employment.
Knouse wrote:
🔴 “I know of one company already speaking with lawyers to remove him on grounds of morality clause.”
She subsequently stated:
🔴 “Hard to imagine how he can be gainfully employed anywhere after the past 24 hours ...”
These were not merely discussions about an institutional investigation. They extended to the potential consequences for Sabatini's career, tenure, corporate affiliations, and future livelihood.
🔴 4. THE DIVERSITY SURVEY AND PROTECTION FROM PUBLIC IDENTIFICATION.
In another particularly consequential exchange, Bhatia wrote:
🔴 “Also the dei survey and subsequent investigation really protects you, which I love. There is not even a scent of whistleblower in all the press.”
This statement takes on particular significance alongside the previously disclosed communications in which Knouse and Nora Kory discussed using Whitehead's diversity survey to conceal an investigation already under consideration (📑 see the original court evidence in the first comment below).
🔴 5. “WE DRANK CHAMPAGNE” — CELEBRATING AS THE NEWS SPREAD.
Perhaps the most striking exchange appears on KK011419.
On August 21, 2021, Knouse declared:
🔴 “I KNOW! Young people took down a relatively young king. Progress, progress, progress.”
Knouse also wrote:
🔴 “Two other women who came forward and I drank champagne while watching the Tweets and articles roll in last night. It felt like campaign headquarters after an election victory. Really special.”
Bhatia responded:
🔴 “That's awesome.”
These exchanges reinforce the serious concerns about coordination and conflicts of interest raised by our previous disclosures. Their significance must be assessed alongside the full documentary record and the subsequent jury verdict.
The scientific community deserves full accountability for any misconduct established by the evidence, including the roles of individuals who participated in or improperly influenced the institutional processes that subjected Professor Sabatini to a devastating ordeal and profoundly damaged his career.
📑 REVIEW THE ORIGINAL COURT EVIDENCE BELOW.
🔱 ScienceGuardians™ Legal and Investigative Team
MORE COURT EVIDENCE. MORE REVELATIONS. STAY TUNED. ⚠️
@SciGuardians 🔱
0
1
36
805
Just like @MargaretAtwood in the strikingly similar Galloway matter in Canada.
@DMSabatinien it first broke, and I posted on a thread piling on about David “let’s wait til all the facts come out”, I was skewered and ostracized. All I said was wait for facts. But I was supposed to just “believe all women”, without access to facts. I rejected that ideology. The facts are out and now we can judge.
0
0
0
175
Dwayne Chomyn retweeted
🚨 BOMBSHELL COURT EVIDENCE EXPOSES EXPLOSIVE PRIVATE MESSAGES REVEALING COORDINATION BETWEEN KRISTIN KNOUSE AND MIT PROFESSOR SANGEETA BHATIA IN THE DAVID M. SABATINI ORDEAL.
🔱 NEW REVELATION — Court evidence exposes how Knouse and Bhatia privately celebrated Sabatini’s potential destruction of his professional career, and anticipated the revocation of his @MIT tenure.
An 80-message exchange between Kristin Knouse and MIT Professor Sangeeta Bhatia, dated August 20–21, 2021, reveals their private reactions immediately following Whitehead Institute and HHMI's severance of ties with Professor @DMSabatini.
The communications contain statements that deserve serious public examination.
🔴 1. “YOU DID IT” — “AND HE’S OUT.”
On August 20, 2021, Bhatia congratulated Knouse:
🔴 “YOU DID IT. You crossed the finish line. It's out in the open. And you're not out in the open. And you're on the faculty. And he's out.”
Knouse responded:
🔴 “You connecting me to Nancy [Hopkins]was the turning point. I will never forget that walk in Lexington.”
🔴 2. “THIS WAS THE OUTCOME I DREAMED OF.”
The following morning, as news coverage spread, Knouse discussed the possibility of Sabatini losing his MIT tenure:
🔴 “Hard to imagine MIT will be left with any choice other than to revoke tenure.”
Bhatia responded:
🔴 “You're right about tenure”
She subsequently wrote:
🔴 “This was the outcome I dreamed of but NEVER certain I would get it.”
Knouse also described her assessment of Whitehead's handling of the matter:
🔴 “And as skeptical as I was of Whitehead's end game, in the end I think the overall process was perfectly executed.”
Bhatia expressed her approval of Whitehead Institute Director Ruth Lehmann:
🔴 “I'm proud of Ruth [Lehmann]”
These exchanges occurred months before MIT's April 2022 tenure-revocation recommendation.
🔴 3. THE PROFESSIONAL CONSEQUENCES — BEYOND WHITEHEAD.
The participants also discussed Sabatini's corporate affiliations and prospects for future employment.
Knouse wrote:
🔴 “I know of one company already speaking with lawyers to remove him on grounds of morality clause.”
She subsequently stated:
🔴 “Hard to imagine how he can be gainfully employed anywhere after the past 24 hours ...”
These were not merely discussions about an institutional investigation. They extended to the potential consequences for Sabatini's career, tenure, corporate affiliations, and future livelihood.
🔴 4. THE DIVERSITY SURVEY AND PROTECTION FROM PUBLIC IDENTIFICATION.
In another particularly consequential exchange, Bhatia wrote:
🔴 “Also the dei survey and subsequent investigation really protects you, which I love. There is not even a scent of whistleblower in all the press.”
This statement takes on particular significance alongside the previously disclosed communications in which Knouse and Nora Kory discussed using Whitehead's diversity survey to conceal an investigation already under consideration (📑 see the original court evidence in the first comment below).
🔴 5. “WE DRANK CHAMPAGNE” — CELEBRATING AS THE NEWS SPREAD.
Perhaps the most striking exchange appears on KK011419.
On August 21, 2021, Knouse declared:
🔴 “I KNOW! Young people took down a relatively young king. Progress, progress, progress.”
Knouse also wrote:
🔴 “Two other women who came forward and I drank champagne while watching the Tweets and articles roll in last night. It felt like campaign headquarters after an election victory. Really special.”
Bhatia responded:
🔴 “That's awesome.”
These exchanges reinforce the serious concerns about coordination and conflicts of interest raised by our previous disclosures. Their significance must be assessed alongside the full documentary record and the subsequent jury verdict.
The scientific community deserves full accountability for any misconduct established by the evidence, including the roles of individuals who participated in or improperly influenced the institutional processes that subjected Professor Sabatini to a devastating ordeal and profoundly damaged his career.
📑 REVIEW THE ORIGINAL COURT EVIDENCE BELOW.
🔱 ScienceGuardians™ Legal and Investigative Team
MORE COURT EVIDENCE. MORE REVELATIONS. STAY TUNED. ⚠️
@SciGuardians 🔱
🔱 NEW REVELATION — Court evidence exposes how Knouse and Bhatia privately celebrated Sabatini’s potential destruction of his professional career, and anticipated the revocation of his @MIT tenure.
An 80-message exchange between Kristin Knouse and MIT Professor Sangeeta Bhatia, dated August 20–21, 2021, reveals their private reactions immediately following Whitehead Institute and HHMI's severance of ties with Professor @DMSabatini.
The communications contain statements that deserve serious public examination.
🔴 1. “YOU DID IT” — “AND HE’S OUT.”
On August 20, 2021, Bhatia congratulated Knouse:
🔴 “YOU DID IT. You crossed the finish line. It's out in the open. And you're not out in the open. And you're on the faculty. And he's out.”
Knouse responded:
🔴 “You connecting me to Nancy [Hopkins]was the turning point. I will never forget that walk in Lexington.”
🔴 2. “THIS WAS THE OUTCOME I DREAMED OF.”
The following morning, as news coverage spread, Knouse discussed the possibility of Sabatini losing his MIT tenure:
🔴 “Hard to imagine MIT will be left with any choice other than to revoke tenure.”
Bhatia responded:
🔴 “You're right about tenure”
She subsequently wrote:
🔴 “This was the outcome I dreamed of but NEVER certain I would get it.”
Knouse also described her assessment of Whitehead's handling of the matter:
🔴 “And as skeptical as I was of Whitehead's end game, in the end I think the overall process was perfectly executed.”
Bhatia expressed her approval of Whitehead Institute Director Ruth Lehmann:
🔴 “I'm proud of Ruth [Lehmann]”
These exchanges occurred months before MIT's April 2022 tenure-revocation recommendation.
🔴 3. THE PROFESSIONAL CONSEQUENCES — BEYOND WHITEHEAD.
The participants also discussed Sabatini's corporate affiliations and prospects for future employment.
Knouse wrote:
🔴 “I know of one company already speaking with lawyers to remove him on grounds of morality clause.”
She subsequently stated:
🔴 “Hard to imagine how he can be gainfully employed anywhere after the past 24 hours ...”
These were not merely discussions about an institutional investigation. They extended to the potential consequences for Sabatini's career, tenure, corporate affiliations, and future livelihood.
🔴 4. THE DIVERSITY SURVEY AND PROTECTION FROM PUBLIC IDENTIFICATION.
In another particularly consequential exchange, Bhatia wrote:
🔴 “Also the dei survey and subsequent investigation really protects you, which I love. There is not even a scent of whistleblower in all the press.”
This statement takes on particular significance alongside the previously disclosed communications in which Knouse and Nora Kory discussed using Whitehead's diversity survey to conceal an investigation already under consideration (📑 see the original court evidence in the first comment below).
🔴 5. “WE DRANK CHAMPAGNE” — CELEBRATING AS THE NEWS SPREAD.
Perhaps the most striking exchange appears on KK011419.
On August 21, 2021, Knouse declared:
🔴 “I KNOW! Young people took down a relatively young king. Progress, progress, progress.”
Knouse also wrote:
🔴 “Two other women who came forward and I drank champagne while watching the Tweets and articles roll in last night. It felt like campaign headquarters after an election victory. Really special.”
Bhatia responded:
🔴 “That's awesome.”
These exchanges reinforce the serious concerns about coordination and conflicts of interest raised by our previous disclosures. Their significance must be assessed alongside the full documentary record and the subsequent jury verdict.
The scientific community deserves full accountability for any misconduct established by the evidence, including the roles of individuals who participated in or improperly influenced the institutional processes that subjected Professor Sabatini to a devastating ordeal and profoundly damaged his career.
📑 REVIEW THE ORIGINAL COURT EVIDENCE BELOW.
🔱 ScienceGuardians™ Legal and Investigative Team
MORE COURT EVIDENCE. MORE REVELATIONS. STAY TUNED. ⚠️
@SciGuardians 🔱
🔱 Part 5 — Joint Appendix JA004741: Court evidence reveals reported support and pressure involving senior MIT faculty
🚨 Court documents reveal that Kristin Knouse described support from influential MIT faculty members during the proceedings concerning Professor David M. es dated 13 October 2021, Knouse identified support attributed to senior MIT figures and described their willingness to approach MIT President Rafael Reif to influence the institutional outcome.
These communications document efforts to mobilize influential individuals within MIT during Sabatini's tenure-review proceedings.
📑 THE ORIGINAL COURT EVIDENCE IS PRESENTED BELOW.
60
128
848
335,239
