Rebel News Podcast - February 22, 2024


EZRA LEVANT ｜ Trudeau's 'illiberal' Liberals leak details on internet censorship bill to friendly media


Episode Stats

Length

44 minutes

Words per Minute

154.64453

Word Count

6,844

Sentence Count

424

Misogynist Sentences

5

Hate Speech Sentences

6


Summary

Bill C-18, Bill C-36, the Online Harmless Act, and the new version of the controversial bill, the so-called "Online Harmless Bill" are just a few of the many pieces of legislation introduced by the Liberal government in order to stifle free speech online.


Transcript

00:00:00.000 The federal government refused to release a briefing note on the new online harms bill
00:00:20.600 to Rebel News and then the federal government leaked the information in that briefing note
00:00:25.960 overnight to friendly media. Then Ezra joins his show with an update from the courthouse
00:00:32.400 at Lethbridge, Alberta. It's February 21st, 2024. I'm Sheila Gunn-Reed and you're watching The Ezra
00:00:38.440 Levant Show. Shame on you, you censorious bug.
00:00:45.540 Do you know what the Online Harms Act is? If you don't and you want to use the internet,
00:01:00.420 you really should get to know it. It was first proposed back in 2021 as Bill C-36, but thankfully
00:01:08.020 it died when the liberals called the last election. And like so much of recent liberal legislation,
00:01:12.700 it is a censorship bill cloaked in something else. For example, we saw the liberals introduce
00:01:20.480 C-11 as a way to promote Canadian content with the Online Streaming Act, touted as a means to
00:01:27.240 protect Canadians on online streaming platforms. However, ultimately it just expanded the powers
00:01:34.380 of the broadcast regulator, the CRTC, the Canadian Radio Television Commission, to control what you can
00:01:41.180 see and say on the internet to control which content creators out there get preferential treatment
00:01:46.280 on streaming platforms based on the whims of some government bureaucrat somewhere. The law will
00:01:52.200 limit what's called discoverability. So, for example, you can produce content critical of the government
00:01:58.120 all day long, but the government might not ever let anybody see or find it. Isn't that convenient?
00:02:05.580 Then there's Bill C-18. That's the Online News Act, which was really a shakedown of social media
00:02:10.880 companies to bail out Justin Trudeau's friends and enablers in the mainstream media. So if a user of a
00:02:18.300 social media platform shares a link to a Canadian news site, Justin Trudeau expects the social media
00:02:24.860 company to pay the newspaper company. It's like making the paperboy delivery person pay the newspaper company
00:02:37.100 for delivering the newspaper. It was a system that wasn't broken, but Justin Trudeau thought it needed
00:02:43.260 fixing. And now you can't share any links to Canadian news on Facebook or Instagram because Meta, the parent
00:02:50.060 company didn't pay the shakedown. Now we've got the Online Harms Act and buckle up for this one. It
00:02:57.100 hasn't been introduced officially in its latest iteration, although Justin Trudeau and the federal
00:03:04.220 government say it's coming very, very soon. The conservative leader says your bill on hate is
00:03:10.860 about banning speech you hate. And he also called you someone with a woke authoritarian agenda who spent
00:03:17.500 the first half of his adult life as a practicing racist. What's your response to that? My response
00:03:24.140 to the substantive part of that question is, Mr. Poliev hasn't even seen the legislation we're
00:03:32.620 about to put forward next week. He's already telling people exactly what it is and what it isn't. I think
00:03:38.220 responsible leadership is about dealing in facts, actually reading a piece of legislation before
00:03:44.940 he starts telling people what he thinks it does, and then having a rigorous debate in parliament
00:03:49.980 about how to best protect kids. He's not interested in that. He's interested in hurling insults and
00:03:56.140 distracting from the fact that he has no plan on housing. He has no plan on childcare. He has no plan
00:04:01.580 on fighting climate change and creating good jobs for the future. He has no plan in terms of building
00:04:06.780 and protecting the kinds of jobs here in Alberta or across the country that people are going to rely on
00:04:11.660 in a transforming world. What does he has a plan for? He has a plan for stoking division, creating fear,
00:04:18.380 throwing out personal insults. That's not leadership. Canadians deserve a government that is focused every
00:04:24.700 day on building a better future for them. That's what I'm doing here today. He can throw whatever
00:04:29.660 insults he like. I look forward to having substantive debates on how we're going to fix the challenges
00:04:35.420 Canadians are facing because we're busy doing that while he's busy ranting.
00:04:39.900 Now, we don't know what's in the new version of the Online Harms Act yet, but based on previous
00:04:45.900 reporting from Jamie Sarkinak over a year ago at the National Post, who dug down into the roundtable
00:04:53.020 discussions for C-36, she found that the federal government went to left-wing activist groups and
00:05:00.460 then asked for advice about what should be in the law. And friends, it's not going to be good. This is from
00:05:06.460 Jamie's article. Roundtable participants were invited by the department based on several factors,
00:05:12.540 including regional representation, the impact the legislation would have on them, their lived
00:05:18.460 experience with harmful content online, whatever that means, and participation in the department's
00:05:24.460 prior engagements. Canadian heritage spokesman David LaRose wrote in an email. Some participants were
00:05:32.300 also invited at their own request or at the recommendation of other community groups. So let's stop right here.
00:05:38.540 These people were hand-selected by the government to give them the responses they wanted. They were invited,
00:05:47.900 and many were already previous participants in government roundtables, ostensibly for other
00:05:53.980 censorship pieces of legislation. Or these were people who self-identified as censorious busybodies
00:06:02.860 who wanted to be involved in censoring other Canadians. Let's keep going. The roundtables were
00:06:08.700 largely in agreement, really, what a shock, with the idea of online censorship, according to Canadian
00:06:16.540 Heritage. Participants believed there was a need for laws that would entail strong enforcement measures
00:06:23.260 for regulating social media to be carried out, preferably by a regulator operating at arm's length
00:06:30.140 from the government. Like July's expert panel, the community roundtables called for more protections
00:06:37.180 for youth, online safety education, an ombudsman to field complaints, and government support to assist
00:06:45.900 victims of online harm. Am I going to have to pay for meme tweets and counseling for Rosie Barton
00:06:53.740 when people say they don't like what she does on the CBC? Let's keep going.
00:06:59.260 This feedback isn't all that helpful, however, because we don't know what harm means to these
00:07:04.940 people. It went undefined and what types of content they view as deserving of censorship.
00:07:11.900 If the feds are concerned about criminal activity, there's a process for that already. Such matters
00:07:18.380 concern the police, not the culture department. If they're concerned about online fights, political
00:07:23.900 disagreements, and other uncomfortable but legal conduct, they shouldn't expect social media
00:07:29.980 companies and the government to play the role of mediator. But the so-called experts are expecting
00:07:39.500 all of this to be in the new legislation and they just might get it. Look at this.
00:07:43.580 From the other side of the political spectrum, the Toronto Star, at the core of the model for the law,
00:07:51.100 is a responsibility to conduct risk assessments on products used by Canadians, a special duty to
00:07:58.700 protect children from harm, the creation of a regulator with the power to investigate and audit
00:08:05.340 platforms, mandate corrective action and impose fines, mandatory data transparency by platforms,
00:08:13.420 and a victim-centered forum for recourse for users impacted by platforms variable content moderation
00:08:23.180 practices. Or, you know, you could just
00:08:25.500 not go on Twitter or X or Facebook or any of these places that are hurting your feelings. You could
00:08:34.860 could do that too without creating an entire bureaucracy to censor Canadians. And while the
00:08:41.100 so-called experts are pushing for this online harms legislation, saying it will protect kids online,
00:08:48.060 there are already, as Jamie pointed out, criminal code measures to deal with.
00:08:52.060 Sexploitation, child exploitation, sharing of abuse images, revenge porn, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
00:09:00.540 The liberals even say that this legislation would and should protect the likes of Taylor Swift
00:09:07.500 from sexualized, AI-generated deepfakes. So we apparently have to censor all Canadians to make
00:09:15.020 sure that nobody makes computer images of rich singers. But here's what the liberals don't want you to know.
00:09:21.980 Besides that they don't want me to know anything, and I'll get to that in a second.
00:09:26.460 As Michael Geist points out, Canadians don't want this legislation. Like real Canadians,
00:09:31.820 not the hand-selected busybodies. Only politicians and activists want it. Because, as Jamie Sarkinak points
00:09:39.980 out, those are the only people who were invited to attend the roundtable consultations. It was a bunch
00:09:44.620 of pro-censorship left-wing activists. 90% of Canadians are fundamentally opposed to the Online
00:09:54.060 Harms Act. And the government knows it. This is from Geist's article on the topic.
00:09:59.260 I obtained a copy of responses under Access to Information revealing that the criticism
00:10:04.300 had been far more significant than previously disclosed. That's the criticism of the Online
00:10:10.380 Harms Act. Indeed, companies such as pre-Elon Musk Twitter had likened the parts of the plan to
00:10:18.220 policies found in China, Iran, and North Korea. But beyond the hidden submissions, I have now obtained
00:10:25.580 further documents under the Access to Information Act that indicate the government was telling Canadians
00:10:31.580 one thing and internal department executives something else. Consider the top-line takeaway
00:10:37.980 summary in the What We Heard report. So that's the summary report of these roundtables and consultations
00:10:44.780 on Bill C-36. It read that there was support from a majority of respondents to a legislative and
00:10:53.100 regulatory framework led by the federal government to confront harmful content online. That's on the cover
00:11:03.500 of the report. They expected people not to read what was inside. Michael Geist did. The internal summary
00:11:10.540 posted below told a much different story. Among individuals, 90% of respondents are unsupportive of the
00:11:19.660 proposal. 5.4% of individual respondents are supportive of the proposal and 4.6% of respondents are mixed,
00:11:29.660 neutral, or otherwise unclear. There is no reference to 90% opposition in the What We Heard report. In fact,
00:11:39.260 the document indicates there were 350 individual responses suggesting that only 19 Canadians provided
00:11:46.700 supportive responses to a nationwide public consultation on a key government policy issue.
00:11:56.220 Let's repeat that again. 19 Canadians provided supportive responses to a nationwide public consultation on a key
00:12:06.620 government policy issue. A regulator to control the internet. The feds want to control the internet
00:12:16.620 based on the approval of 19 people. So let's get back to what I alluded to at the beginning. Let's go back
00:12:24.460 to the government, the federal government, withholding documents from me on the Online Harms Act and then
00:12:31.900 releasing them to friendly media. Because apparently, the story I was going to do and then post online,
00:12:38.460 I think, would probably harm the government's credibility on this new piece of legislation even further.
00:12:43.820 Here's what we know. The Online Harms Act is a key piece of liberal legislation, part of a trifecta of internet
00:12:51.820 censorship legislation, which is quickly turning Canada into maple syrup North Korea, or more accurately, frozen Venezuela.
00:13:00.380 Morning, Mr. Polyev, Andrew Lawton, True North. The federal government has said that its online harms bill is imminent.
00:13:08.380 They've said this bill will include, among other things, a ban on so-called online hate speech. As you know, the
00:13:14.380 Conservatives a decade ago repealed Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, which the Liberals have talked about reintroducing and
00:13:20.380 tried in the last parliamentary term. Will the Conservatives oppose the reintroduction of these provisions and the
00:13:28.380 Liberals approach to so-called online hate speech? Yes. We will oppose Justin Trudeau's latest attack on freedom of expression.
00:13:38.380 And I want to ask, what does Justin Trudeau mean when he says the word hate speech?
00:13:48.380 He means speech he hates. So, for example, let's go through some of the things he said is hate speech.
00:13:56.380 Jerry Butts, the PMO puppet master, said that it was hate speech to criticize Trudeau for using the ridiculous
00:14:04.380 term people kind, right? Justin Trudeau said anyone who criticized him during the pandemic was engaging in hate speech.
00:14:16.380 Basically, anybody who disagrees with his radical agenda when it comes to kids, he said,
00:14:24.380 his hate speech. He attacked Muslim parents who are protesting against his agenda. Is he going to criminalize
00:14:32.380 those Muslim parents for protecting their children in schools? Go down the list of things that Justin Trudeau disapproves of,
00:14:42.380 and you can imagine all of the things that will be criminalized. Then there becomes the question of who is going to be in charge of determining what is hate speech?
00:14:53.380 What is hate speech? Recently, a school board in Ontario banned Anne Frank's books, okay?
00:15:01.380 So would that be considered hate speech under Justin Trudeau's woke authoritarian agenda? I think it would.
00:15:10.380 So anyone who thinks that speech they don't like is going to be criminalized and therefore the bill should be supported,
00:15:18.380 those people should go through the list of their own thoughts that Justin Trudeau considers to be unacceptable views.
00:15:27.380 And you can assume that he will ban all of that as well.
00:15:30.380 And I know there is an interdepartmental briefing note from Public Safety on the Online Harms Act.
00:15:36.380 I know it exists because evidence of it was posted online. And that briefing note, I know, is dated from December 2023.
00:15:44.380 So it's relatively recent. It's the briefing note on the piece of legislation Justin Trudeau was just talking about.
00:15:54.380 So I filed to get access to that briefing note, which I know exists.
00:15:58.380 It's a very recent briefing note on a piece of legislation the liberals won't shut up about.
00:16:02.380 They keep talking and talking and talking about the Online Harms Act.
00:16:05.380 The liberals have even proposed it more than once, as I explained.
00:16:09.380 And it died when the election was called.
00:16:11.380 So there's nothing in here that is some sort of state secret, right?
00:16:15.380 But that's exactly what the government just told me.
00:16:19.380 They can't give it to me.
00:16:21.380 They told me this briefing note is protected under cabinet secrecy.
00:16:25.380 Which is odd.
00:16:27.380 Because overnight, they released the information in the briefing note to City TV.
00:16:33.380 Here's City TV's story on what was most certainly contained in the document that the government told me was so secret I couldn't have it.
00:16:41.380 The news article describes the creation of an internet regulator, which would specifically field complaints from the public who want to shut up the rest of us.
00:16:51.380 This is from their article on the information from my briefing note.
00:16:55.380 The federal government's evolving plan to help protect Canadians from online harm could include a new ombudsman to field public concerns and a regulator that would oversee the conduct of internet platforms.
00:17:09.380 The proposed regulator would have a mandate to ensure online giants comply with federal law, the official said.
00:17:15.380 The government is also planning to establish a new ombudsman whose job would be to field concerns from ordinary Canadians.
00:17:23.380 Sure, sure.
00:17:24.380 Who encounter problematic material or scenarios online.
00:17:30.380 Read hurt feelings.
00:17:32.380 Now, for his part, Justin Trudeau says this law is just about protecting kids from what they see online.
00:17:38.380 Or at least that's what he said today when he was in Edmonton.
00:17:42.380 Why do you think the online harms bill is necessary and why can't people be allowed to say what they want online?
00:17:48.380 First of all, we know and everyone can agree that kids are vulnerable online to hatred, to violence, to being bullied, to seeing and being affected by terrible things online.
00:18:06.380 We need to do a better job as a society of protecting our kids online the way we protect them in schoolyards, in our communities, in our homes across the country.
00:18:17.380 We need to make sure, and I think we can all agree, we need to protect our kids online.
00:18:22.380 Now, how to go about doing that is a very careful balance.
00:18:27.380 We need to make sure we're protecting freedom of expression.
00:18:30.380 We need to make sure we're protecting the freedoms and the rights of Canadians while we protect kids.
00:18:36.380 That's why we've spent years working with different community groups, with advocates, with minority communities, with experts, with people in all sorts of different backgrounds to make sure that what we're doing is actually protecting kids.
00:18:50.380 And I look forward to putting forward that online harms bill, which people will see is very, very specifically focused on protecting kids and not on censoring the internet as misinformation and as the right wing tends to try and characterize it as.
00:19:09.380 I think everyone, wherever they are on the political spectrum, can agree that protecting kids is something governments should be focused on doing.
00:19:17.380 But then why are his own officials confirming to city that it's going to be much more than just about protecting kids online?
00:19:25.380 It's going to be about encountering problematic material or scenarios online as if that couldn't get any vaguer.
00:19:35.380 And the Liberals' own website indicates that the Online Harms Act will target hate, terrorism, and I think probably hurt feelings.
00:19:46.380 So is Trudeau an idiot, or is he lying to us, or is there really no difference at the end of the day?
00:19:52.380 I think it might be a difference without a distinction.
00:19:55.380 And in the end, Canadians will be less free.
00:19:58.380 Stay with us.
00:19:59.380 We've got a special video from boss man Ezra Levant from the courthouse at Lethbridge, Alberta.
00:20:04.380 Ezra Levant here.
00:20:17.380 I'm at the courthouse in Lethbridge, a different part of the building because it's a little bit noisy out front where I normally stand.
00:20:23.380 I've been inside the court all morning.
00:20:26.380 We are in the pre-trial hearings for the trial of the Coutts IV.
00:20:30.380 Those are four men charged with very serious offenses emanating from the trucker blockade at the Coutts border crossing in 2022.
00:20:37.380 A couple of weeks ago, as you know, two of the men pled guilty to relatively minor charges.
00:20:41.380 There are two men who are proceeding to trial.
00:20:44.380 The subject matter of these preliminary hearings today is an application by the defendants to have the judge throw out the search warrant, or more to the point, the fruits of that search warrant, what they found when they executed the search warrant.
00:20:58.380 So, all day yesterday and this morning today, the defendants' lawyers were arguing that the information to obtain that search warrant was not proper, and that even if the search warrant itself was properly obtained, it was not properly executed.
00:21:13.380 There was a lot of talk about case law and a lot of talk about things that unfortunately I can't describe because they're subject to a publication ban.
00:21:22.380 Details that the defendants claim were inappropriately addressed by the police.
00:21:29.380 Let me just leave it that way.
00:21:31.380 This information will likely come out either if the court throws out the search warrant or if it proceeds to trial and the evidence brought out by the search warrant is allowed in.
00:21:42.380 It's difficult being in court hearing details, some of which are fascinating, some of which are a little bit shocking, some of which are frankly a little bit salacious,
00:21:52.380 and not being able to talk about them simply because to do so, you can understand, could prejudice the trial before it happens because these are just untested accusations by the police.
00:22:03.380 But that said, the judge was very attentive and there was one police officer who signed the information to obtain.
00:22:11.380 He's called an affiant.
00:22:12.380 That's a legal term, the person who swears, this is true.
00:22:15.380 It was interesting, he was an RCMP officer based in Calgary.
00:22:18.380 It was interesting to hear how the police go about putting together an information to obtain because, of course,
00:22:24.380 there's so many police who were involved with the Cooch blockade, some wearing uniforms, many of them undercover.
00:22:29.380 They had conversations with the accused and then they took notes and they and the process was outlined.
00:22:35.380 It was very interesting.
00:22:37.380 And it was interesting to hear that the affiant's role, the final signer, is sort of like the final check and balance on what the police are going to take to the court.
00:22:44.380 And they claim, and we'll see if the judge agrees, that because the other side is not there, because it's an ex parte hearing, a secret hearing really, because the search warrant is a kind of ambush, you don't want to tell the other side you're doing it in advance.
00:22:57.380 But to go to court, you have to be full and frank and fair, is the phrase they use.
00:23:03.380 You have to say a little bit of the other side of the story.
00:23:06.380 You have to say what the defense would say if they were allowed to be there, because otherwise you're withholding evidence from a judge that would have been useful.
00:23:13.380 So the question is, was the information to obtain fair?
00:23:19.380 Was it a full frank and fair summary of the investigation?
00:23:24.380 And the search warrant that emanated from that, was it properly executed?
00:23:28.380 The affiant, the cop who gathered it all together and signed it, answered questions in cross-examination for not quite an hour.
00:23:37.380 And frankly, I thought he was very credible.
00:23:39.380 He didn't seem evasive.
00:23:40.380 He was quite candid, including candid about things that may be problems for the prosecutor.
00:23:46.380 Then the prosecutor, Steven Johnson, the same one who's targeted other lockdown dissenters over the years, he vociferously asked the judge to bar questions of the next more senior cop.
00:23:59.380 And after a lengthy back and forth with the judge, the judge ruled, no, we will allow that senior cop to be cross-examined.
00:24:06.380 And there was a feeling in the gallery that this was a good win for the defense because of reasons I can't actually describe, but it could lead to the search warrant or the information to obtain that search warrant being thrown out.
00:24:21.380 And the judge seemed to be taking it seriously.
00:24:24.380 I mean, that's quite a dramatic thing to have a search warrant thrown out and all the fruits of the poison tree, as they say, thrown out with it.
00:24:30.380 If that were to happen, that would throw this case into a great disarray.
00:24:34.380 It could likely mean the staying of proceedings against at least one of the defendants.
00:24:39.380 And even if only one of the defendants is let go, that leaves a single defendant.
00:24:44.380 How do you have a conspiracy charge with one person?
00:24:47.380 These are heavy matters and the judge seems to be attentive to it.
00:24:52.380 I have a frustration because I'm hearing so many things and I can't share them.
00:24:57.380 That's the nature of publication bans, I suppose.
00:25:00.380 And I understand why they're there.
00:25:02.380 So I'm going to stick around this afternoon and listen to the examination of the senior cop.
00:25:06.380 And I want to tell you that we've been talking to our larger Rebel News team.
00:25:10.380 And we're going to assign Robert Krejcik to cover the Cooch 4, the Cooch 3, the various Cooch trials,
00:25:17.380 because Robert's proven himself to be a great trucker lawyer journalist.
00:25:21.380 He's not a lawyer himself, but he's a journalist covering trucker law.
00:25:24.380 He's covered the Tamara Leach case every day in Ottawa, really understanding the beat.
00:25:29.380 And in that case in Ottawa with Tamara Leach, he's really learned firsthand how abusive of the system and how false prosecutions can be.
00:25:38.380 They're certainly putting Tamara Leach through the ringer out there.
00:25:41.380 I think it's an atrocious trial. It's taken many months. It should be a day at most.
00:25:45.380 I think that's excellent training for Robert.
00:25:48.380 And to have him out here in Alberta, I think would be great.
00:25:50.380 I will come out here from time to time, too, of course.
00:25:52.380 I'm very interested in these matters, but I don't think I'm in a position to come to the trial every single day.
00:25:57.380 Luckily, we have Robert, who's done a great job of that.
00:26:00.380 So that's my midday update from here in Lethbridge.
00:26:04.380 I guess I'll leave one more thing, and it's more a personal comment.
00:26:07.380 So there's, as I mentioned, there's a lot of different people in the court.
00:26:11.380 The court has a small courtroom, which nobody likes because that leaves most of the people out in the hallway.
00:26:18.380 They're interested in this case, and the court has assigned a fairly small room to it.
00:26:22.380 If these people feel it's unfair and it just compounds their feeling that the establishment is against them in large and small ways.
00:26:29.380 You know, I chat with people in the hallway in the break, and it's interesting.
00:26:35.380 Obviously, the family is motivated by their love for their family members.
00:26:39.380 And, you know, that is an incontrovertible, immutable love.
00:26:45.380 Even if someone in your family is charged with their crime, you're going to stand by them.
00:26:49.380 You're going to root for them.
00:26:51.380 You're going to say they didn't do it.
00:26:53.380 And that's family. That's what family is for, and friends also.
00:26:57.380 There's also other members in the community a little bit further out from the center of the Bullseye.
00:27:02.380 The center would be their spouse and parents and then their extended family and their friends.
00:27:07.380 But there's other people in the community who are interested too.
00:27:09.380 And the Coutts Four, as they're called, are being touted as a unit.
00:27:17.380 In fact, if you look at the bumper sticker that's on some of the cars here, they talk about the Coutts Four arrested together, defending together.
00:27:25.380 But I've learned over the last few days that it's actually not how it is.
00:27:29.380 Jerry Moran, one of the Coutts Four, never actually was in Coutts, at least not according to the two journalists we had in the blockade the whole time and the lawyers we had there.
00:27:37.380 They say they never saw him there.
00:27:39.380 In fact, he was arrested in his vehicle near Calgary.
00:27:43.380 And he was one of the two who signed a guilty plea.
00:27:47.380 He, in his statement of fact, said he agreed to take guns to the blockade.
00:27:52.380 Now, again, he may have been signing that under duress.
00:27:55.380 If you were in jail for two years, you'd sign pretty much anything, I suppose, to get out.
00:28:01.380 But if he was indeed found with guns, and if he did indeed agree to bring guns to a blockade, what was he thinking?
00:28:09.380 Were you going to have an armed shootout with the RCMP?
00:28:12.380 I mean, the RCMP are better trained or better armed.
00:28:15.380 It's a fool's errand.
00:28:17.380 It's a suicide run.
00:28:18.380 But let's say you're successful and you have a little revolution there with, you know, truckers with muskets or whatever you have, shotguns.
00:28:25.380 You don't think that's going to be crushed by more police or the army or something.
00:28:29.380 What's the game plan there to smuggle, to agree to smuggle firearms to a peaceful blockade?
00:28:37.380 What you're doing is you're sentencing anyone who touches those to harsh police consequences or prosecutorial consequences.
00:28:46.380 And indeed, that's what happened.
00:28:48.380 And if you were successful, God forbid, for arming these men, to what end?
00:28:55.380 Would they be slaughtered?
00:28:56.380 God forbid.
00:28:57.380 Or would the police be slaughtered?
00:28:58.380 God forbid.
00:28:59.380 And more to the point of the protest, the strength of the protest was its moral cleanliness, was its moral high ground, that these were peaceful protesters engaging in civil disobedience.
00:29:10.380 There was no violence.
00:29:11.380 That was the whole success of it.
00:29:13.380 What kind of a man would agree to bring guns to a peaceful protest that, by the way, was surrounded by cops?
00:29:21.380 And so you don't have to say that Jerry Moran deserved two years in prison.
00:29:25.380 I don't think he did.
00:29:26.380 And you don't have to say that Jerry Moran wasn't overcharged.
00:29:29.380 I think he was.
00:29:30.380 But I think part of something I've detected here is that in the solidarity for the men and the opposition to the overcharging, there's a celebration of things that, frankly, aren't good.
00:29:41.380 That's the reason why Rebel News was very cautious two years ago about crowdfunding these very serious charges.
00:29:48.380 As you know, this week I decided, after meeting with Chris Carbert, one of the four accused, that we were going to crowdfund his case but keep it a separate crowdfund so that people who only want to defend civil liberties battles don't chip into it.
00:30:00.380 But if you want to help Chris, go to helpchris.ca.
00:30:03.380 But there are other things I heard that I'm not at liberty to say because of the publication ban.
00:30:07.380 These four men are not a unit.
00:30:09.380 These four men don't have the same case against them.
00:30:12.380 In fact, these four men are, in some cases, facing different charges.
00:30:15.380 And they're called the Coots Four because there's four of them.
00:30:19.380 There's also the Coots Three and the Coots Five.
00:30:21.380 There's 55 men altogether that I know of that Rebel News and the Democracy Fund are defending, plus others.
00:30:29.380 It's close to 60.
00:30:32.380 But they're not a unit.
00:30:34.380 But because people were so supportive of the blockade and so opposed to the lockdowns and so appalled by the overreach of the prosecution and the police,
00:30:43.380 they sort of lumped together all four men as heroes.
00:30:46.380 I don't think they are.
00:30:48.380 They're not saints.
00:30:49.380 I don't think it's saintly to say, I agree to bring guns to a police standoff.
00:30:54.380 I think that's very serious.
00:30:55.380 And I'm not saying Jerry Moran deserved two years in prison for that.
00:30:59.380 But I'm saying he's, if indeed he did do that, and he said he did, that's not a saint.
00:31:04.380 Anyone who brings guns to a blockade surrounded by police is looking to escalate things,
00:31:11.380 perhaps is even an agent provocateur.
00:31:14.380 So Rebel News is going to continue to cover this trial with great interest, and we're going to follow the facts wherever they lead.
00:31:20.380 And I hope that the two remaining accused are acquitted, not because I have a personal affection for them, but because I hope they didn't do it.
00:31:28.380 And I hope that the police overcharge and the prosecutorial overcharge is revealed.
00:31:36.380 But we will follow the facts wherever they lead, and I think that there are some activities that I've heard about directly in court
00:31:43.380 and that we now know because of the two plea deals that are not salutary.
00:31:48.380 Rebel News believes in peaceful protest, in civil disobedience, in minor offenses like mischief.
00:31:57.380 We don't believe in doing those things, but if someone like Tamara Leach is charged with mischief, which is technically a crime,
00:32:02.380 of course we're going to defend her, because that's just what police are throwing anything in the walls to make it sick.
00:32:07.380 Of course we're going to help people like that.
00:32:10.380 But people who say, yes, I agree to bring guns to an armed standoff, no.
00:32:14.380 And I sort of wish that the people who are so passionate in the courtroom there,
00:32:19.380 that they just can't bring themselves to say it was wrong to agree to bring guns to a standoff with police.
00:32:27.380 I think they need to give their head a shake. I think they've gone too down the rabbit hole, too far down.
00:32:32.380 I guess that's my remarks for today.
00:32:37.380 We will hear the senior officer cross-examine later today.
00:32:42.380 But again, I really won't be able to say much of it.
00:32:45.380 That's my report from here. This is a terrible thing.
00:32:48.380 And this is the residue of the worst thing that's happened in a generation.
00:32:53.380 The pandemic wasn't the worst thing that happened in a generation.
00:32:56.380 The pandemic was a bad flu season in terms of its mortality.
00:33:00.380 The lockdowns and the authoritarianism and the abuse of policing and the outrageous health orders.
00:33:07.380 You can only have so many people at your funeral or your wedding.
00:33:10.380 Only so many people over to your house for Christmas dinner.
00:33:12.380 That was the worst thing that happened to us in a quarter century or more.
00:33:17.380 And this trial and the fact that men have been in jail for years and the fact that many more are being put through the legal process.
00:33:26.380 That is the ugly legacy of the lockdowns in Alberta and around the country.
00:33:31.380 And by the way, in Alberta, they were amongst the most punitive.
00:33:35.380 For all of my reports, go to truckertrial.com.
00:33:41.380 It's 2.20pm, but the court is done.
00:33:45.380 Here in Lethbridge, Alberta, the pretrial hearings for the Cooch 4 were suddenly adjourned when a senior police witness failed to show up.
00:33:53.380 The reason the police officer was required is because the defendant lawyers were going to cross-examine this senior officer about the information to obtain a search warrant that was sworn by police two years ago.
00:34:07.380 The defendants are challenging the validity of the search warrant and the way it was executed.
00:34:12.380 They had the judge's agreement to cross-examine the senior officer who simply didn't show up.
00:34:19.380 Maybe they'll be there tomorrow morning when the court resumes at 9am.
00:34:22.380 Until then, well, another busy half-day of work at the courthouse here in Lethbridge.
00:34:28.380 For all of our coverage on the Cooch 4, the Cooch 3, the Cooch 5, and all other blockade and Cooch-oriented coverage, go to truckertrial.com.
00:34:42.380 Well, friends, letters, letters, letters.
00:34:52.380 We get your letters, questions, and comments every single day of the week on every single thing that we do.
00:34:57.380 And we love that because without you, there is no Rebel News.
00:35:01.380 We're not like the mainstream media where, you know, even though they don't have any consumers of their content because they make something nobody wants and nobody trusts them anyway, they just get money from Justin Trudeau, which is your money, by the way,
00:35:17.380 to continue to make things and do things and say things that you don't trust and don't care about.
00:35:23.380 It's just a vicious cycle watching the entire media landscape flush itself down the toilet.
00:35:30.380 They're just circling the drain.
00:35:32.380 Anyway, it's all like that here at Rebel News.
00:35:34.380 In fact, we just had our ninth birthday.
00:35:36.380 So, I know I said it then, but I'll say it now.
00:35:40.380 Thank you for these last nine years for the company and eight and a half for me, allowing us to tell the stories that nobody else will and help the people sometimes that nobody else will.
00:35:56.380 I feel like I work at a job where I make a difference.
00:35:59.380 But this is the letter section, not a therapy session for me.
00:36:05.380 And so I want to hear from you.
00:36:07.380 And we've got some really great responses to Ezra's sit down interview with Lawrence Greenspawn.
00:36:13.380 Now, that is Tamara Leach's lawyer.
00:36:17.380 For those of you who don't know, and I don't know how you possibly couldn't.
00:36:20.380 Tamara Leach is the spiritual and, I guess, operational leader of the Freedom Convoy,
00:36:26.380 which I describe quite accurately as the single largest human rights demonstration in Canadian history.
00:36:34.380 And it was entirely peaceful until violence at the hands of the state was used against the participants of the Freedom Convoy and financial violence as well.
00:36:45.380 People who donated or supported the convoy in a financial way.
00:36:50.380 They had their bank accounts frozen for political reasons.
00:36:55.380 And as we know, with the case of Farm Credit Canada, the government's bank for the agricultural sector, people were denied financing.
00:37:07.380 And they never really knew why.
00:37:09.380 Well, we know why now.
00:37:10.380 And it was because they had shown some sort of support for the Freedom Convoy.
00:37:16.380 And so maybe they didn't get their combine.
00:37:19.380 Maybe they didn't get their financing.
00:37:22.380 Or maybe they lost their farm.
00:37:24.380 But I guess it's all the same to Justin Trudeau if you get to punish your political enemies.
00:37:29.380 And Lawrence talked to Ezra about the state of Canada's civil liberties, which I think not great, but we've had some wins these days.
00:37:40.380 And the latest on the ongoing trial of Freedom Convoy leader Tamara Leach, you have to remember, this woman is charged with non-violent mischief charges.
00:37:51.380 If, like, in another life, with a more sane government, she would never have seen the inside of a jail cell.
00:38:00.380 And instead, she spent up to 50 days inside of a jail cell.
00:38:05.380 And if she were convicted tomorrow, they would never give her jail time.
00:38:09.380 She is a non-violent person and not a criminal.
00:38:12.380 But anyway, 50 days in jail and the process ultimately is the punishment.
00:38:19.380 Justin Blackface Trudeau.
00:38:22.380 I'm pretty sure that's not the real Justin Blackface Trudeau.
00:38:25.380 He writes, Lawrence Greenspawn is one of the best defense lawyers ever in Ottawa.
00:38:29.380 Tamara is in good hands.
00:38:31.380 She is in good hands.
00:38:32.380 But that is thanks in part, again, to you at home.
00:38:36.380 Tamara is represented by the Democracy Fund, which is, I think, quite possibly Canada's largest civil liberties charity.
00:38:46.380 It grew out of the Fight the Fines initiative here at Rebel News, where we decided to help anybody, regardless of their political leanings if they got a lockdown ticket.
00:38:58.380 And then it grew and grew and took on a civil liberties mandate.
00:39:02.380 It's representing truckers, farmers, protesters, and Tamara Leach.
00:39:09.380 And the only way that Tamara is able to have not just one of the best defense lawyers in Ottawa, but I think one of the best defense lawyers in the entire country.
00:39:19.380 Lawrence Greenspawn is thanks to you at home who continue to make donations to her legal fund and who continue to make your tax deductible donations to the Democracy Fund.
00:39:32.380 I should tell you, one of the best things that I get to do, and especially during the pandemic, was talk to people who were being helped by the Democracy Fund.
00:39:45.380 And I would see people in the news and hear about people getting tickets, and I would call them up, and I would offer them help.
00:39:55.380 And they would think I was joking.
00:39:57.380 And I'd say to them, no, I want to give you the best lawyer I can find you.
00:40:03.380 And I am going to make sure that they fight your ticket like this is a murder charge.
00:40:08.380 And we'll really spare no expense.
00:40:11.380 We'll spend thousands of dollars fighting an $800 ticket because it's the right thing to do.
00:40:18.380 And these people thought I was crazy.
00:40:21.380 They just didn't know who this strange lady was calling them up and offering them help.
00:40:26.380 And I got to do that good work, thanks to all of you who donate.
00:40:33.380 So, I mean, people, they thanked me, but really the thanks is yours.
00:40:38.380 So, good job out there.
00:40:40.380 Mr. Andrew Skinner writes on the same interview,
00:40:44.380 What about the police who acted on the unlawful unconstitutional order?
00:40:49.380 Serious question.
00:40:50.380 So, that is the invocation of the Emergencies Act.
00:40:53.380 It was recently just ruled unconstitutional and illegal.
00:40:58.380 And I think the police were acting on the information before them.
00:41:04.380 I mean, there are some bad cops.
00:41:06.380 I think they're just cops in general are pretty good guys.
00:41:10.380 They didn't get into the business, as they say, to go around arresting people trying to have Christmas or beat up protesters.
00:41:17.380 Some of them, some of them do.
00:41:19.380 Some of them, I think in every career, there are people who love power and to wield their power over others.
00:41:27.380 And those are the kind of cops who shoot journalists in the leg with a riot control gun.
00:41:32.380 But I think by and large, a lot of those cops were acting on an order they thought was lawful.
00:41:41.380 But you know who knew that order would never be held up as lawful?
00:41:45.380 The politicians who invoked it.
00:41:47.380 The cackling Chrystia Freeland's of the world.
00:41:50.380 The Justin Trudeau's.
00:41:52.380 The David Lamedi's.
00:41:54.380 The Bill Blair's.
00:41:57.380 The Marco Mendicino's.
00:41:59.380 All of them with their dirty, grimy little civil liberties disrespecting fingers all over the actions that unfolded when the government used what is generally a 9-11 Pearl Harbor level event piece of legislation on horn hawking and street parties.
00:42:24.380 All of them, they knew that what they were doing would not rise the standards in the law.
00:42:31.380 But they did it anyway.
00:42:32.380 Because for them, it was a 9-11 level event that the blue collars were uprising and they couldn't have it.
00:42:40.380 It was a working class uprising.
00:42:42.380 And for them, that was a 9-11 level crisis that they just couldn't handle.
00:42:50.380 And so, yeah, I mean, there are cops that acted unlawfully and, you know, we're doing our best to take care of, take care of them.
00:43:01.380 And make sure that they face consequences for their actions.
00:43:06.380 But it's the politicians.
00:43:08.380 They knew that the Freedom Convoy did not rise to the level of a national security level event that local authorities did not have the tools to deal with.
00:43:21.380 And they invoked it anyway.
00:43:22.380 And they invoked it anyway.
00:43:24.380 They are the ones who should be held responsible.
00:43:27.380 And I think many of them, many of them probably, are going to be held responsible at the ballot box when Justin Trudeau faces, I think, a Kim Campbell-style blowout at the next election, if the NDP ever let that happen.
00:43:42.380 Well, everybody, that's the show for tonight.
00:43:44.380 Thank you so much for tuning in.
00:43:46.380 I'll see everybody, well, on my show next Wednesday.
00:43:51.380 And I think Ezra's back in the chair tomorrow, I believe.
00:43:55.380 If not, we'll always have a show for you.
00:43:57.380 Don't you worry.
00:43:58.380 And as Ezra always says, keep fighting for freedom.
00:44:02.380 Don't be there.
00:44:04.380 Don't be there.
00:44:07.380 See you later.
00:44:08.380 We'll see you later.
00:44:09.380 Bye-bye.
00:44:10.380 Bye-bye.
00:44:12.380 Bye-bye.