EZRA LEVANT ｜ Alberta's ethics commissioner condemns Premier Danielle Smith, is it an inside job？
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
169.5972
Summary
On the day of the election debate, Alberta's ethics commissioner condemns Premier Danielle Smith. Is it an inside job? Or is it something else? Ezra Levenant takes you through the report, including a small cameo by himself.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Hello, my friends. Today, I talk about the late breaking news in Alberta that the ethics
00:00:04.980
commissioner has condemned Danielle Smith, the premier, for wanting to drop some prosecutions
00:00:11.760
of old pandemic cases. I'll take you through the report, including my own small cameo role in it.
00:00:17.960
But first, let me invite you to become a subscriber to Rebel News Plus. It's the video
00:00:20.980
version of this show. Just go to rebelnewsplus.com, click subscribe, eight bucks a month,
00:00:25.680
and you get my show every night, Sheila Gunn-Reed's show every week, and the satisfaction of knowing
00:00:31.000
that you are keeping our independent journalism strong because we take no money from the government.
00:00:44.160
Tonight, on the day of the election debate, Alberta's ethics commissioner condemns Premier
00:00:57.760
Danielle Smith. Is it an inside job? I'll tell you more. It's May 18th, and this is the Ezra LeVant Show.
00:01:14.160
I've never seen a bureaucracy move so fast, never seen a court move so fast, never seen a judge move
00:01:25.200
so fast. Just a few weeks ago, the NDP filed a complaint with Alberta's ethics commissioner,
00:01:31.820
a former judge named Marguerite Trussler. The ethics complaint said two things, that the CBC had reported
00:01:38.920
that Danielle Smith had sent a series of inappropriate emails to Alberta prosecutors telling them not to
00:01:46.280
prosecute pandemic cases. The CBC reported this as a fact, even though they say they didn't actually see
00:01:52.360
the emails themselves. The NDP forwarded that to the government. They also said, and it's a fact,
00:01:59.180
that Danielle Smith had a conversation with Arthur Pawlowski. As you know, Arthur is a Christian pastor
00:02:06.020
who was charged with various offenses under lockdown rules, and we know that conversation did happen because
00:02:12.480
Arthur recorded it, and the video made its way to the same CBC.
00:02:17.620
So the CBC was not just a reporter of the news, it was a maker of the news, and that news just
00:02:25.380
happened to dovetail nicely with what the NDP opposition was doing, and they filed it with the
00:02:32.100
judge, the former judge, Marguerite Trussler. And I've never seen anything move so fast. Today,
00:02:38.260
the judge released her ruling. In the middle of the election, less than two weeks to go,
00:02:43.320
on the day of the debate, ensuring that the media party, including CBC reporters,
00:02:48.860
will be there to make that the lead topic. Isn't that quite something? The CBC wrote a story
00:02:54.720
about emails and about Arthur Pawlowski. The CBC formed the subject matter of a complaint to the
00:03:00.500
ethics commissioner, and tonight the CBC will have a role in the debate between the leaders. That's
00:03:06.840
that's a neat trick if you can arrange it. Except, and importantly, this judge,
00:03:14.060
former judge, ruled that the CBC accusations were baseless. The Arthur Pawlowski story was real,
00:03:23.120
but exaggerated. But in the case of the CBC, the judge had an exhaustive investigation,
00:03:29.440
spoke to many individuals, all 44 prosecutors who were in charge of prosecuting COVID offenses in the
00:03:39.040
province. Every single one of them said the same thing. They had not, in fact, received an email
00:03:45.620
about prosecuting or not prosecuting. Not a single one received such an email from anyone,
00:03:52.420
let alone the premier. Not only did the 44 prosecutors on that file say that, but all 32
00:03:59.580
staff of the premier's office said the same thing. And in case that's not enough to convince you,
00:04:06.580
the civil service had a massive search on the tech side. They had their tech people, their IT people
00:04:13.140
search more than a million emails. They didn't find a single one. The judge concluded that there was
00:04:20.600
zero evidence that any inappropriate emails were sent. And yet, the former judge, the ethics
00:04:30.300
commissioner, condemned Danielle Smith, said she broke the rule, though she offered no punishment for
00:04:36.000
it, saying that by talking to Arthur Pawlowski, Danielle Smith was in the wrong. And that by raising
00:04:43.480
the subject with her justice minister, Tyler Shandro, who just happens to be the health minister who put
00:04:48.920
into effect all these lockdown laws, she put undue pressure on him, even though they only talked
00:04:54.700
about the subject once. And he did not act on him. And he was not fired. Compare that with the case of
00:05:01.960
Jody Wilson-Raybould, the justice minister under Justin Trudeau, who simply refused to call off the
00:05:07.480
prosecution of his criminal friends. His friends at SNC-Lavalin were on trial for criminal corruption
00:05:13.120
involving hundreds of millions of dollars. Trudeau wanted to get that to go away. Jody Wilson-Raybould
00:05:18.440
refused to do that. They continuously badgered her all the way up to the top. Gerald Butts himself.
00:05:24.920
And they finally fired her when she wouldn't comply. Imagine comparing a single five-minute phone call
00:05:30.540
between Danielle Smith and her justice minister, in which case the justice minister did nothing.
00:05:35.240
Imagine comparing the two of them, the two of those cases. It's incredible. I myself had a small
00:05:41.740
cameo appearance in the report. You see, last year, and I tweeted about this before, I think I did a
00:05:47.260
show on this before, I bumped into Danielle Smith and I mentioned to her our campaign that we call
00:05:54.100
lockdownamnesty.com. Amnesty is technically not the precise word. It would be more a stay of a
00:06:02.020
prosecution, but amnesty is a layperson's term. And I sent a follow-up email that I had a lawyer help me
00:06:07.760
draft to the premier outlining how it's perfectly legal for the government to stay the prosecution
00:06:14.120
of cases for which there is no public interest. As you may know, for decades in Canada, police
00:06:22.000
simply didn't arrest people for mere possession of marijuana. Prosecutors simply didn't prosecute
00:06:28.220
for mere possession. If you were a drug dealer, sure. Or if you were doing other crimes at the same time,
00:06:33.000
sure. But it was just the use of public discretion that it wasn't worth the resources. It was not deemed a
00:06:39.740
serious enough crime to prosecute. So this is not new. In fact, in my memo, I cited the Supreme Court of
00:06:46.620
Canada case discussing prosecutorial discretion. Now, the judge claimed that I got it wrong in my memo. I wasn't
00:06:56.440
under investigation or anything. The judge just in passing said that I, quote, advocated direct
00:07:02.680
interference by the premier by having her order a stay in prosecutions. My memo clearly doesn't do
00:07:08.720
that. I said she should talk to the justice minister, which is what the law prescribes. That's
00:07:14.420
neither here nor there. It was just a passing comment by the judge. But the fact that she got it wrong on a
00:07:19.120
pretty basic matter makes me wonder if she read the whole thing carefully. But the long and the short of
00:07:25.200
it is that today, in a late hit during the campaign, just less than two weeks to go on the day of the
00:07:31.260
election debates, the ethics commissioner condemned Danielle Smith, confirming the NDP CBC narrative,
00:07:39.240
which is a bizarre one, given that the CBC continues to report on these fictitious emails.
00:07:45.460
The media coverage of this was absolutely nuts. They were not pure reporters. A genuine reporter
00:07:52.320
reporter would tell both the good and the bad news. If you're the NDP, the good news is that
00:07:59.760
Danielle Smith was caught or was called out for breaking one of the rules. If you're a Danielle
00:08:06.560
Smith advocate, the good news is that there was she was completely exonerated on the other one,
00:08:11.220
the CBC email story. Yet the media only covered the fact that she got in trouble for talking to Arthur
00:08:17.960
Pawlowski, even though she actually didn't do anything about his case. What's so incredible
00:08:22.440
is that the CBC didn't even mention the rebuke to them that their story was fake. The judge went on
00:08:30.120
for pages about the CBC fabrication. The judge didn't use the word fabrication. She just said there's no
00:08:36.140
evidence of these emails at all. The CBC didn't even mention that. And bizarrely, CTV in their stories,
00:08:44.640
for some reason, had this sub-headline that the emails exist when the judge specifically said they
00:08:51.340
do not and quoted 44 prosecutors to that effect. I find it an absolutely stunning proof of my theory,
00:08:59.500
my concept of the media party. The only reporters you can trust in Alberta are the independent
00:09:08.780
journalists who are not on the take. I'm talking about Rebel News, of course,
00:09:11.640
Western Standard, True North, and Kean Bextie at Counter Signal. The only journalists who are
00:09:20.220
telling the truth about this, the good, the bad, and the ugly, are the journalists who are not taking
00:09:25.040
money from Trudeau. And I think that although the independent journalists I just listed have a large
00:09:32.620
following in Alberta, typically that following is already fairly conservative and already on side for
00:09:38.880
the conservative party. The CBC and the other media, they reach people in the middle, people who are not
00:09:46.180
particularly political, and of course people on the left, who will never hear the other side of the
00:09:50.700
story. As CTV claimed, the emails exist. That is a lie. That is specifically what the judge said does not
00:09:58.580
exist. Now, I did an emergency live stream on this today for about an hour, and I went through things,
00:10:05.580
and I'd like to show you some of that today. So, I'm going to throw a clip from the live stream,
00:10:12.400
and then I'm going to interview Derek Fildebrand, the boss of the Western Standard, and see what he
00:10:16.380
has to say. Look, this is much more than just the Alberta election. I think it would be atrocious
00:10:22.440
if the NDP won and brought socialism back, and frankly, authoritarianism back. They're real bullies
00:10:29.000
when it comes to civil liberties. But I think how Alberta goes, well, that's really the conservative
00:10:35.780
hope for the country in many ways. And if Alberta manages to get snuffed out by a second atrocious
00:10:42.120
term by a socialist premier, I honestly don't know if it'll ever regain its old spring in its step.
00:10:48.620
It's also a test of how the controlled, restricted, funded, subsidized media party can operate in an
00:10:56.160
election. What they're doing to Danielle Smith is exactly what they will do to Pierre Polyev.
00:11:04.000
It'll be interesting to see if the CBC journalists and their friends in the other bailout media are
00:11:09.120
strong enough to destroy a sitting premier. If so, it's bad news for Pierre Polyev.
00:11:16.200
Stay with us. Next, the excerpt from my live stream.
00:11:26.160
Today, the ethics commissioner ruled that Alberta Premier Danielle Smith broke the ethics code
00:11:40.740
in regards to pursuing lockdown amnesty, that is, a stay of prosecution against people who are still
00:11:50.100
being hounded by prosecutors for obsolete rules that were in effect a year, two, three ago.
00:12:00.540
I'll take you through the ruling itself, what it says, what it does not say.
00:12:04.360
But I think there's an even deeper, more important story to it, which is how
00:12:08.260
Alberta's deep state, as it were, is trying to get rid of Danielle Smith with an election,
00:12:15.700
what is it, 11 days away now? Today, by the way, is the debate day in the province of Alberta.
00:12:25.640
Danielle Smith, the leader of the UCP, the United Conservative Party, and Rachel Notley,
00:12:30.560
the leader of the NDP Socialist Party, former premier who was deposed by Jason Kenney,
00:12:35.900
but wants a second crack at it. And opinion polls, I've seen opinion polls showing the NDP with a
00:12:41.500
real lead, but I've also seen opinion polls showing that UCP is in the lead. I think that means that
00:12:49.800
it's a volatile electorate. Normally, pollsters are generally in the same zone. I think that this
00:12:57.000
election is really up in the air, and the deep state has decided they're going to make the decision.
00:13:03.380
I'll tell you what I mean by that. This ethics report was rushed out hastily. Most of the ethics
00:13:10.860
reports by this commissioner take three, four plus months to do. This one was done very hastily to
00:13:17.500
make sure it got out before the election. And maybe that's appropriate, or maybe that's someone
00:13:23.960
putting their thumb on the scale. It was released today, the day of the debates. Not tomorrow,
00:13:30.400
the day after the debates, but today. The day where the candidates are normally preparing,
00:13:35.740
and where the candidates themselves would choose the issues. No, the ethics commissioner herself
00:13:42.460
will choose the issue. You know that that will be the case. The CBC has a major role in what I am
00:13:52.980
calling an attempted coup d'etat. And here's what I mean by that. A few months ago, the CBC reported
00:14:00.140
something as fact. They said that Danielle Smith or her staff emailed prosecutors on the COVID files
00:14:09.280
telling them to stop. They couldn't be more explicit. They said they were emails. Now, later on,
00:14:16.360
they said they hadn't actually seen the emails. Isn't that interesting? But they insisted they happen.
00:14:24.220
Well, this launched an enormous investigation in the public service by the non-partisan public service.
00:14:30.920
I don't mean political appointees. I mean the permanent bureaucracy that runs the government.
00:14:37.640
They checked over a million emails and couldn't find the emails that the CBC said had happened,
00:14:46.320
even though the CBC couldn't have been sure about it because they never saw them themselves.
00:14:51.240
Who would have told them? And why would they believe someone who wouldn't show them in the face
00:14:58.420
of a massive investigation by the bureaucracy that showed no such emails were done?
00:15:04.320
Well, in today's report by the ethics commissioner, which talks about Danielle Smith and her views on a
00:15:11.980
kind of lockdown amnesty, there's a major section on the CBC. And I want to show it to you. And this
00:15:18.980
isn't the most important part of today's story, but it shows you the collusion between the NDP,
00:15:26.620
the media party, Justin Trudeau's CBC, and how it's all happening, in my opinion, with some
00:15:34.260
dissident conservatives who have never accepted Danielle Smith as a leader.
00:15:38.960
Here, I'd like you to, Olivia or Efron, I'm not sure who's at the computer there. Is that you, Olivia?
00:15:47.640
Can you please search for CBC and go to the next instance of it and first show the title page of
00:15:53.100
the report to show people what document we're referring to? I have on the screen, and I'll show
00:15:59.180
it to you, and we'll have a link to it. If you could put that on the screen. This is the Office of the
00:16:03.660
Ethics Commissioner, Province of Alberta, a report of findings and recommendations by the Honorable
00:16:07.920
Marguerite Trussler, King's Counsel, Ethics Commissioner, into allegations involving Danielle
00:16:14.160
Smith. So it was published today. So that's the document I'm reading from. And then do a find,
00:16:19.220
the word CBC, and skip the first one. That shows that, you can put it on the screen there.
00:16:23.280
Um, um, in January of 2023, the CBC aired a story relying on an unnamed source that a political
00:16:31.400
staff member in the Premier's office had directly contacted prosecutors, plural, in the Criminal
00:16:37.020
Prosecution Service about COVID-related prosecutions. In March of 2023, a tape was posted to the CBC
00:16:42.340
website of a conversation between Premier Smith and Arthur Pavlovsky. We can talk about that a little
00:16:46.760
bit later. The allegation is that the Premier and your staff, as a result of these two incidents,
00:16:51.020
interfered with the administration of justice and thereby breached Section 3 of the Conflict of
00:16:54.880
Interest Act. Oh, I skipped a paragraph there. Highlights from the tape are set out in the NDP
00:17:00.180
request for an investigation. I also downloaded the tape and personally listened to it. So those
00:17:04.200
are the two allegations, um, that, that Arthur Pavlovsky recording of his personal conversation with
00:17:10.840
Daniel Smith, and far more serious in my mind, the accusation that Smith or her staff were literally
00:17:18.360
emailing prosecutors, plural, and telling them what to do. That would be political interference
00:17:23.700
like Justin Trudeau does. That's not something a good conservative would do. Uh, skip ahead to
00:17:29.400
the next instance of the word CBC, because this is quite something.
00:17:36.580
Yeah, let's read this. The CBC allegation. We already read that. The person who was alleged to
00:17:46.960
have sent one or perhaps more of the emails was incensed by the allegations and denied them. The
00:17:52.440
lawyer conducting or participating in all the Cooch prosecution, Stephen Johnson said that he was never
00:17:57.540
contacted by anyone in the Premier's office. Kim Goddard, assistant deputy minister of justice at one
00:18:02.320
point, held a town hall video meeting with prosecutors and reiterated the impendence of
00:18:06.580
the Crown prosecutors. She told them to ignore political statements and to advise her if anyone
00:18:10.140
was contacted, particularly if the contact was from a political source. At one point, she requested
00:18:14.820
and received from the Crown Prosecution Service an update on all cases, but it was used by her merely
00:18:19.320
as a reference to bring the attorney general and was never forwarded. The public service commissioner,
00:18:24.860
with the consent of the deputy minister, um, conducted an email search. I referred to that. Keep going.
00:18:29.920
Skip to the next page. Look at this. I think it can be said that the members of the Crown Prosecution
00:18:37.940
Services, that's another way of saying prosecutors, were annoyed and even incensed by the allegation
00:18:44.540
that one of them had received outside political pressure. Assistant Deputy Minister Kim Goddard is confident
00:18:51.720
no one in the service received an email. So that's not a political appointee. That's a lifer prosecutor.
00:18:57.900
But look at these next two paragraphs. Absolutely devastating to the wicked liars of the CBC.
00:19:06.460
Look at these two next paragraphs. All 44 Crown prosecutors who had coots, that was the border
00:19:15.800
blockade by the truckers, or COVID-related files, provided a statement that they did not receive
00:19:24.560
any contact relating to their files from the premier's office. 44 prosecutors on the COVID file.
00:19:33.300
None of them appointed by Daniel Smith, of course. They're not political appointees at all. They,
00:19:37.900
they're, they're people, lawyers who just work for the government. 44 out of 44 said, I don't know
00:19:44.300
what the CBC is talking about. I have never received such an email. And then this next line.
00:19:53.480
All 32 political staff members in the premier's office at the relevant time provided a statement
00:19:58.900
that they did not contact any Crown prosecutors regarding the coots or COVID-related files.
00:20:03.620
76 people, 76 people, 76 people said it is not true. That is absolutely devastating to the CBC.
00:20:21.860
It was one of the grounds for this ethics complaint. And here, Marguerite Trussler, retired judge,
00:20:31.720
now ethics commissioner, said in a polite way, the CBC made it up and they continue to lie about it
00:20:44.820
That's a pretty devastating review of the CBC. Back in October last year, I bumped into the premier
00:20:53.540
and I said, look, there's a way, a legal way to stay these prosecutions. That's illegal. Amnesty is
00:21:02.280
probably not the right word. And amnesty implies you did it, you didn't do it, whatever stage of it,
00:21:08.100
you're just, you're, you're washed clean of your sins. Amnesty isn't the word. Pardon isn't the word.
00:21:15.000
The legal technical term is to stay a prosecution.
00:21:18.380
Now I'm going to read you some of the letter I wrote. Now I wrote it to Danielle. So I met with
00:21:22.360
Danielle Smith and she said, hey, give me your ideas on, on, on how to do it. So I'll just read
00:21:27.140
some of this. You can see this from October. Marshall is the name of her chief of staff.
00:21:33.120
Please thank the premier for taking the time to speak with me. It's nice to see her again in her
00:21:36.380
new role. Nice to meet you. I'll send you another note in a couple of days about blah, blah, blah.
00:21:39.600
On the lockdown and pandemic prosecutions, I was heartened to see how well informed the
00:21:45.040
premier is on these matters. She clearly understands how important these issues are,
00:21:48.280
both politically and morally. She really is on the right side of history, blah, blah, blah.
00:21:54.000
The premier was interested in information that I could provide her about the situation on the
00:21:57.840
ground and mechanisms available to her to provide leadership on these issues. The purpose of this
00:22:01.660
is to provide the premier with that information. So what follows is a slightly more technical version
00:22:06.620
of what I say on my nightly show all the time. There are still an unknown number of tickets,
00:22:12.680
charges and contempt proceedings or related matters. I have good knowledge of some of the
00:22:19.020
prosecutions, but other lawyers have files and, you know, some trials have commenced. There are real
00:22:24.020
issues about why they're proceeding. As the premier says, they appear to have been politically
00:22:29.600
motivated. Staying or withdrawing the charges would send a strong message in support of the rule of law.
00:22:33.320
I'm only suggesting that prosecutions which have been politically motivated targeting people who
00:22:39.560
only sought to exercise their constitutional freedom of expression and religion be stayed
00:22:43.340
or discontinued. So let's just go stand to, I'm not going to read all of it because it's a little
00:22:49.500
bit legalistic. Jurisdiction, almost all the prosecutions that I'm aware of are conducted by
00:22:54.220
provincial prosecutors. They're under the premier's jurisdiction. The attorney general has the
00:22:59.420
discretion on whether and how to prosecute. Here's a leading case on the matter.
00:23:04.860
Significant of what is common with various elements of prosecutorial discretion is that
00:23:07.940
they involve the ultimate decisions as to whether prosecution should be brought,
00:23:10.700
continued or ceased, and what the prosecution ought to be for. Put differently, prosecutorial
00:23:14.800
discretion refers to decision regarding the nature and extent of the prosecution and the
00:23:18.500
attorney general's participation in it. Decisions that do not go to the nature and extend the
00:23:22.180
prosecution need the decision to govern a crown prosecutor's tactics and conduct before the
00:23:26.200
court, blah, blah, blah. So you see I have footnote number one there. Scroll to the very bottom on
00:23:30.580
this memo. I want to show you that that case is from the Supreme Court. It was in the case called
00:23:37.520
Krieger and the Law Society of Alberta. A 2002 case. SCC says it's a Supreme Court of Canada case. So I'm
00:23:44.340
quoting the Supreme Court. I'm not making this stuff up. Okay, go right back up. Thanks very much. I just
00:23:49.460
wanted to show my footnote there. This next paragraph is important. Specifically, the attorney general can
00:23:55.440
decide the nature and extent of the prosecution and the attorney general's participation in it.
00:23:59.900
And crown prosecutors employed by Alberta Crown Prosecution Service have prosecutorial discretion
00:24:04.020
to stay or withdraw proceedings, blah, blah, blah. It's usually done in open court. Scroll down, scroll down,
00:24:11.140
scroll down. The basis for staying them, if there's no reasonable likelihood of conviction,
00:24:17.300
and if it does not suit the public interest. There are clear legal issues with many of the cases,
00:24:22.640
vague and confusing. As aptly noted by, you know, and I quote others, other experts, Dr. Fluker.
00:24:39.100
Yeah, I'm not going to, this is a fairly dense legal memo.
00:24:42.920
The premier can, should she choose to, direct the attorney general to review and withdraw or discontinue
00:24:53.600
any cases arising from the chief medical officer of health orders under the Public Health Act
00:24:58.040
or any pending charges. So I don't say that the premier should tell the prosecution what to do.
00:25:05.180
I say the premier can direct the attorney general to review and withdraw. The premier could request
00:25:12.820
that the review be undertaken with respect to each prosecution. Obviously, the attorney general would
00:25:17.420
take into account the premier's view that without more, proceeding these prosecutions is not in the
00:25:21.580
public interest. I would also encourage the premier to note that beyond the lack of merit and political
00:25:26.440
nature of these charges, the province has a shortage of prosecutors, court staff and superior court judges.
00:25:29.820
Can you imagine putting 44 prosecutors on this beat? In consultation with my lawyers, it appears the
00:25:36.480
most direct and efficient way to direct a state proceedings is to make a written memo, and I get
00:25:40.420
into the technicalities. Anyways, so thanks very much. You can read the whole thing. I've tweeted that.
00:25:44.940
It's on our website. It's a technical memo, but it's really what I say and have been saying in public for
00:25:50.780
about two years now, which is, I don't really use the word amnesty. I use the word amnesty,
00:25:56.800
lockdown amnesty, because it's a common parlance. People know what amnesty is.
00:26:04.180
Stay of prosecution is a little more technical. That's actually what it is, and you can see my memo
00:26:10.980
from October outlines, and you can see, and I mentioned it twice there, that nowhere do I recommend
00:26:19.520
the premier talk to any prosecutors at all. I say, talk to the attorney general, have him review
00:26:26.680
things with an eye to, are these good cases? That's what I say. If you don't blame me, read the memo
00:26:31.860
for yourself. But go back to Judge Trussler's ruling, because I think she misquotes my memo.
00:26:40.960
It's not a big deal. I mean, I don't care. But she says, the only incident that is in any way close
00:26:46.020
to what was reported was the email containing a letter sent by Ezra Levant criticizing the prosecutions
00:26:51.540
and purporting to show why they were wrong and what to do about them. The communication was sent
00:26:56.200
to the premier's chief of staff, who forwarded to the chief of staff of the minister of justice,
00:27:00.440
Christopher Thrasher, for response. As the latter was within the jurisdiction of the justice ministry,
00:27:05.720
the email was appropriately forwarded from one political staffer to another, so that the second
00:27:09.380
political staff member could deal with the matter. Mr. Thrasher provided the email letter to the
00:27:13.560
minister of justice, Tyler Shandro, who in turn forwarded to the deputy minister, Frank Basha.
00:27:17.460
It was then sent to the assistant deputy minister in charge of the Crown Prosecution Service,
00:27:21.500
who did not forward it to any Crown prosecutor. She appropriately had a discussion about it with
00:27:25.760
the deputy minister, and nothing further than it happened with the letter. So that's it.
00:27:36.280
Okay, can you search my name one more time? Because it's at a later point where she refers to
00:27:40.620
my memo itself. Yeah, search it just one more time.
00:27:42.900
So I'm fine with what she described there. But here she says, go back up one, one, or two, yeah.
00:27:57.580
Yeah, so she says, on October 25th, Marshall Smith received the email directly from
00:28:01.480
Mr. Levant, which surprisingly, from someone legally trained, that's me, advocated direct
00:28:08.400
interference by the premier by having her order a stay in prosecutions. I did not say that.
00:28:14.980
I just read to you what I said. I didn't say that at all.
00:28:19.520
I said that the premier should direct the justice minister to review the cases,
00:28:24.620
and the ones that do not meet the legal standards, the justice minister should state them. I never said
00:28:31.580
that the premier should order a stay in the prosecutions. I defy you to find that. I think
00:28:38.440
I'm going to write to the judge and point out that she's wrong. Not that anything turned on it. Like
00:28:44.680
I say, this fake complaint by the CBC was thrown out by the judge. But it bothers me about this much
00:28:52.680
that the judge didn't read my memo. It was only like five pages.
00:29:08.540
Well, I'm based in Toronto, even though my heart may be in Alberta. So the information I get about
00:29:13.440
Alberta is often through the filter of the internet. One of the things I've detected by going through
00:29:17.920
dozens of tweets about this Ethics Commission report and Danielle Smith is that the media party,
00:29:23.700
the regime media, the legacy media, the bailout media, whatever you want to call it,
00:29:27.960
have universally ignored the fact that the CBC's central allegation against Danielle Smith,
00:29:34.960
that she or her office meddled with prosecutors, communicated with prosecutors, was absolutely
00:29:40.120
devastated by this report. The judge, Marguerite Trussler, who's now the Ethics Commission, she's a
00:29:45.100
former judge, said 44 out of 44 prosecutors who touched COVID file said, no, they didn't receive
00:29:52.340
a single email about it. And everyone in the premier's office testified they didn't send an
00:29:57.900
email, which seems to make sense since none were received. And yet the CBC is still publishing that
00:30:05.320
such email, a series of emails were sent to prosecutors, plural, yet not one can be found.
00:30:12.320
I find that incredible, an incredible lie to begin with. But even more so that this former judge,
00:30:19.220
Marguerite Trussler, now the Ethics Commissioner ruled, said I have can find no evidence of this.
00:30:26.300
And yet even noting that, which was half the complaint here, is completely absence in the
00:30:32.340
regime media. It's almost like they're in a club together. In fact, this stunning website story by CTV
00:30:41.840
actually has a headline, email was found or email exists. Even though the Ethics Commissioner said
00:30:49.840
there were no emails, just absolutely incredible. So that's what it looks like through the filter of
00:30:54.300
the internet from here in Toronto, a couple thousand kilometers away. But who is a man on the ground,
00:30:59.280
finger on a pulse, who is living and breathing Alberta politics every day, who's about an Albertan
00:31:04.020
as they get? I'm talking about my friend, Derek Fildebrandt, the boss of Western Standard. Hey,
00:31:09.860
Derek, nice to see you. Always good to be back. Thank you.
00:31:13.300
Well, thanks for having us. And how, by the way, how are the wildfires? I mean, the smoke,
00:31:17.960
I know, is an inconvenience, but how are the fires themselves? Are there still people who are in
00:31:21.820
danger? Yeah, it's still raging, still nasty. I mean, most of my interaction with it is just
00:31:29.400
smoke around Calgary. It's a lot clearer today than it was the last few days. I had a couple,
00:31:35.920
two days ago, it looked like the red planet, looked like Mars around here. But I've talked
00:31:39.960
to some folks who are up there. I've talked to one MLA who's running for re-election up in the
00:31:45.300
northwest corner. And he has essentially not campaigned the entire election. He's just been
00:31:50.920
kind of coordinating efforts on the grounds there. It's still pretty chaotic, but it seems to be a
00:31:56.780
little less extreme than the 2016 ones that saw Ford McMurray get singed pretty bad.
00:32:02.240
Yeah, I can imagine what, I mean, not just an inconvenience, but when there's that real
00:32:08.000
emergency on the ground, even a politician has to, especially if they're an incumbent MLA,
00:32:12.580
has to be part of the solution, not just indulging in the campaign. Do you think that's going to
00:32:18.420
affect the election timing at all? I mean, it's one thing that'd be an inconvenience or even a
00:32:24.520
blight in the sky. But what do you think there, do you think there will be some parts of the province
00:32:29.140
where voting is delayed at all? I want to get back to the ethics question, but I am curious what I
00:32:34.860
think. Just quickly, I don't think it'll be a material difference. Most of those are big,
00:32:42.200
sprawling rural ridings that for the most part are safe UCP. The only one in the north that's in play
00:32:48.480
in any way would be a lesser slave lake. And it's a very low population riding. It's under a special
00:32:54.760
formula. So even a few hundred people not able to vote actually could switch things there. But
00:33:00.000
I don't think it's going to be a material, make a material difference to the ability of people to get
00:33:04.100
out and vote in a way that'll actually change the outcome of any seats. Yeah, I think you're right.
00:33:09.100
And doing something as dramatic as changing an election, I think erodes confidence. People,
00:33:13.840
and by the way, it's a license to move elections around for any so-called emergency. All right,
00:33:19.660
let's get back to the news of the day. Look, there's no getting around it. The ethics commissioner
00:33:27.520
did say that Danielle Smith broke the rules. She had no punishment, no sanction, no advice even on how
00:33:33.780
to fix it. But she did say that. I got a question for you. Is this what they call in campaigning a late
00:33:39.540
hit, as in something so close to the election, so dramatic, like a surprise by someone who could
00:33:45.540
have waited a couple of weeks, but said, no, no, no. I want this to come out before the election. I
00:33:49.520
want this to come out on election day. I'm going to, I'm going to meddle in the election. I'm going to
00:33:53.360
drop a bombshell right on debate day, 11 days to the vote. Is that unfair on my part? Or was this a
00:33:59.980
late hit in the campaign? Well, it is a late hit. Was it intentional? I mean, it's certainly weird.
00:34:07.900
I've never seen federally or provincially an ethics commissioner release a negative report
00:34:13.460
during a campaign period. I've just never seen that before. So it definitely leaves open the
00:34:18.720
possibility. But at a minimum, the ethics commissioner is sensitive to the allegation of
00:34:23.160
it, because in it, she recommended that the legislature consider amending the laws around
00:34:28.560
the Conflict of Interest Act so that the ethics commissioner could put investigations on hold during
00:34:34.880
a writ period, because it's obviously a very hyper-political time. But these are always political
00:34:40.140
things, but this is a very political time. So at the very least, the ethics commissioner
00:34:44.040
is aware of the perception that this is very politically timed. That doesn't necessarily
00:34:51.100
mean that it was done intentionally, but it is extremely strange. But to be fair, though,
00:34:56.260
I mean, if this had dropped a week after the election, the NDP and the media would allege
00:35:01.080
that the ethics commissioner was covering up for the UCP and for Premier Smith. So there's
00:35:07.740
probably no good way to time this kind of thing one way or another.
00:35:10.680
Now, there are two main complaints. The first was those CBC emails, which the judge, if you
00:35:17.380
read the report, exhaustively looked into, talked to multiple people. And the judge, I say the
00:35:25.160
judge, she was a former judge, now the ethics commissioner, she said that the prosecutors
00:35:30.080
were adamant it didn't happen, and they were even angry with the allegation. Like these prosecutors,
00:35:35.880
44 prosecutors, not only every single one of them denied it, but they were sort of hurt that
00:35:42.120
someone would smear them saying that they were somehow being directed politically. So all 44
00:35:50.240
prosecutors said no. I think it was 32 staff in the Premier's office said no. The judge here says
00:35:56.080
there is no evidence at all. To me, that's a calamitous rebuke of the CBC's reporting. And yet the CBC
00:36:03.000
is still reporting that. Still reporting the existence of emails that the judge can't find and 44
00:36:07.980
prosecutors can't find. So I've never seen anything so brazen in my life. So it's a good news, bad news
00:36:13.040
story, because Smith did get her hands slapped on a bit. And I know you're going to want to touch on
00:36:17.040
that in a bit. But on this, this was the good news side. Smith has maintained she has not,
00:36:22.600
her and people in her office, to her knowledge, have not been in any contact with prosecutors. And
00:36:27.040
if someone had, or if Smith had, that would be bad. You know, that would be definitely warranting
00:36:34.160
significant censure. It'd be very inappropriate. But the report was clear here. And the CBC has not
00:36:44.540
changed their story that we've seen, at least they haven't updated the story or retracted it and
00:36:48.980
apologized. All of the media that I've at least seen from the legacy media in Alberta, have at the
00:36:57.920
very least in the story, if not really talked about that part, generally not put it up front. It's been
00:37:04.100
all about the negative side. And I mean, I guess that is the news business. We're all guilty of,
00:37:10.620
you know, if it leads and bleeds. If it's negative, it tends to be more newsworthy. It's never a news
00:37:15.520
story that nothing happened today. But it's definitely been downplayed in the press that
00:37:22.740
that she's been, it seems entirely exonerated of the more serious allegation against her.
00:37:30.100
And the CBC is not only not playing up that in the reports on the report that came out today,
00:37:37.700
but hasn't, uh, hasn't retracted its existing story. So definitely would seem to strengthen the
00:37:45.040
legal case if Smith decides to pursue her defamation suit against the CBC post-election.
00:37:50.280
You know, it's one thing for them not to retract. Like they can say,
00:37:53.300
we stand by it, but they don't even acknowledge that the judge tore a strip off them and said it's
00:37:59.400
fake. Like you can say the judge ruled against the CBC email allegation and said they had no
00:38:07.040
evidence. CBC stands by its reporting. So, okay. So you're saying you disagree.
00:38:13.340
Now we have to choose between the judge's version, the CBC's version, but at least we have
00:38:20.060
It is possible that the CBC is correct. I don't think it is at this point. I think the,
00:38:25.320
the scales have been pretty heavily tilted one way to show that it's not likely a correct story,
00:38:31.080
but it is possible. It's true. And they have a right to stand by it, but they do have an
00:38:36.880
obligation to at least acknowledge that, uh, that, that, that this has been, uh, the result of the
00:38:44.000
report that, that this, uh, former judge and the ethics commissioner says, no, didn't happen.
00:38:49.640
Yeah. I mean, if there's a million emails searched on by the public service, nothing shows up all 44
00:38:55.780
prosecutors say, no, we didn't receive anything. The entire premier staff said, no, we didn't send
00:39:00.720
it. I think it behooves the CBC to put up or shut up or at least acknowledge this contradiction,
00:39:05.440
which they haven't done. I have a theory though, and I'm going to run it by you. I just, it just
00:39:09.840
popped into my mind. I make a cameo appearance in this report. Uh, in October I met with the premier,
00:39:15.020
I bumped into her at an event and I, um, talked to her briefly about, uh, I used the word lockdown
00:39:21.660
amnesty. It should have been stay a prosecution. That's the more accurate term. And, uh, followed
00:39:27.120
up. Um, and, uh, I sent her, I think it was a five page memo where I, I, I remember I read that,
00:39:34.140
you know, I, I had a lawyer help me prepare it. So it wasn't just my musings off the top of my head.
00:39:39.040
And I talked about how you do it properly. You know, you have the attorney general review cases
00:39:45.200
with the public interest in mind and reasonable likelihood of conviction. And the attorney general
00:39:49.600
is the decider. Um, yeah, I stand by the memo. I think it's a great memo and I'm not shy about it.
00:39:55.880
Frankly, I've said the same thing on TV many times. Um, indulge me for 30 seconds. So the, the judge
00:40:03.260
treats my legal memo. And she says, the legal memo was sent by me to Smith and her chief of staff.
00:40:10.420
Okay. That's true. And then it was sent to the justice minister and then the chief of staff and
00:40:15.640
then the attorney, sorry, the associate deputy minister or something. And then the head of
00:40:20.900
crown prosecution service. And it went no further. So this ethics commissioner, former judge tracked
00:40:29.060
where my memo went and it just went to the names I just told you. So it, that's, she literally
00:40:34.940
followed who forwarded it to whom. So she just listed all the names, Danielle Smith and her chief
00:40:40.860
of staff, justice minister Tyler Shender and his chief of staff. And I think three bureaucrats in the
00:40:46.980
justice department. That's it. Yeah. Now my memo was leaked to the CBC a few months ago. I don't think
00:40:56.140
Danielle Smith leaked it to the DBC. I don't think her chief of staff leaked it to the CBC. And frankly,
00:41:01.300
I, I, I can't fathom why a civil servant would leak it to the CBC because they were angry at any
00:41:07.620
accusations of interference. This wasn't interference. This was my advice. I see how you go with this.
00:41:13.180
So if it wasn't Danielle Smith or her chief of staff, and if it's not the civil, the only political
00:41:17.440
person was Tyler Shender and it was leaked to the CBC. And so here we are, Derek, the CBC is digging
00:41:28.320
their heels in on this. Oh, I swear there were emails. We can't prove it to you, but someone told
00:41:33.140
us and we believe them. Well, gee, I wonder if that's Tyler Shender. Because if, if Tyler Shender
00:41:41.560
had told the CBC, there had been emails, trust me. Well, my God, if the justice minister tells you
00:41:47.560
it would happen, you better believe him. He wouldn't lie, would he? He's Danielle Smith's right-hand
00:41:52.360
man. So that would be the explanation for why they are so extremely tenacious, despite not finding an
00:42:00.860
email after a million email search, despite 44 prosecutors saying, I don't know what you're talking
00:42:06.620
about. Why would the CBC hang on for dear life? Well, if Tyler Shender had said, no, no, no, guys,
00:42:15.580
trust me. Well, the CBC would not give that up and they would not reveal who he is. And that's a hell
00:42:21.560
of a thing. Who else could it be besides the guy who leaked my memo? I think Tyler Shender did it.
00:42:27.180
I think that he is against Danielle Smith. I think he was the health minister who put in place these
00:42:32.040
lockdown laws. I think he wants to be premier. And I don't think he's been particularly healthy.
00:42:36.600
to Danielle Smith. He certainly didn't do her bidding on this matter. I accused Tyler Shender
00:42:41.760
of being the source of the CBC and a leaker of my memo. What do you make of that allegation I just
00:42:48.260
told you? Um, you've got me a lot. That's a lot to think about. Um, it's, uh, there's a lot,
00:42:58.160
I think, uh, to lend credibility to the possibility. I, I'd have to do some more research myself,
00:43:04.620
but it is possible. I mean, I, I did think it was very, an awkward position that Shandro was put in
00:43:12.460
that he, you know, he was dropped as health minister soon after Shandro introduced the vaccine
00:43:18.360
passports for Jason Kenney. Uh, Jay, you know, Shandro was after Jason Kenney and kind of alongside
00:43:24.900
Jason Nixon, the kind of the guy that the insurgent element in the UCP and Alberta wanted gone for his
00:43:32.420
role in lockdowns and mandates. And then Danielle Smith comes in as the crusader against these things.
00:43:39.180
And she doesn't obviously put him back in health, but then she puts him in justice.
00:43:42.320
And clearly on the docket in justice is dealing with these people, uh, many of which have been
00:43:48.480
wrongfully, uh, charged with, uh, violating lockdowns and mandates that were put in place
00:43:56.220
by Tyler Shandro that now that is an awkward position. Nothing else that you put in place,
00:44:02.760
these regulations and laws that people get charged under, then you're responsible for overseeing
00:44:09.120
them then as justice minister. And the new boss says, I want you to look into essentially stay
00:44:13.640
of prosecution for these people who've been charged under the regulations that you as health
00:44:17.380
minister introduced. Yeah. And if nothing else, that is grossly awkward. Uh, and I, but I, you know,
00:44:24.240
I'd have to follow, uh, the dots a bit more, but it, it, it certainly raises a, a real possibility
00:44:30.900
that it, that it could have been, uh, Shandro, but I, I'm not confident enough to myself say.
00:44:35.080
Well, and I have no proof of it other than there's a, there's a very short list of people
00:44:38.800
who had access to my memo. It was leaked to the CBC. Uh, uh, it, it sounds like, uh, the same,
00:44:46.740
um, motive and modus operandi as the leaker on the, um, invisible emails. Well, I, I, I think that
00:44:56.140
and, and, and, and leaks are great. I mean, we used to get leaks like, like nobody's business
00:45:01.420
out of, out of the Kenny government. People who were opposed to Kenny in that government,
00:45:05.240
they were leaking to us twice a day, like two years. And it was devastating to the government.
00:45:10.540
Yeah. Um, and I generally agree with the reasons for it, but, uh, you know, it was our job as
00:45:15.360
journalists to, to collect information. It wasn't our job to carry water for the government, but, uh,
00:45:20.620
definitely would not be surprised, uh, one bit if, you know, Smith had people in her government who
00:45:27.200
were not her friends and were leaking things. Yeah. You know, a house divided against itself cannot
00:45:31.160
stand. That was the case under Jason Kenney. It's definitely the case under Danielle Smith.
00:45:36.660
I, thanks for indulging my theory. That's all it was, a speculative theory, but I just, uh,
00:45:41.160
reading the report today. It's worth digging into. I think it's very much worth digging into by,
00:45:45.640
by process of elimination. Uh, that's what, yeah, exactly right. Hey, um, there's about a week and a
00:45:51.120
half to go, which is not a lot of time, but in another sense, it's an eternity in politics. So many
00:45:56.300
more things can happen. Typically political parties save their biggest bombshells in their
00:46:00.680
opposition research for the last week. They don't shoot it all in the first week of the campaign.
00:46:05.640
I think that we haven't even seen the worst of it. Now on the Danielle Smith side, the woman did radio
00:46:12.060
and TV shows for years in which she said controversial things as a pundit. So I'm sure there's some clips
00:46:17.860
there they'll dig up. Who knows what the UCP's bombshells are on the NDP? I think both sides have
00:46:23.180
priced them in. I think conservatives know that Rachel Notley is an anti-oil extremist.
00:46:28.220
I think NDPers are already terrified that Danielle Smith is a libertarian who doesn't believe in,
00:46:34.700
you know, a heavy handed government. How much are these bombshells going to move the needle?
00:46:40.160
Because boy, the polls are close and I was scared this morning, but then I thought, you know what,
00:46:45.340
has this changed anything? Has anyone who liked Danielle Smith before changed their mind or vice versa?
00:46:51.180
What do you think? Well, it depends what polls you're looking at. Most polls until now have showed
00:46:56.260
a modest UCP lead, which was a huge comeback after, you know, Jason Kenney spent the better part of
00:47:02.600
two years, like 20, 25 points behind the NDP. So Smith brought the party back into a competitive
00:47:08.940
position. Now, some polls are still showing the UCP with a modest lead, especially in critical battleground
00:47:15.360
Calgary. But there are others that have showed the NDP with a modest lead. Previously, all the polls
00:47:23.240
showed across the board showed a moderate UCP lead. Now they're showing moderate UCP leads and moderate
00:47:30.740
NDP leads. So I'm not sure what to make of it. It's possible that these bombs have been hitting their
00:47:36.540
mark and eroding it. I think a lot of, as you said, I think a lot of the controversy around this,
00:47:41.980
you know, Danielle Smith is a controversial figure who said controversial things. A lot of that is baked
00:47:46.820
into the price already. It's a sunken cost, if you will. But the, you know, kind of the oppo drops
00:47:53.160
against the NDP, they're not hitting the mark, because the media have reported precisely zero of them.
00:48:00.900
So, you know, if, you know, if a UCP can, you know, if there was an audio recording of a UCP candidate
00:48:07.840
farting in the public washroom 10 years ago, that's going to be on the front page of the Herald
00:48:11.780
of the Journal. But, you know, as of this morning, we have released evidence of four NDP candidates,
00:48:21.580
including one incumbent MLA, who have clearly and unambiguously publicly stated their support
00:48:30.360
for communism or communism affiliated things. Including Rod Loyola, we already know he was a
00:48:37.660
communist, but it's kind of swept under the rug, because it wasn't explicitly capital C communist,
00:48:43.300
it was just supporting Hugo Chavez, who happens to be a communist. But, you know, we've gotten photos
00:48:48.260
of him at the front of a Communist Party of Canada delegation in a parade. We've got another candidate
00:48:55.860
for MLA who's been sharing images of Chairman Mao with inspirational quotes from him. And so there's
00:49:04.500
now four of these MLAs in total. And you know how many stories I've seen in the government funded
00:49:10.200
legacy media on this stuff? Precisely, zero. Yeah, zero. And that is much worse than even I thought. I
00:49:17.720
think neither of us have a particularly charitable view of the government funded media. But I mean,
00:49:23.500
they used to keep up the appearance of balance. And not everybody working there is bad. But now
00:49:28.220
it's, it is worse than it was even four years ago, I think. Yeah, I think four years ago, if it was
00:49:35.080
exposed that an NDP candidate running for to be the government had supported and explicitly supported
00:49:42.660
an ideology that killed about 100 million people in the last century, it would get a mention at the
00:49:48.320
bottom of a story somewhere. Maybe not, it wouldn't get a headline, but it get a mention somewhere.
00:49:51.780
I've seen precisely zero mentions. So any hits on the NDP, they're just not landing because
00:49:57.460
unless you're watching independent media, reading independent media in Alberta, it's just not
00:50:03.780
happening. It doesn't exist. And so the UCP is fighting against, in a media landscape, even more
00:50:10.740
hostile than is normally there for conservatives. You know, you make me think of what happened a few
00:50:16.140
days ago, uh, at a press conference, but a week ago, your reporter, Jonathan Bradley, who is so
00:50:22.700
mild-mannered, he's so polite. I think he's too polite, by the way. I mean, nice guy.
00:50:29.020
I'm trying to make him meaner. I'm like, like, like trying to make a pit bull. I'm going to like
00:50:33.820
You've got to meanify him a bit. But the reason I mentioned that is because, you know, butter
00:50:38.660
wouldn't melt in his mouth. And he goes to an NDP event to ask a bona fide question. And
00:50:44.500
the, and the press aide says to him, we're banning you because you engaged in hate speech
00:50:51.220
against one of our candidates. As in writing a critical story isn't just criticism. It's
00:50:55.820
just, it's hate speech. Let me just show a clip of that because people might be thinking
00:50:59.560
I'm making that up. And by the way, this is the nicest guy. I think he's too nice. But
00:51:04.820
I emphasize that because he's not a hater. And, and his criticism is fair and gentle.
00:51:13.160
Jonathan Bradley, Western Standard. I got a question about the, the military.
00:51:16.340
Hey, don't, don't yell your questions out, okay? You know that you have a policy with your
00:51:20.860
particular outlet where you have operated in hate speech against our candidates.
00:51:26.220
From you. I've gone over this, Jonathan, several times. Happy to continue talking about it. Happy
00:51:31.360
to have that discussion with your editors. Thank you for coming. Appreciate it.
00:51:34.660
That's a smear. And, and they've kept out others like, uh, the other day, Kian Bexty.
00:51:42.060
He literally told the NDP in advance what his question was. It was firm, but fair.
00:51:46.880
He wasn't noisy. He wasn't swearing. He wasn't blocking. And they simply refused to come out
00:51:52.100
until he was let out by police. And then Rachel Notley later said, oh, we had a protester here.
00:52:00.980
Well, thank you very much. And, uh, thank you everybody for your, uh, patience. Uh, as many
00:52:05.460
of you here know, we had to, uh, remove a protester, but I'm very pleased that we were
00:52:11.280
Now, the thing is that looks insane to me. And by the way, they banned Rebel News, of course.
00:52:14.620
So you're banning Western Standard. You're banning Counter Signal, Kian Bexty. You're banning
00:52:20.880
Rebel News. Rachel Emanuel gets into some, some of the events. I think it's just because she's so nice,
00:52:26.400
but it didn't work for Jonathan Bradley. Um, the reason I mentioned all this, Derek, is because
00:52:33.080
this would normally be a devastating authoritarian approach by Rachel Notley and the NDP if the rest
00:52:40.100
of the media were to describe what they were doing, but they don't. So Rachel Notley has perfect
00:52:45.380
serenity kicking out the four independent media in Alberta because she knows that the big boys
00:52:51.360
won't even talk about it. So she'll get away with it.
00:52:54.340
Well, there was a, there was a one day story. Um, so at the beginning of the campaign, you might
00:53:00.300
recall, uh, there was controversy because, uh, Danielle Smith said she's going to take only one
00:53:05.040
question from all of the media. So she could take questions from more media instead of two questions
00:53:09.780
from just a few media and the media were very, you know, the kind of media were, uh, upset about
00:53:15.520
this and Rachel Notley tried to make a big point of it. And she, uh, put on Twitter, I'm having a
00:53:20.200
press conference tomorrow and I will answer all of the questions and their follow-ups from all of
00:53:25.540
the media. And I kind of scratched my head. I was like, Oh, we've been kind of quietly banned from
00:53:29.300
the NDP for a while. Well, we haven't made a big deal of it, but you know, cause like, whatever,
00:53:33.340
they, they don't have to talk to us if they don't want to, we're not going to cry about it, but
00:53:36.600
she's, she's kind of on her high horse here. I think I'm, I'm seeing some serious hypocrisy.
00:53:41.000
So I sent the classiest, um, most bonafide experienced journalist. I got around here,
00:53:49.360
uh, next to Dave Naylor. I sent my news editor, Nigel Hannaford.
00:53:52.720
Oh, he's a great guy. He's very British, very proper gentleman.
00:53:56.800
How much more frigging mainstream do you need to get than one of the former editors of the Calgary
00:54:00.900
Herald? So I sent him down and Rachel Gottlieb just says, Nope, Nope. You guys are engaged in a hate
00:54:06.100
speech. And so that now, so the media, the legacy media picked that up, except they put it kind of
00:54:12.240
at the lower half of the story after, well, Danielle Smith will only take one question from
00:54:17.420
everyone. And that's a big deal. And then, uh, Rachel Notley, not taking questions from people
00:54:22.820
she doesn't like is the bottom of half of the story, but there's been virtually nothing since,
00:54:27.020
but you know, it's just, she keeps moving the ball. She says, uh, okay, if you're, um,
00:54:34.160
you know, rebel is, uh, not rebel or counter signal, they're not accredited members of the
00:54:39.220
legislative press gallery, that nice little club there, uh, gatekeep. Um, so they're not allowed
00:54:44.880
in because they're not accredited. Well, then we show up, we're accredited and we're, we're,
00:54:49.740
we're accredited at the press gallery here, Saskatchewan, Parliament Hill, we show up.
00:54:53.600
Well, she needs a new excuse because we are accredited. So she says, well, you're, uh,
00:54:58.480
you're hate criminals. So, uh, you know, and how do you defend against that? That's just
00:55:03.720
technically, according to lawyers, that's just her opinion that she could say we, we, we commit
00:55:07.360
hate crimes. So, uh, she just moves the ball. And at the end of the day, what it comes down to is,
00:55:13.280
are you too much of a pain in asking inconvenient questions for her? And if that is the case,
00:55:18.820
You know, I, I don't like it when journalists complain about how tough their life is and maybe
00:55:24.500
that's what I'm doing here, but I, I don't think I'm talking about myself. I don't think I'm even
00:55:28.720
talking about you and, or Jonathan Bradley or Kian Bexley. I'm talking about Rachel Notley and how she
00:55:35.000
demonizes and defames her opponents as hate criminals and, and, and shuts down public accountability
00:55:42.780
now in the opposition. Imagine what she will do if she becomes premier. Alberta could go
00:55:50.040
very dark in terms of censorship. Derek, it's great to catch up with you in the closing moments we have.
00:55:57.320
I don't want to put you on the spot, but if you had to guess based on current trends,
00:56:03.600
do you think Danielle Smith will, will pull it off? Or do you think Rachel Notley will be restored
00:56:08.340
and the socialists will take the castle again? Oh God. Uh, you know, and this is the worst
00:56:14.020
possible time to ask because by the time this airs, it'll almost be debate time. It's so much
00:56:18.620
could go. Yeah. Yeah. I take your point tonight. Uh, the debate's on, we're having a live stream.
00:56:24.180
Are you guys having a live stream too? But here, I hate when people cop out and give non-answers.
00:56:27.920
So I'm going to give the best answer I can. Absent the debate, if the election was held at, you know,
00:56:36.900
noon today, I'd say the UCP squeaks by. Yeah. Uh, I'd say in aggregate, they're leading in polls,
00:56:44.260
although not all the polls, but also the math favors them better because the NDP are so heavily
00:56:48.620
concentrated in, in Edmonton. So if the election was held at noon today, I'd say the UCP wins a
00:56:55.000
slight majority, loses a bunch of their seats, but still holds on to government. But, uh, this
00:56:59.460
evening, the debate, uh, has the potential at least to, uh, finally tilt, uh, tilt real momentum
00:57:06.140
one way or another. Yeah. I think you're right. All right, my friend, thanks for your time. Good
00:57:10.120
luck today. You're doing important work out there. Love the Western standard. Keep it up.
00:57:14.260
Thank you. Appreciate it. You too. All right. Cheers. There you have it. Dare fill the brand,
00:57:17.600
the boss of Western standard dot news. Stay with us more ahead.
00:57:25.000
Hey, welcome back. Your feedback to me on my monologue about the immigration poll.
00:57:31.420
Bill Fairhall says we don't have, and can't build the kind of infrastructure to support this in the
00:57:35.860
timeframe. Ridiculous idea. You would wait at emergency departments for hours to days from
00:57:41.480
hours to days and doctors from months to several years. It's a crazy idea. Imagine a hundred million
00:57:48.520
Canadians, but they're not going to be new villages in Northwest territories. They're just going to turn
00:57:54.420
Toronto from the greater Toronto area, about six and a half million people. They'll turn it into a 20
00:57:59.300
million person mega city, like Mexico city. It makes no sense economically, infrastructure wise,
00:58:07.760
social cohesion. Most people in the country would not be born Canadians. You would completely change
00:58:16.500
the character of the country. You would snuff out old Canada. And where would these folks come from?
00:58:20.340
Quebec is worried because they know they're not going to be French speakers. I don't understand.
00:58:24.720
It's an insane idea. It's an idea that makes sense. If you're a corporation looking for a market,
00:58:34.260
Peter, after he says, I would be angry at Danielle Smith if she had not made the call,
00:58:38.960
sending a half a dozen police to a church during services should be talked about,
00:58:42.220
investigated. Lone police officers sometimes get killed dealing with violent offenders,
00:58:46.120
like in a Hay River Northwest territories a few years ago. But we sent a group of officers to a
00:58:50.640
peaceful church. Where or who is giving these police their orders? Start a petition to fire
00:58:55.740
Tuss Trussler. Lacking any common sense, best regards. P.S. Recent poll was comparing Premier Smith
00:59:02.200
and Notley, but they left out who practices cancel culture category. Yeah, isn't it funny?
00:59:08.320
Danielle Smith has gotten more trouble from the media for a brief phone call with Arthur Pavlovsky
00:59:13.800
then other politicians got in trouble for jailing pastors. Like, isn't that crazy? I think that's
00:59:21.240
a reflection of the media party, not the common sense of the common people, but we'll find out in
00:59:24.660
11 days, won't we? That's our show for today. Until tomorrow, on behalf of all of us here at
00:59:29.820
Rebel World Headquarters, to you at home, good night and keep fighting for freedom.
00:59:43.800
ones Christ who rulett from the people off, good night and we'll talk about Xiang