This paper proposes a content analysis of the discourse of repentance produced by Canadian politicians between 2005 and 2014. From an interactionist approach, the aim of this study is to examine how politicians realize strategic forms of repentance, forms taking place on a continuum from exemplary repentance to more simulated repentance. If the analysis shows the predominance of equivocal markers in this repentance speech, it also reveals that (1) pseudo-repentance is embodied in various forms, reflecting the tension between the desire of politicians to make amends and the desire to protect their image; (2) the degree of repentance simulation can be partly explained by the context of the controversy where the reactions of the offender’s audiences, the nature of the offense, the offender’s reputation, and the power relationship between the offender and the offended play a role in the choice of a form of repentance.