Fact Check: On Oct. 1, 2024, U.S. Navy destroyers fired about a dozen interceptors in defense of Israel as the country came under attack by more than 200 missiles fired by Iran.

Fact Check: On Oct. 1, 2024, U.S. Navy destroyers fired about a dozen interceptors in defense of Israel as the country came under attack by more than 200 missiles fired by Iran.

June 14, 2025by TruthOrFake AI
±
VERDICT
Partially True

# Fact Check: "On Oct. 1, 2024, U.S. Navy destroyers fired about a dozen interceptors in defense of Israel as the country came under attack by more th...

Fact Check: "On Oct. 1, 2024, U.S. Navy destroyers fired about a dozen interceptors in defense of Israel as the country came under attack by more than 200 missiles fired by Iran."

What We Know

On October 1, 2024, Iran launched a significant missile attack against Israel, reportedly firing over 200 ballistic missiles in what was termed Operation True Promise II. This attack was characterized as the largest direct assault by Iran on Israel during the ongoing conflict between the two nations (source-1). In response, U.S. Navy destroyers were deployed to the eastern Mediterranean and fired approximately a dozen interceptors to help defend Israel from these incoming missiles (source-2, source-3).

The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) reported that while many missiles were intercepted, some did manage to hit various targets in Israel, causing minor damage and injuries (source-1). The U.S. military's involvement included the use of destroyers equipped with missile defense systems, which had previously been positioned in the region due to escalating tensions (source-4).

Analysis

The claim that U.S. Navy destroyers fired about a dozen interceptors in defense of Israel during the Iranian missile attack is supported by multiple credible sources. Reports from the Times of Israel and The Hill confirm that U.S. naval forces were actively involved in intercepting missiles aimed at Israel, with specific mention of a dozen interceptors being launched (source-2, source-3).

However, while the U.S. military's involvement is well-documented, the specifics of the interception success rate and the exact number of missiles that reached their targets remain less clear. The IDF reported that most missiles were intercepted, but some did cause damage, indicating that the situation was complex and not entirely under control (source-1).

The reliability of the sources used in this analysis is generally high, as they include established news organizations and military reports. However, the potential for bias exists, particularly in the framing of military engagements and outcomes, which can vary based on the source's perspective.

Conclusion

The claim that U.S. Navy destroyers fired about a dozen interceptors in defense of Israel during the Iranian missile attack on October 1, 2024, is Partially True. While it is confirmed that U.S. naval forces did engage in missile defense operations, the overall effectiveness and the full context of the attack, including the damage inflicted on Israel, complicate the narrative. The situation reflects the ongoing tensions and military dynamics in the region, where both sides have engaged in significant military actions.

Sources

  1. October 2024 Iranian strikes on Israel
  2. US air defense systems, naval destroyer help down Iranian missiles
  3. US helps Israel shoot down barrage of Iranian missiles
  4. US helps defend Israel from Iranian missile attack
  5. US shifts military resources in Mideast in response to Israel strikes
  6. Live updates: Iran retaliates against Israel for strikes on military leadership
  7. U.S. Warships Fire a Dozen Interceptors Against Iranian Missile Attack
  8. 2 Navy destroyers help defend Israel, intercept ballistic missiles

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:
"Coffee helps you live longer"
100% Free
No Registration
Instant Results

Comments

Comments

Leave a comment

Loading comments...

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

🔍
Unverified
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: THIS IS STRAIGHT OUT OF THE MAGA PROJECT 2025 : PLEASE READ THIS ARTICLE AND SHARE FAR AND WIDE ❤ THANK YOU FOLKS ❤ LIKE THE MAGA, THE PP HAS A 100 DAY AGENDA : The first rule of Fight Club is you do not talk about Fight Club. Over the past year, if you asked around Ottawa about the transition team that was planning Pierre Poilievre’s first days in government, you were likely to be met with shrugs. The members of the team were not named, and those in the know were not talking. Even The Hill Times, the Ottawa parliamentary affairs outlet that excels at digging up gossipy news, had come up empty-handed. At the outset of 2025, they approached a dozen Conservatives close to Poilievre, all of whom stayed tight-lipped. His campaign manager Jenni Byrne ran a very tight organization, and slip-ups might incur her wrath. Besides, any operative whose party is on the verge of power knows it’s best to maintain utmost organizational secrecy. Such discipline, however, sometimes falters under the influence of a few drinks. That’s what Bryan Evans, a political science professor at Toronto Metropolitan University, found out in late 2024. Around the winter holidays, he ducked into his neighbourhood bar and ran into an old acquaintance. The man wasn’t himself on the transition team, but it turned out he was deeply informed. They slid onto stools for a conversation. While they didn’t run in the same circles, and certainly didn’t share political opinions, his acquaintance knew that Evans had an understanding and appreciation for the machinery of government. For ten years he was employed by the Ontario government, including a stint in the Ministry of Labour after Progressive Conservative Mike Harris had come to power in the mid 1990s. Relying on insights from that experience, he wrote his doctoral dissertation on that government and its radical agenda. In December 2024, Poilievre was riding high in the polls, as he had been for nearly two years. So maybe it was the overconfidence talking. Over beers, Evans’s drinking companion laid out more about the transition planning than anything yet discovered by well-connected reporters in the establishment media. The group was preparing for a Poilievre government to hit the ground running. It was going to be a blitzkrieg. “You were there at the start of the Mike Harris government.” “Yeah,” Evans said. “That’s going to be the playbook.” It was an ominous sign. Mike Harris’s government had moved quickly to make dramatic reforms. They had a hundred-day agenda, and they got a lot done: laying off public sector employees, cutting funding to education, slashing social assistance rates, deregulating industries, repealing equity laws, selling off Crown corporations, and empowering the government to impose user fees on public services. “It’s going to come hard and fast from every direction again,” Evan’s acquaintance said. The groups and communities impacted, as well as the political opposition, both inside Parliament and outside, would have to fight on dozens of fronts at once. One of Harris’s key first steps was to balance the budget as a way of supercharging their plans, according to Guy Giorno, the premier’s top strategist. He described this as their “agenda within the agenda,” the “factor which meant that absolutely everybody rolled in the same direction.” It began the process of shrinking public spending, and was followed up by deregulation, rolling back labour protections, freezing the minimum wage, and encouraging the subcontracting of public services. Back in the 1990s, Harris had been convinced by Alberta Premier Ralph Klein’s advisors that he would have to move speedily to implement his agenda, lest he get tripped up by protests or a stubborn public service. Those advisors had once encouraged Klein to read the work of economist Milton Friedman (Pierre Poilievre’s own ideological guru). In the 1980’s, Friedman had written that “a new administration has some six to nine months in which to achieve major changes; if it does not seize the opportunity to act decisively during that period, it will not have another such opportunity.” It’s the lesson Friedman had drawn from his first laboratory, Chile. After the U.S. backed overthrow of democratic socialist Salvador Allende, the military dictator Augusto Pinochet had instituted a violent, rapid-fire makeover of the economy, following Friedman’s radical free market rulebook: privatization, deregulation, cutbacks to the public sector, and attacks on labour unions. Purging the public service As for the composition of Poilievre’s transition group, Bryan Evans’ acquaintance belatedly recalled his Fight Club rules. He wouldn’t divulge names, but offered some ideas. There were Poilievre’s policy advisors, as well as some former senior public servants, lawyers, and an ex-Cabinet minister. He admitted that some people who had been around for the Mike Harris days were in there too. Even before they were sworn in as the government in 1995, Harris’s team had laid groundwork within the public service to ensure they could take swift control of the levers of power. Members of his transition team had shown up to their first meeting with outgoing NDP government officials with a list of six high-ranking deputy ministers they wanted to meet quickly. Those civil servants were the A-list, empowered to advise and serve Harris’s agenda; several others, considered unfriendly, received their pink slips as part of a careful purge. As one NDP official remarked, his own party had “assumed office, but never took power. These guys are taking power even before they have assumed office.” Poilievre’s transition team also was thinking very strategically about how they would wield the machinery of the state. Who did they want to bring into the higher ranks of public service to help advance their plans? Who should be removed? And who might they want for the most important position of all, the top ranking civil servant, the Clerk of the Privy Council? These were some of the questions they were asking while plotting their first moves. When it came to policy plans, one crucial difference between the two eras was that Mike Harris’ Conservatives publicly had rolled out their agenda years in advance. Harris’s young ideologues put out detailed papers, organized policy conferences, eventually published a manifesto, the Common Sense Revolution, of which they printed 2.5 million copies. Everyone knew what was coming, even if it would still shock people when it arrived and extend far beyond what Harris had promised. Would Poilievre’s team, for instance, follow Mike Harris’s “playbook” on healthcare? Harris had lulled Ontario into complacency by assuaging voters’ fears about protecting health services. Their manifesto was crystal clear: “We will not cut healthcare spending.” But the result turned out to look very different: forty hospital closures, 25,000 staff laid off, and declining per capita real funding at a time of growing need. Poilievre’s team, by contrast, hadn’t laid out many policy details. And yet, over the years and in the run-up to the spring of 2025, Poilievre had telegraphed a lot in past election platforms, online videos, and podcast interviews with Jordan Peterson. It hinted at what his sweeping agenda would entail if he was able to secure a majority government—an assault on the country’s collective assets and already tattered social programs, a renewed attack on unions, activist and Indigenous defenders, and a bonanza of deregulation and privatization that would make his billionaire backers cheer. This is an excerpt from Martin Lukacs’s THE POILIEVRE PROJECT : A RADICAL BLUEPRINT FOR CORPORATE RULE published by Breach Books and available for order.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: THIS IS STRAIGHT OUT OF THE MAGA PROJECT 2025 : PLEASE READ THIS ARTICLE AND SHARE FAR AND WIDE ❤ THANK YOU FOLKS ❤ LIKE THE MAGA, THE PP HAS A 100 DAY AGENDA : The first rule of Fight Club is you do not talk about Fight Club. Over the past year, if you asked around Ottawa about the transition team that was planning Pierre Poilievre’s first days in government, you were likely to be met with shrugs. The members of the team were not named, and those in the know were not talking. Even The Hill Times, the Ottawa parliamentary affairs outlet that excels at digging up gossipy news, had come up empty-handed. At the outset of 2025, they approached a dozen Conservatives close to Poilievre, all of whom stayed tight-lipped. His campaign manager Jenni Byrne ran a very tight organization, and slip-ups might incur her wrath. Besides, any operative whose party is on the verge of power knows it’s best to maintain utmost organizational secrecy. Such discipline, however, sometimes falters under the influence of a few drinks. That’s what Bryan Evans, a political science professor at Toronto Metropolitan University, found out in late 2024. Around the winter holidays, he ducked into his neighbourhood bar and ran into an old acquaintance. The man wasn’t himself on the transition team, but it turned out he was deeply informed. They slid onto stools for a conversation. While they didn’t run in the same circles, and certainly didn’t share political opinions, his acquaintance knew that Evans had an understanding and appreciation for the machinery of government. For ten years he was employed by the Ontario government, including a stint in the Ministry of Labour after Progressive Conservative Mike Harris had come to power in the mid 1990s. Relying on insights from that experience, he wrote his doctoral dissertation on that government and its radical agenda. In December 2024, Poilievre was riding high in the polls, as he had been for nearly two years. So maybe it was the overconfidence talking. Over beers, Evans’s drinking companion laid out more about the transition planning than anything yet discovered by well-connected reporters in the establishment media. The group was preparing for a Poilievre government to hit the ground running. It was going to be a blitzkrieg. “You were there at the start of the Mike Harris government.” “Yeah,” Evans said. “That’s going to be the playbook.” It was an ominous sign. Mike Harris’s government had moved quickly to make dramatic reforms. They had a hundred-day agenda, and they got a lot done: laying off public sector employees, cutting funding to education, slashing social assistance rates, deregulating industries, repealing equity laws, selling off Crown corporations, and empowering the government to impose user fees on public services. “It’s going to come hard and fast from every direction again,” Evan’s acquaintance said. The groups and communities impacted, as well as the political opposition, both inside Parliament and outside, would have to fight on dozens of fronts at once. One of Harris’s key first steps was to balance the budget as a way of supercharging their plans, according to Guy Giorno, the premier’s top strategist. He described this as their “agenda within the agenda,” the “factor which meant that absolutely everybody rolled in the same direction.” It began the process of shrinking public spending, and was followed up by deregulation, rolling back labour protections, freezing the minimum wage, and encouraging the subcontracting of public services. Back in the 1990s, Harris had been convinced by Alberta Premier Ralph Klein’s advisors that he would have to move speedily to implement his agenda, lest he get tripped up by protests or a stubborn public service. Those advisors had once encouraged Klein to read the work of economist Milton Friedman (Pierre Poilievre’s own ideological guru). In the 1980’s, Friedman had written that “a new administration has some six to nine months in which to achieve major changes; if it does not seize the opportunity to act decisively during that period, it will not have another such opportunity.” It’s the lesson Friedman had drawn from his first laboratory, Chile. After the U.S. backed overthrow of democratic socialist Salvador Allende, the military dictator Augusto Pinochet had instituted a violent, rapid-fire makeover of the economy, following Friedman’s radical free market rulebook: privatization, deregulation, cutbacks to the public sector, and attacks on labour unions. Purging the public service As for the composition of Poilievre’s transition group, Bryan Evans’ acquaintance belatedly recalled his Fight Club rules. He wouldn’t divulge names, but offered some ideas. There were Poilievre’s policy advisors, as well as some former senior public servants, lawyers, and an ex-Cabinet minister. He admitted that some people who had been around for the Mike Harris days were in there too. Even before they were sworn in as the government in 1995, Harris’s team had laid groundwork within the public service to ensure they could take swift control of the levers of power. Members of his transition team had shown up to their first meeting with outgoing NDP government officials with a list of six high-ranking deputy ministers they wanted to meet quickly. Those civil servants were the A-list, empowered to advise and serve Harris’s agenda; several others, considered unfriendly, received their pink slips as part of a careful purge. As one NDP official remarked, his own party had “assumed office, but never took power. These guys are taking power even before they have assumed office.” Poilievre’s transition team also was thinking very strategically about how they would wield the machinery of the state. Who did they want to bring into the higher ranks of public service to help advance their plans? Who should be removed? And who might they want for the most important position of all, the top ranking civil servant, the Clerk of the Privy Council? These were some of the questions they were asking while plotting their first moves. When it came to policy plans, one crucial difference between the two eras was that Mike Harris’ Conservatives publicly had rolled out their agenda years in advance. Harris’s young ideologues put out detailed papers, organized policy conferences, eventually published a manifesto, the Common Sense Revolution, of which they printed 2.5 million copies. Everyone knew what was coming, even if it would still shock people when it arrived and extend far beyond what Harris had promised. Would Poilievre’s team, for instance, follow Mike Harris’s “playbook” on healthcare? Harris had lulled Ontario into complacency by assuaging voters’ fears about protecting health services. Their manifesto was crystal clear: “We will not cut healthcare spending.” But the result turned out to look very different: forty hospital closures, 25,000 staff laid off, and declining per capita real funding at a time of growing need. Poilievre’s team, by contrast, hadn’t laid out many policy details. And yet, over the years and in the run-up to the spring of 2025, Poilievre had telegraphed a lot in past election platforms, online videos, and podcast interviews with Jordan Peterson. It hinted at what his sweeping agenda would entail if he was able to secure a majority government—an assault on the country’s collective assets and already tattered social programs, a renewed attack on unions, activist and Indigenous defenders, and a bonanza of deregulation and privatization that would make his billionaire backers cheer. This is an excerpt from Martin Lukacs’s THE POILIEVRE PROJECT : A RADICAL BLUEPRINT FOR CORPORATE RULE published by Breach Books and available for order.

Apr 6, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Unverified
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: THIS IS STRAIGHT OUT OF THE MAGA PROJECT 2025 : PLEASE READ THIS ARTICLE AND SHARE FAR AND WIDE ❤ THANK YOU FOLKS ❤ LIKE THE MAGA, THE PP HAS A 100 DAY AGENDA : The first rule of Fight Club is you do not talk about Fight Club. Over the past year, if you asked around Ottawa about the transition team that was planning Pierre Poilievre’s first days in government, you were likely to be met with shrugs. The members of the team were not named, and those in the know were not talking. Even The Hill Times, the Ottawa parliamentary affairs outlet that excels at digging up gossipy news, had come up empty-handed. At the outset of 2025, they approached a dozen Conservatives close to Poilievre, all of whom stayed tight-lipped. His campaign manager Jenni Byrne ran a very tight organization, and slip-ups might incur her wrath. Besides, any operative whose party is on the verge of power knows it’s best to maintain utmost organizational secrecy. Such discipline, however, sometimes falters under the influence of a few drinks. That’s what Bryan Evans, a political science professor at Toronto Metropolitan University, found out in late 2024. Around the winter holidays, he ducked into his neighbourhood bar and ran into an old acquaintance. The man wasn’t himself on the transition team, but it turned out he was deeply informed. They slid onto stools for a conversation. While they didn’t run in the same circles, and certainly didn’t share political opinions, his acquaintance knew that Evans had an understanding and appreciation for the machinery of government. For ten years he was employed by the Ontario government, including a stint in the Ministry of Labour after Progressive Conservative Mike Harris had come to power in the mid 1990s. Relying on insights from that experience, he wrote his doctoral dissertation on that government and its radical agenda. In December 2024, Poilievre was riding high in the polls, as he had been for nearly two years. So maybe it was the overconfidence talking. Over beers, Evans’s drinking companion laid out more about the transition planning than anything yet discovered by well-connected reporters in the establishment media. The group was preparing for a Poilievre government to hit the ground running. It was going to be a blitzkrieg. “You were there at the start of the Mike Harris government.” “Yeah,” Evans said. “That’s going to be the playbook.” It was an ominous sign. Mike Harris’s government had moved quickly to make dramatic reforms. They had a hundred-day agenda, and they got a lot done: laying off public sector employees, cutting funding to education, slashing social assistance rates, deregulating industries, repealing equity laws, selling off Crown corporations, and empowering the government to impose user fees on public services. “It’s going to come hard and fast from every direction again,” Evan’s acquaintance said. The groups and communities impacted, as well as the political opposition, both inside Parliament and outside, would have to fight on dozens of fronts at once. One of Harris’s key first steps was to balance the budget as a way of supercharging their plans, according to Guy Giorno, the premier’s top strategist. He described this as their “agenda within the agenda,” the “factor which meant that absolutely everybody rolled in the same direction.” It began the process of shrinking public spending, and was followed up by deregulation, rolling back labour protections, freezing the minimum wage, and encouraging the subcontracting of public services. Back in the 1990s, Harris had been convinced by Alberta Premier Ralph Klein’s advisors that he would have to move speedily to implement his agenda, lest he get tripped up by protests or a stubborn public service. Those advisors had once encouraged Klein to read the work of economist Milton Friedman (Pierre Poilievre’s own ideological guru). In the 1980’s, Friedman had written that “a new administration has some six to nine months in which to achieve major changes; if it does not seize the opportunity to act decisively during that period, it will not have another such opportunity.” It’s the lesson Friedman had drawn from his first laboratory, Chile. After the U.S. backed overthrow of democratic socialist Salvador Allende, the military dictator Augusto Pinochet had instituted a violent, rapid-fire makeover of the economy, following Friedman’s radical free market rulebook: privatization, deregulation, cutbacks to the public sector, and attacks on labour unions. Purging the public service As for the composition of Poilievre’s transition group, Bryan Evans’ acquaintance belatedly recalled his Fight Club rules. He wouldn’t divulge names, but offered some ideas. There were Poilievre’s policy advisors, as well as some former senior public servants, lawyers, and an ex-Cabinet minister. He admitted that some people who had been around for the Mike Harris days were in there too. Even before they were sworn in as the government in 1995, Harris’s team had laid groundwork within the public service to ensure they could take swift control of the levers of power. Members of his transition team had shown up to their first meeting with outgoing NDP government officials with a list of six high-ranking deputy ministers they wanted to meet quickly. Those civil servants were the A-list, empowered to advise and serve Harris’s agenda; several others, considered unfriendly, received their pink slips as part of a careful purge. As one NDP official remarked, his own party had “assumed office, but never took power. These guys are taking power even before they have assumed office.” Poilievre’s transition team also was thinking very strategically about how they would wield the machinery of the state. Who did they want to bring into the higher ranks of public service to help advance their plans? Who should be removed? And who might they want for the most important position of all, the top ranking civil servant, the Clerk of the Privy Council? These were some of the questions they were asking while plotting their first moves. When it came to policy plans, one crucial difference between the two eras was that Mike Harris’ Conservatives publicly had rolled out their agenda years in advance. Harris’s young ideologues put out detailed papers, organized policy conferences, eventually published a manifesto, the Common Sense Revolution, of which they printed 2.5 million copies. Everyone knew what was coming, even if it would still shock people when it arrived and extend far beyond what Harris had promised. Would Poilievre’s team, for instance, follow Mike Harris’s “playbook” on healthcare? Harris had lulled Ontario into complacency by assuaging voters’ fears about protecting health services. Their manifesto was crystal clear: “We will not cut healthcare spending.” But the result turned out to look very different: forty hospital closures, 25,000 staff laid off, and declining per capita real funding at a time of growing need. Poilievre’s team, by contrast, hadn’t laid out many policy details. And yet, over the years and in the run-up to the spring of 2025, Poilievre had telegraphed a lot in past election platforms, online videos, and podcast interviews with Jordan Peterson. It hinted at what his sweeping agenda would entail if he was able to secure a majority government—an assault on the country’s collective assets and already tattered social programs, a renewed attack on unions, activist and Indigenous defenders, and a bonanza of deregulation and privatization that would make his billionaire backers cheer. This is an excerpt from Martin Lukacs’s THE POILIEVRE PROJECT : A RADICAL BLUEPRINT FOR CORPORATE RULE published by Breach Books and available for order.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: THIS IS STRAIGHT OUT OF THE MAGA PROJECT 2025 : PLEASE READ THIS ARTICLE AND SHARE FAR AND WIDE ❤ THANK YOU FOLKS ❤ LIKE THE MAGA, THE PP HAS A 100 DAY AGENDA : The first rule of Fight Club is you do not talk about Fight Club. Over the past year, if you asked around Ottawa about the transition team that was planning Pierre Poilievre’s first days in government, you were likely to be met with shrugs. The members of the team were not named, and those in the know were not talking. Even The Hill Times, the Ottawa parliamentary affairs outlet that excels at digging up gossipy news, had come up empty-handed. At the outset of 2025, they approached a dozen Conservatives close to Poilievre, all of whom stayed tight-lipped. His campaign manager Jenni Byrne ran a very tight organization, and slip-ups might incur her wrath. Besides, any operative whose party is on the verge of power knows it’s best to maintain utmost organizational secrecy. Such discipline, however, sometimes falters under the influence of a few drinks. That’s what Bryan Evans, a political science professor at Toronto Metropolitan University, found out in late 2024. Around the winter holidays, he ducked into his neighbourhood bar and ran into an old acquaintance. The man wasn’t himself on the transition team, but it turned out he was deeply informed. They slid onto stools for a conversation. While they didn’t run in the same circles, and certainly didn’t share political opinions, his acquaintance knew that Evans had an understanding and appreciation for the machinery of government. For ten years he was employed by the Ontario government, including a stint in the Ministry of Labour after Progressive Conservative Mike Harris had come to power in the mid 1990s. Relying on insights from that experience, he wrote his doctoral dissertation on that government and its radical agenda. In December 2024, Poilievre was riding high in the polls, as he had been for nearly two years. So maybe it was the overconfidence talking. Over beers, Evans’s drinking companion laid out more about the transition planning than anything yet discovered by well-connected reporters in the establishment media. The group was preparing for a Poilievre government to hit the ground running. It was going to be a blitzkrieg. “You were there at the start of the Mike Harris government.” “Yeah,” Evans said. “That’s going to be the playbook.” It was an ominous sign. Mike Harris’s government had moved quickly to make dramatic reforms. They had a hundred-day agenda, and they got a lot done: laying off public sector employees, cutting funding to education, slashing social assistance rates, deregulating industries, repealing equity laws, selling off Crown corporations, and empowering the government to impose user fees on public services. “It’s going to come hard and fast from every direction again,” Evan’s acquaintance said. The groups and communities impacted, as well as the political opposition, both inside Parliament and outside, would have to fight on dozens of fronts at once. One of Harris’s key first steps was to balance the budget as a way of supercharging their plans, according to Guy Giorno, the premier’s top strategist. He described this as their “agenda within the agenda,” the “factor which meant that absolutely everybody rolled in the same direction.” It began the process of shrinking public spending, and was followed up by deregulation, rolling back labour protections, freezing the minimum wage, and encouraging the subcontracting of public services. Back in the 1990s, Harris had been convinced by Alberta Premier Ralph Klein’s advisors that he would have to move speedily to implement his agenda, lest he get tripped up by protests or a stubborn public service. Those advisors had once encouraged Klein to read the work of economist Milton Friedman (Pierre Poilievre’s own ideological guru). In the 1980’s, Friedman had written that “a new administration has some six to nine months in which to achieve major changes; if it does not seize the opportunity to act decisively during that period, it will not have another such opportunity.” It’s the lesson Friedman had drawn from his first laboratory, Chile. After the U.S. backed overthrow of democratic socialist Salvador Allende, the military dictator Augusto Pinochet had instituted a violent, rapid-fire makeover of the economy, following Friedman’s radical free market rulebook: privatization, deregulation, cutbacks to the public sector, and attacks on labour unions. Purging the public service As for the composition of Poilievre’s transition group, Bryan Evans’ acquaintance belatedly recalled his Fight Club rules. He wouldn’t divulge names, but offered some ideas. There were Poilievre’s policy advisors, as well as some former senior public servants, lawyers, and an ex-Cabinet minister. He admitted that some people who had been around for the Mike Harris days were in there too. Even before they were sworn in as the government in 1995, Harris’s team had laid groundwork within the public service to ensure they could take swift control of the levers of power. Members of his transition team had shown up to their first meeting with outgoing NDP government officials with a list of six high-ranking deputy ministers they wanted to meet quickly. Those civil servants were the A-list, empowered to advise and serve Harris’s agenda; several others, considered unfriendly, received their pink slips as part of a careful purge. As one NDP official remarked, his own party had “assumed office, but never took power. These guys are taking power even before they have assumed office.” Poilievre’s transition team also was thinking very strategically about how they would wield the machinery of the state. Who did they want to bring into the higher ranks of public service to help advance their plans? Who should be removed? And who might they want for the most important position of all, the top ranking civil servant, the Clerk of the Privy Council? These were some of the questions they were asking while plotting their first moves. When it came to policy plans, one crucial difference between the two eras was that Mike Harris’ Conservatives publicly had rolled out their agenda years in advance. Harris’s young ideologues put out detailed papers, organized policy conferences, eventually published a manifesto, the Common Sense Revolution, of which they printed 2.5 million copies. Everyone knew what was coming, even if it would still shock people when it arrived and extend far beyond what Harris had promised. Would Poilievre’s team, for instance, follow Mike Harris’s “playbook” on healthcare? Harris had lulled Ontario into complacency by assuaging voters’ fears about protecting health services. Their manifesto was crystal clear: “We will not cut healthcare spending.” But the result turned out to look very different: forty hospital closures, 25,000 staff laid off, and declining per capita real funding at a time of growing need. Poilievre’s team, by contrast, hadn’t laid out many policy details. And yet, over the years and in the run-up to the spring of 2025, Poilievre had telegraphed a lot in past election platforms, online videos, and podcast interviews with Jordan Peterson. It hinted at what his sweeping agenda would entail if he was able to secure a majority government—an assault on the country’s collective assets and already tattered social programs, a renewed attack on unions, activist and Indigenous defenders, and a bonanza of deregulation and privatization that would make his billionaire backers cheer. This is an excerpt from Martin Lukacs’s THE POILIEVRE PROJECT : A RADICAL BLUEPRINT FOR CORPORATE RULE published by Breach Books and available for order.

Apr 6, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Not every migrant has a politician like Poilievre in their corner’ A member of Pierre Poilievre’s extended family has crossed through Roxham Road illegally to seek asylum in Canada from Venezuela.  Anaida Poilievre’s uncle, José Gerardo Galindo Prato, is the third from the right in the front row at the Conservative Party convention in Quebec City, September 9, 2023. The hypocrisy is overwhelming when you consider Poilievre’s stance on illegal border crossers and his blame of the liberal government. I am glad that he is here safe and sound. But what makes him special is that he’s able to live here in Canada undocumented with a deportation order and his name until Anaida Poilievre and an undisclosed MP’s office in 2021 and his efforts to get permanent residency. Article by The Breach In late July 2018, Pierre Poilievre took aim at “illegal border crossers.” “How much will it cost to house the illegal border crossers in hotels in the coming year?” he repeatedly asked during a parliamentary committee hearing, criticizing the Liberal government for helping shelter thousands of asylum seekers who had entered the country through Roxham Road in Quebec. “Who will pay for it?” Two months later, the Conservative leader’s own uncle-in-law crossed Roxham Road on foot. After failing to get his refugee claim approved, he appears to have lived undocumented in Canada with a deportation order in his name. According to documents obtained by The Breach, Poilievre’s relative—the uncle of his wife, Anaida Poilievre—received help from her and an undisclosed MP’s office in 2021 in his efforts to get permanent residency. He has since been seen attending Conservative events, as recently as 2023, according to photos examined by The Breach. Poilievre has said a Conservative government would “have the resources” to “track down” such individuals and deport them. “These are people who are not eligible to be here and we will find them and we will deport them,” Poilievre told a Montreal radio station in December. The Conservative leader has taken an increasingly hard line on asylum seekers entering Canada, calling to shut down Roxham Road, where tens of thousands crossed in recent years fleeing hardship or persecution. At his election campaign launch on Sunday, Poilievre said he would put a hard cap on immigration and take other measures. “We will keep out and deport criminals, stop fraud and crack down on bogus refugee claims,” he said. “On immigration, like everything else, we will put Canada First.” Refugee advocacy organizations say his position appears to be “his family first.” “It is deeply hypocritical that Poilievre has vilified migrants, blamed them for the housing and affordability crisis, and said he wants to deport undocumented people who are in the same situation his own family seemed to be in,” said Syed Hussan, the executive director of the Migrant Workers Alliance for Change. “If Poilievre’s family deserves to make a life here, so does everybody else’s.”‘Shut off the flow of false refugee claims’: Poilievre Anaida Poilievre’s uncle, Venezuelan lawyer José Gerardo Galindo Prato, had previously entered Canada in 2004 and lived without documentation until 2007, when he was deported by Canadian border agents. Back in Venezuela, Galindo Prato was convicted in 2017 of helping a drug trafficker escape from prison and served six months in prison, which he says was a trumped-up, false charge. In the fall of 2018, he flew to Miami, then to Pittsburgh, and later crossed at Roxham Road. The Breach obtained a draft copy of Galindo Prato’s written submission to Immigration Canada from early 2021, applying to stay on humanitarian and compassionate grounds, which Anaida Poilievre helped him prepare. At this stage of the asylum process, he would have already failed his refugee application and been served with a deportation order, according to an immigration lawyer The Breach consulted. According to email and Facebook correspondence seen by The Breach, Anaida Poilievre organized the drafting and mailing of the submission with assistance from a parliamentarian. In one message she wrote that she had a “person helping in a MP’s office.” In another, she was even more direct. “I’m trying to help my uncle,” she wrote, and “the MP can help us.” At the time, she worked as an executive assistant in the office of Conservative MP Michael Cooper, a close ally of Pierre Poilievre. Since Poilievre became leader, she has taken an active leadership role herself, narrating ads, introducing her husband at major events, and playing a key role in fundraising for the party. The revelations about an undocumented family member raise questions about whether Pierre Poilievre was in any way involved in advocating for his uncle-in-law to stay in the country, despite his outspoken rhetoric against “illegal border crossers.” In December 2024, Poilievre called for Canada to bulk up the security at the border, including by deputizing provincial police and cracking down on “false refugee claims.” “We need to shut off the flow of false refugee claims who are in no danger in their country of origin but who are sneaking in either through our porous border, through our weak visa system, and then when they’re here, making a false claim,” he said. Galindo Prato’s written submission, which the immigration lawyer verified looks like a typical example, says he was persecuted and jailed without trial in Venezuela. But online court documents from the Venezuelan Supreme Court of Justice indicate he was charged with helping a drug trafficker escape from prison while he served as a legal consultant in a psychiatric clinic. Because refugee and immigration proceedings are highly confidential, The Breach could not confirm whether Galindo Prato has received his permanent residency. But The Breach was able to identify Galindo Prato sitting with the rest of Anaida Poilievre’s family in the front row at the Conservative Party convention in Quebec City in August 2023. “I love real refugees,” Poilievre said in December. “Our country was built in large part by real refugees who were genuinely fleeing danger, like my wife. But I have no time for people who lie to come into our country, and that is the problem we have to cut off.”‘Not every migrant has a politician like Poilievre in their corner’ Refugees who try to enter Canada at official border crossings are turned back, because of an agreement with the United States that suggests they are safe in Canada’s southern neighbour. So thousands of people like Galindo Prato have crossed into the country at unofficial entry points like Roxham Road, after which they are able to make a claim for asylum. There is no guarantee that they will be able to stay—tens of thousands of refugees have been deported by the Liberal government in recent years. Migrant Workers Alliance for Change executive director Hussan said that humanitarian and compassionate grounds are the last resort for denied refugee claimants like Galindo Prato and are granted on the basis of strong community ties. “But not every migrant has a politician like Poilievre in their corner,” he said. “We think every asylum seeker, refugee, migrant, and undocumented person should have permanent resident status in order to ensure equal rights. What Poilievre is proposing is instead to deport and destroy the lives of vast numbers of people—except those he knows.” Hussan’s organization is part of a coalition of groups in the Migrant Rights Network that have spent years advocating for the government to grant status to undocumented people in Canada, who number anywhere between 300,000 and 600,000. The Liberals had pledged in late 2021 to “explore ways of regularizing status for undocumented workers who are contributing to Canadian communities.” But in the wake of increasing anti-immigrant rhetoric and the Conservative Party’s surge in the polls, the government backtracked on their promise for a “broad and comprehensive program.” By contrast, Poilievre has promised to more vigorously pursue deportations, especially of people—just like his uncle-in-law—who have had their initial refugee claims rejected. “We know that there are 30,000 people who’ve been ordered deported that have not left,” Poilievre said in December. “Trudeau has lost control of immigration. I will take back control. First of all, we will track down the 30,000 people who’ve been ordered deported, and I will have them deported from this country.” Two years ago, Poilievre described the Roxham Road crossing as one of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s great failures. “Nowhere is that chaos more evident then at Roxham road where Trudeau encouraged people to cross illegally into Canada,” Poilievere said. “We need more immigrants but we need to have it done in an orderly and lawful fashion.” In 2023, the Liberal government closed Roxham Road permanently. Poilievre has increasingly blamed Canada’s crises on immigrants and migrants, saying last fall that “radical, uncontrolled immigration and policies related to it are partly to blame for joblessness, housing and healthcare crisis.” In his submission to Immigration Canada, Galindo Prato writes that he was detained without trial after making allegations about corruption within the Venezuelan government. He said he was held for almost five months in a three-by-four-meter cell, where he was beaten and deprived of clean water, medical care, and adequate nutrition. But according to the court documents filed in the Supreme Court of Venezuela by the public prosecutors office and in Venezuelan media coverage, Galindo Prato was charged with the crime of helping the escape of a convicted drug trafficker, while he was serving as the legal consultant for a psychiatric clinic. Galindo Prato did not reply to multiple attempts to reach him through direct messages to his social media accounts. Anaida Poilievre did not reply to a request for comment by time of publication. A Conservative campaign spokesperson provided a written statement to The Breach that “Mr. Galindo Prato has pursued his case through established channels, including with the use of an immigration lawyer.” “While MPs may make requests for information to [Immigration Refugees and Citizenship Canada], MPs do not have the ability to influence immigration cases,” the spokesperson wrote. “It is certainly ridiculous to suggest that opposition Conservative MPs would be able to influence cases under a Liberal Government.” In fact, parliamentarians frequently advocate for the Immigration Minister to expedite immigration applications, including for undocumented people. “This is a disgusting smear of Ms. Poilievre’s extended family who have been subjected to persecution and political repression in Venezuela, and we will not be commenting further,” the spokesperson added.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Not every migrant has a politician like Poilievre in their corner’ A member of Pierre Poilievre’s extended family has crossed through Roxham Road illegally to seek asylum in Canada from Venezuela.  Anaida Poilievre’s uncle, José Gerardo Galindo Prato, is the third from the right in the front row at the Conservative Party convention in Quebec City, September 9, 2023. The hypocrisy is overwhelming when you consider Poilievre’s stance on illegal border crossers and his blame of the liberal government. I am glad that he is here safe and sound. But what makes him special is that he’s able to live here in Canada undocumented with a deportation order and his name until Anaida Poilievre and an undisclosed MP’s office in 2021 and his efforts to get permanent residency. Article by The Breach In late July 2018, Pierre Poilievre took aim at “illegal border crossers.” “How much will it cost to house the illegal border crossers in hotels in the coming year?” he repeatedly asked during a parliamentary committee hearing, criticizing the Liberal government for helping shelter thousands of asylum seekers who had entered the country through Roxham Road in Quebec. “Who will pay for it?” Two months later, the Conservative leader’s own uncle-in-law crossed Roxham Road on foot. After failing to get his refugee claim approved, he appears to have lived undocumented in Canada with a deportation order in his name. According to documents obtained by The Breach, Poilievre’s relative—the uncle of his wife, Anaida Poilievre—received help from her and an undisclosed MP’s office in 2021 in his efforts to get permanent residency. He has since been seen attending Conservative events, as recently as 2023, according to photos examined by The Breach. Poilievre has said a Conservative government would “have the resources” to “track down” such individuals and deport them. “These are people who are not eligible to be here and we will find them and we will deport them,” Poilievre told a Montreal radio station in December. The Conservative leader has taken an increasingly hard line on asylum seekers entering Canada, calling to shut down Roxham Road, where tens of thousands crossed in recent years fleeing hardship or persecution. At his election campaign launch on Sunday, Poilievre said he would put a hard cap on immigration and take other measures. “We will keep out and deport criminals, stop fraud and crack down on bogus refugee claims,” he said. “On immigration, like everything else, we will put Canada First.” Refugee advocacy organizations say his position appears to be “his family first.” “It is deeply hypocritical that Poilievre has vilified migrants, blamed them for the housing and affordability crisis, and said he wants to deport undocumented people who are in the same situation his own family seemed to be in,” said Syed Hussan, the executive director of the Migrant Workers Alliance for Change. “If Poilievre’s family deserves to make a life here, so does everybody else’s.”‘Shut off the flow of false refugee claims’: Poilievre Anaida Poilievre’s uncle, Venezuelan lawyer José Gerardo Galindo Prato, had previously entered Canada in 2004 and lived without documentation until 2007, when he was deported by Canadian border agents. Back in Venezuela, Galindo Prato was convicted in 2017 of helping a drug trafficker escape from prison and served six months in prison, which he says was a trumped-up, false charge. In the fall of 2018, he flew to Miami, then to Pittsburgh, and later crossed at Roxham Road. The Breach obtained a draft copy of Galindo Prato’s written submission to Immigration Canada from early 2021, applying to stay on humanitarian and compassionate grounds, which Anaida Poilievre helped him prepare. At this stage of the asylum process, he would have already failed his refugee application and been served with a deportation order, according to an immigration lawyer The Breach consulted. According to email and Facebook correspondence seen by The Breach, Anaida Poilievre organized the drafting and mailing of the submission with assistance from a parliamentarian. In one message she wrote that she had a “person helping in a MP’s office.” In another, she was even more direct. “I’m trying to help my uncle,” she wrote, and “the MP can help us.” At the time, she worked as an executive assistant in the office of Conservative MP Michael Cooper, a close ally of Pierre Poilievre. Since Poilievre became leader, she has taken an active leadership role herself, narrating ads, introducing her husband at major events, and playing a key role in fundraising for the party. The revelations about an undocumented family member raise questions about whether Pierre Poilievre was in any way involved in advocating for his uncle-in-law to stay in the country, despite his outspoken rhetoric against “illegal border crossers.” In December 2024, Poilievre called for Canada to bulk up the security at the border, including by deputizing provincial police and cracking down on “false refugee claims.” “We need to shut off the flow of false refugee claims who are in no danger in their country of origin but who are sneaking in either through our porous border, through our weak visa system, and then when they’re here, making a false claim,” he said. Galindo Prato’s written submission, which the immigration lawyer verified looks like a typical example, says he was persecuted and jailed without trial in Venezuela. But online court documents from the Venezuelan Supreme Court of Justice indicate he was charged with helping a drug trafficker escape from prison while he served as a legal consultant in a psychiatric clinic. Because refugee and immigration proceedings are highly confidential, The Breach could not confirm whether Galindo Prato has received his permanent residency. But The Breach was able to identify Galindo Prato sitting with the rest of Anaida Poilievre’s family in the front row at the Conservative Party convention in Quebec City in August 2023. “I love real refugees,” Poilievre said in December. “Our country was built in large part by real refugees who were genuinely fleeing danger, like my wife. But I have no time for people who lie to come into our country, and that is the problem we have to cut off.”‘Not every migrant has a politician like Poilievre in their corner’ Refugees who try to enter Canada at official border crossings are turned back, because of an agreement with the United States that suggests they are safe in Canada’s southern neighbour. So thousands of people like Galindo Prato have crossed into the country at unofficial entry points like Roxham Road, after which they are able to make a claim for asylum. There is no guarantee that they will be able to stay—tens of thousands of refugees have been deported by the Liberal government in recent years. Migrant Workers Alliance for Change executive director Hussan said that humanitarian and compassionate grounds are the last resort for denied refugee claimants like Galindo Prato and are granted on the basis of strong community ties. “But not every migrant has a politician like Poilievre in their corner,” he said. “We think every asylum seeker, refugee, migrant, and undocumented person should have permanent resident status in order to ensure equal rights. What Poilievre is proposing is instead to deport and destroy the lives of vast numbers of people—except those he knows.” Hussan’s organization is part of a coalition of groups in the Migrant Rights Network that have spent years advocating for the government to grant status to undocumented people in Canada, who number anywhere between 300,000 and 600,000. The Liberals had pledged in late 2021 to “explore ways of regularizing status for undocumented workers who are contributing to Canadian communities.” But in the wake of increasing anti-immigrant rhetoric and the Conservative Party’s surge in the polls, the government backtracked on their promise for a “broad and comprehensive program.” By contrast, Poilievre has promised to more vigorously pursue deportations, especially of people—just like his uncle-in-law—who have had their initial refugee claims rejected. “We know that there are 30,000 people who’ve been ordered deported that have not left,” Poilievre said in December. “Trudeau has lost control of immigration. I will take back control. First of all, we will track down the 30,000 people who’ve been ordered deported, and I will have them deported from this country.” Two years ago, Poilievre described the Roxham Road crossing as one of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s great failures. “Nowhere is that chaos more evident then at Roxham road where Trudeau encouraged people to cross illegally into Canada,” Poilievere said. “We need more immigrants but we need to have it done in an orderly and lawful fashion.” In 2023, the Liberal government closed Roxham Road permanently. Poilievre has increasingly blamed Canada’s crises on immigrants and migrants, saying last fall that “radical, uncontrolled immigration and policies related to it are partly to blame for joblessness, housing and healthcare crisis.” In his submission to Immigration Canada, Galindo Prato writes that he was detained without trial after making allegations about corruption within the Venezuelan government. He said he was held for almost five months in a three-by-four-meter cell, where he was beaten and deprived of clean water, medical care, and adequate nutrition. But according to the court documents filed in the Supreme Court of Venezuela by the public prosecutors office and in Venezuelan media coverage, Galindo Prato was charged with the crime of helping the escape of a convicted drug trafficker, while he was serving as the legal consultant for a psychiatric clinic. Galindo Prato did not reply to multiple attempts to reach him through direct messages to his social media accounts. Anaida Poilievre did not reply to a request for comment by time of publication. A Conservative campaign spokesperson provided a written statement to The Breach that “Mr. Galindo Prato has pursued his case through established channels, including with the use of an immigration lawyer.” “While MPs may make requests for information to [Immigration Refugees and Citizenship Canada], MPs do not have the ability to influence immigration cases,” the spokesperson wrote. “It is certainly ridiculous to suggest that opposition Conservative MPs would be able to influence cases under a Liberal Government.” In fact, parliamentarians frequently advocate for the Immigration Minister to expedite immigration applications, including for undocumented people. “This is a disgusting smear of Ms. Poilievre’s extended family who have been subjected to persecution and political repression in Venezuela, and we will not be commenting further,” the spokesperson added.

Mar 28, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: The DHS previously said that through the end of November 2024, a total of 531,670 people were granted permission to stay in the US under the programme.
Needs Research

Fact Check: The DHS previously said that through the end of November 2024, a total of 531,670 people were granted permission to stay in the US under the programme.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: The DHS previously said that through the end of November 2024, a total of 531,670 people were granted permission to stay in the US under the programme.

Jun 14, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: The DHS previously said that through the end of November 2024, a total of 531,670 people were granted permission to stay in the US under the programme.
Needs Research

Fact Check: The DHS previously said that through the end of November 2024, a total of 531,670 people were granted permission to stay in the US under the programme.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: The DHS previously said that through the end of November 2024, a total of 531,670 people were granted permission to stay in the US under the programme.

Jun 14, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: The DHS previously said that through the end of November 2024, a total of 531,670 people were granted permission to stay in the US under the programme.
True

Fact Check: The DHS previously said that through the end of November 2024, a total of 531,670 people were granted permission to stay in the US under the programme.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: The DHS previously said that through the end of November 2024, a total of 531,670 people were granted permission to stay in the US under the programme.

Jun 13, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: On Oct. 1, 2024, U.S. Navy destroyers fired about a dozen interceptors in defense of Israel as the country came under attack by more than 200 missiles fired by Iran. | TruthOrFake Blog