Justin Trudeau and Jagmeet Singh don't support the freedom to draw Mohammed
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
169.34096
Summary
Justin Trudeau and Jagmeet Singh make it clear they do not support freedom of expression. It means drawing an image of the Muslim prophet Mohammed. Why would they do that? Ezra Levant explains why they refuse to speak on the matter.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Hello, my friends. Yesterday, Jagmeet Singh and Justin Trudeau refused to say that they support
00:00:05.380
the human right, the civil right, the charter right, to draw a cartoon of Mohammed. Why wouldn't
00:00:11.540
they say that? I'll read to you from the only news report of their refusal, the only news report in
00:00:19.540
the country. That's ahead. But before, can I invite you to become a Rebel News Plus subscriber? It's
00:00:24.900
only eight bucks a month or 80 bucks for the whole year. Just go to rebelnews.com, click on
00:00:28.720
subscribe. You get the video version of the podcast, plus, well, that's how we pay the bills
00:00:34.540
around here, folks. So it makes a real difference. 80 bucks for the whole year. Go to rebelnews.com,
00:00:40.660
Tonight, Justin Trudeau and Jagmeet Singh make it clear they do not support freedom of expression.
00:01:01.480
It means drawing an image of Mohammed. It's October 30th, and this is the Ezra Levant Show.
00:01:06.400
Why should others go to jail when you're a biggest carbon consumer I know?
00:01:12.440
There's 8,500 customers here, and you won't give them an answer.
00:01:16.520
The only thing I have to say to the government about why I publish it is because it's my bloody
00:01:22.380
Here's a story from a Quebec newspaper called Le Divoire.
00:01:32.260
Trudeau évite de se prononcer sur le droit de caricaturer Mohammed.
00:01:39.880
What do you think of my French accent? In English, that means Trudeau avoids pronouncing on the
00:01:45.000
rights to caricature Mohammed caricatures and to draw cartoons. Now, I'm going to run this story
00:01:50.580
through Google Translate now so you're not punished by my terrible accent. I'm going to read the Google
00:01:55.240
Translate version. Translation's not perfect, but it works well enough. I just wanted to show you the
00:01:59.900
original French version first. It's written by Helen Bozzetti, who is based in Ottawa, because this one
00:02:08.140
was an exchange in Parliament. Had a press scrum, so there's no excuse why this wasn't in every media
00:02:14.880
outlet across Canada. I mean, there are literally hundreds of accredited journalists who were based
00:02:22.360
in Ottawa, including dozens from the big legacy media like CBC and CTV, and none of them covered
00:02:27.940
this. We would have, but we'd been banned from the Parliamentary Press Gallery. China's state
00:02:33.600
broadcaster Xinhua is allowed in, but not us. Our competitors have colluded to ban us. You can see
00:02:40.380
why. Because they prefer if certain stories are not told. Well, Helen Bozzetti apparently didn't
00:02:45.980
get the memo yesterday because she did, in fact, cover the story. Here's what it says, translated
00:02:51.700
from Google, by Google from French. While a new Islamist, that's a word you don't see in English
00:02:58.360
papers, while a new Islamist attack afflicts France, federal politicians are reluctant to call the right
00:03:05.140
for anyone to caricature the Muslim prophet Mohammed. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has avoided answering
00:03:10.300
the question, while the leader of the NDP believes that we must avoid unnecessarily fueling hatred.
00:03:17.380
There's a lot of words in there you would never see in an English language newspaper. Good for Helen
00:03:22.040
Bozzetti for saying those things. In French, though, in Quebec only, because Quebec is actually less
00:03:27.300
politically correct about Islam. They take their culture more seriously since they're worried about
00:03:33.760
the French-Canadian culture melting away in North America. So they fight for their French-Canadian
00:03:38.840
culture, their history, their language, their norms, which includes very particular thoughts about
00:03:44.540
religion and secularism. And then, of course, the recent attacks in France have been in France.
00:03:50.360
And likely everyone in Quebec has watched the French news in their native tongue. So the opposite of
00:03:56.940
the cowardly English-Canadian press gallery. I'll read some more.
00:04:00.280
The Nice attack, which resulted in three deaths, was carried out Thursday morning by a young man
00:04:07.020
shouting, Allahu Akbar! It is still unclear for the moment whether, as in the case of the beheading of
00:04:11.960
Samuel Patti, the gesture was made in response to the publication of cartoons of Mohammed, which became
00:04:17.560
relevant again with the ongoing trial of the supporters of the attack on Charlie Hebdo. But the question was
00:04:23.060
nonetheless put to Mr. Trudeau and Jagmeet Singh, should we, in the name of Western values, publicly
00:04:28.200
assert that it is permissible to make fun of religion, including caricaturing Mohammed?
00:04:33.740
There's a lot of fair questions in there. Obvious questions to me, which is why it's so surprising
00:04:39.080
that any Canadian journalist would ask them. Good for her, I say again. And look at this. Look at the
00:04:44.320
boldness of this next line. Asked three times, Jagmeet Singh refused to answer directly. The NDP
00:04:52.660
leader has repeatedly reiterated his faith in free speech, while adding that we should not
00:04:58.640
attack others unnecessarily. You have to stand up for freedom of expression, even if you don't agree
00:05:04.500
with someone, Singh said. But, hang on, there's no but after that, but he added one. But also,
00:05:11.040
if we want to have peace in society, we must also recognize that the freedom to express our thoughts
00:05:16.960
is not a freedom to expressly create divisions and hatred, he added. That there are limits to
00:05:23.980
expressing hatred or promoting hatred towards others. It is a limit that we have accepted as a
00:05:28.400
society, because it is important for living together. Well, hang on, hang on, hang on. Which is it?
00:05:34.160
Do we have free expression or not? Or only if you don't create divisions. Isn't every
00:05:40.900
decision in life a division? Isn't every controversy a division? I mean, do we have separation of mosque
00:05:47.080
and state or not? It's a yes or no. Are we allowed to draw pictures of Jesus and to mock him? Yes or no?
00:05:54.280
There's no maybe. How about for Mohammed? These are yes or no questions. In parliament, a vote is called
00:06:00.540
calling for a division. It's what democracy is built on. That's why we have elections. So we can talk
00:06:06.980
about things, according to Jack Mead Singh, but nothing divisive. That means we can talk about
00:06:11.960
nothing. And why can't you hate a religion, if we're going to use the word hate? I don't recommend
00:06:18.800
hate. I don't prescribe hate. But if someone feels that human emotion, why can't they feel that way?
00:06:26.160
And why can't they express it peacefully? But why can't they express their emotion? A religion
00:06:30.920
might have a rule that you cannot criticize that religion. All right. I would say that's not a very
00:06:36.500
robust faith, I must say, but fine. But how is that internal rule of Islam applicable to the rest of
00:06:42.840
us who are not Muslim? If you want to be Muslim or Jewish or Christian or Sikh or Buddhist or a
00:06:47.720
Scientologist or a vegetarian, help yourself. But why should the rest of us have to follow your particular
00:06:53.240
group's rules too? I'll read some more. Mr. Singh stressed that it was difficult for him to measure
00:06:59.200
the impact of a cartoon of Mohammed since he is not a Muslim. But I can say that it is essential
00:07:04.340
to find a way to achieve our ultimate goal of living together. Well, there are various ways to
00:07:08.680
live together. One is as equals, peacefully under a common rule of law. There's other ways too. I mean,
00:07:15.420
under Sharia law, it is true even infidels can live under Islamic Sharia law if they agree to submit to
00:07:24.280
Islam and abide by certain strictures. For example, to pay an infidel tax called the Jazeera. I visited
00:07:31.760
Bethlehem. For centuries, they were allowed to have Christians in Bethlehem. They just had to live under
00:07:39.080
the laws of Islam. Absolutely, Islam allows Jews and Christians to still live there. You just wouldn't
00:07:44.780
want to live that way. Just like prison wardens and prisoners have found a way to live together. Yeah,
00:07:49.380
it's just not equalism. Secular Muslims disagree with the stabbers. Secular Muslims, of whom there
00:07:56.140
are many in France and many in Quebec, despise this cowardice in the face of terrorists and Islamists.
00:08:01.180
But Singh and Trudeau are practiced at caving into the most extreme elements and ignoring the modern
00:08:08.200
elements. Let me read some more. Mr. Trudeau was even more evasive in limiting himself to condemning
00:08:13.800
the French attack. He did not say a word about the freedom to caricature. Quote,
00:08:18.280
we absolutely condemn these heinous, unacceptable terrorist attacks. There is absolutely nothing to
00:08:22.120
justify this violence. It is unjustifiable. We stand by all the French people, said the Prime
00:08:26.860
Minister. He added that it was necessary, however, at the same time, quote, to recognize that these
00:08:31.040
criminals, these terrorists, these murderers do not in any way represent Islam or Muslims. Okay, got it.
00:08:36.220
So he'll say the murderers don't reflect Islam. He'll say that. They say they do. They shout
00:08:43.620
ala Akbar when they commit the murders. As I told you the other day, the local mosque
00:08:48.180
actually organized a protest against the school where the cartoons had been shown. The imam at that
00:08:53.960
local mosque actually texted back and forth with the murderer of the school teacher. But sure,
00:08:58.740
noted Quranic scholar Justin Trudeau says that these have nothing to do with Islam, got it. And he would
00:09:04.000
know. But if that is true, then why doesn't he stand up for the right to draw Muhammad cartoons,
00:09:08.060
since he disavows those who claim it's a crime deserving of execution? If you say that Islam does
00:09:15.600
not kill infidels, why are you not willing to say that freedom of speech includes drawing cartoons of
00:09:22.340
Muhammad? We are banned from these press conferences because we would ask questions about freedom of
00:09:27.800
speech from that freedom of speech point of view. No other media there did so. I give credit to the
00:09:32.160
Quebec reporters who asked these questions and to Helen Bozzetti who noted the invasiveness. But
00:09:36.340
where's the CBC state broadcaster? Where's CTV Global? Where's the Globe and Mail? Where's the
00:09:42.860
Toronto Star? Where's the National Post? Do they find it uninteresting that Trudeau and Singh won't
00:09:48.240
defend the right to mock Islam or to caricature Muhammad? I mean, you don't have to recommend
00:09:53.120
mocking or caricaturing to defend the right to do so. I mean, how about this for an answer?
00:09:59.840
We want to live in harmony. We want to respect each other and our religious faiths. But part of being in a
00:10:05.220
liberal, pluralistic democracy is that we permit criticism of any ideas, including religions.
00:10:10.840
How about saying that? Just say that. Is it not true anymore? And for Justin Trudeau to be such a
00:10:17.260
coward about it, his own father brought in the Charter of Rights that specifies our fundamental
00:10:21.560
freedoms. So important, they give them their own special section in the Charter called Fundamental
00:10:25.660
Freedoms. It's brief. I'm going to read it. I know Justin Trudeau has never read this. Let me read it for him.
00:10:30.620
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms. A, freedom of conscience and religion. B, freedom of
00:10:37.500
thought, belief, opinion, and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication.
00:10:42.220
C, freedom of peaceful assembly. And D, freedom of association. That pretty much covers it.
00:10:48.760
How about you say, as my dad said, Charter of Rights and Freedoms, free... How about you say that?
00:10:53.760
Well, there's no such thing in the Charter there. I just read it to you. There's no such freedom of
00:11:00.160
expression with respect, as our disgraceful foreign minister said the other day in that tweet that
00:11:07.620
Canada supports freedom of expression with respect. You have to have that respect for it. If you don't
00:11:12.520
respect someone, then they can stab you or bomb you. That's the Islamist way. That's the Chinese
00:11:18.200
Communist Party way that Francois-Philippe Champagne believes in. But that's not the way of Canada.
00:11:22.600
It's not the way of the Charter of Rights. It's not Pierre Trudeau's way, but it's Justin Trudeau's
00:11:27.480
way, and it's Jagmeet Singh's way. And it's the way of 99% of the media party. I'm worried that it'll
00:11:37.180
Welcome back. Well, of course, we're Canadians, and we think about Canadian things. But what the
00:11:53.940
United States says and does has a disproportionate impact on us. America is the world's leading nation,
00:12:00.360
certainly the beacon of freedom and democracy. And we have the luck of being their next-door
00:12:05.640
neighbor and closest ally. So, of course, it's going to affect us. But the themes of the U.S.
00:12:11.700
election, a small government, a rule of law, the foreign policy approach, the approach to terrorism,
00:12:22.640
the approach to China, so many of the things that Donald Trump stands for and that the Biden campaign
00:12:28.380
is against, will have an immediate effect on our country. Just to pick one example, whether or not
00:12:34.220
Canada chooses to let Huawei, China's high-tech mega company, set up our 5G. That is one of the things,
00:12:42.380
I believe, one of the many things that will turn on this U.S. election. In some ways, I think this
00:12:49.160
momentous election coming up next week will have more impact on Canadians than even the Canadian election
00:12:58.660
itself. So, we will be live-streaming the election results. I understand that the first results from
00:13:05.160
Florida will come in at 7 p.m. Eastern Time. So, I think we're going to start our live stream about a half hour
00:13:12.580
before that, 6.30 p.m. Eastern Time. That's 4.30 p.m. Mountain Time. And we'll go late. We'll go long.
00:13:21.100
We're making plans to be in this chair for a while because, of course, we want to see what happens in
00:13:27.020
those key early states like Florida. But there are a lot of states in contention. Obviously, California
00:13:33.560
and Hawaii are shoe-ins for the Democrats. But there's a lot of interesting places. We'll have to stay up late.
00:13:39.220
I wonder how Pennsylvania will go. I wonder how Ohio, Wisconsin, and Michigan will go.
00:13:46.300
Well, one of the guests who will be joining us intermittently through the night on Tuesday
00:13:50.700
is our friend Ben Weingarten, who's a fellow at the Claremont Institute, has written variously
00:13:57.580
for The Federalist, and in fact has a new piece in Newsweek. He joins us now. Ben, how are you doing?
00:14:05.200
Ezra, I'm well. How about you? And thanks for having me on.
00:14:07.480
Well, it's a pleasure, and I'm very grateful to you for being our go-to U.S. expert that
00:14:14.360
night. We're going to have lots of things we're talking about. We'll bring in the rebel
00:14:17.960
team from Canada. But over the course of the last year, I've come to know your deep command
00:14:24.180
of American politics, not just at the shallow talking points level, but, for example, your
00:14:29.860
book, American Ingrate, about Ilhan Omar and, of course, the state of Minnesota, a place
00:14:34.900
where Donald Trump thinks he can win him. Very interesting election. Give us your thoughts
00:14:40.400
on the lay of the land. Mark Morano yesterday said it's a 50-50, knife's edge for him. What's
00:14:48.440
Yeah, to me, and I don't mean this as a cop-out answer because I think it's still the contrarian
00:14:53.520
answer when you look at where the national polling is and even most of the state polling
00:14:58.820
as well. I think it's a toss-up, and this election rests on a knife's edge, and it's purely going to
00:15:05.360
be a function of intensity and passion leading to turnout. And the reason I say that is I don't think
00:15:13.040
anyone is undecided on these two men. They're two of the most known political officials, one not
00:15:19.520
really, one kind of an anti-political official, but two of the most known quantities possible out
00:15:24.920
there. What they represent are two conflicting worldviews, two conflicting paths for America,
00:15:31.080
frankly, for Western civilization as a whole. I'd even go above and beyond just one representing
00:15:35.920
American values and the other representing a party, which is in hock to those like Ilhan Omar who
00:15:42.360
believe in values that are completely antithetical to them. I think it's civilization versus de-civilization
00:15:47.940
on the ballot. It's more than just two choices. It's an existential election. It's a survival
00:15:54.020
election. And if America is to repudiate its founding values and principles in toto, which
00:16:00.300
is what I think would happen to the extent there was a Democrat sweep, I think it portends
00:16:05.640
terrible things for Western civilization. There's no place to go after America. We can't go north
00:16:10.720
to Canada, and we can't go south to Mexico either. So everything sort of hinges on this. I wish it
00:16:15.680
weren't so. If we were adhering to our founding values and principles, and we were kind of debating
00:16:20.560
over means but not ends, and we agreed on those ends, we'd be in a much better place. Unfortunately,
00:16:26.580
we're not. And Donald Trump is essentially the one man, the single force fighting against what I view
00:16:33.340
as a tyrannical leftist movement that's really revealing itself in these final days where in
00:16:38.220
Washington, D.C. and cities across the country, already in main streets, stores are covering up
00:16:44.480
their storefronts, boarding them up in anticipation of anti-civilizational unrest and riots. And there's
00:16:51.560
a shutdown D.C. movement that plans to do just that in the days following the election. You have
00:16:56.820
essentially dissenting opinions being completely censored on social media and elsewhere, and you
00:17:01.760
have a blackout, and I assume we'll talk about this a bit during this segment, of any information
00:17:07.280
that at all could damage Joe Biden's political trajectory. So these are scary times. I do really
00:17:13.700
believe, though, that it is on a knife's edge. It's going to come down to those few states.
00:17:17.580
As you mentioned, Pennsylvania, for one, it looks like Florida is trending in the president's
00:17:21.600
direction, and those Rust Belt states as well. And we will see where it comes out in Wisconsin
00:17:29.660
Yes, very interesting. You know, you were using very dramatic language, but I think the evidence
00:17:35.520
supports it. I mean, the fact that essential elements of the American democracy, the checks and
00:17:41.200
balances of the Constitution, have all been directly challenged by senior voices in the Democrats,
00:17:47.880
from Biden himself, Nancy Pelosi, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who represents the Red Guards of the movement,
00:17:55.780
challenging the Electoral College, talking about packing the courts. There's so many things,
00:18:03.040
even the idea that votes would be counted up to nine days later, the possibility for total electoral
00:18:09.420
fraud. These are not people who are two happy teams, the blue team and the red team, playing a, you know,
00:18:16.920
a football match, and then they're both going to go home, hey, job well done, I accept the win,
00:18:20.920
I accept the loss. One team is so zealously intent on power that it has effectively said in advance,
00:18:29.000
it will do whatever it takes to win. And the fact that the riots are so palpable in the air,
00:18:37.000
that people are boarding up store windows now, only one side rides. It's not being a summer of
00:18:42.840
discontent where conservatives have been rioting. Conservatives don't riot. That's the left saying,
00:18:49.720
yeah, you're damn straight, we're going to riot.
00:18:52.460
Yeah, and I think something that was underappreciated among many who would call themselves
00:18:57.500
conservatives or Republicans in 2016 was the fact that Trump saw this. He saw the other side and
00:19:04.760
clearly over this three and three quarters years of his tenure thus far, he's seen the fact that the
00:19:11.380
other side wants it all. They want to dominate. They want total power. This isn't about, there was
00:19:17.900
never a transition of power, a peaceful transition of power in any traditional respect. This is a
00:19:23.340
president who's had to fight for every last thing opposed by a bureaucracy that's probably more than 95%
00:19:29.000
at his throat the entire way. And I think that's a representation of where kind of the elite and the
00:19:35.200
political establishment is in America. And they're leading, they're kind of stalking horse in the radical
00:19:41.260
left that is out in the streets. And this kind of woke, big tech, Wall Street alliance that we see,
00:19:48.000
ultimately, they believe that their regime should triumph over our regime in the classical sense.
00:19:55.200
And that's why everyone always says it's the most important election of all time. But in this case, it
00:19:59.440
really is up there because it really is two antithetical worldviews that are competing with each other
00:20:04.860
right now. And again, I think the reason that Trump has been so loathed and hated this entire time is that
00:20:10.360
he's been willing to fight fire with fire in a way that no non-leftist has represented towards the left
00:20:18.520
and the political establishment. And that's why they've tried to destroy him at every turn. And
00:20:21.540
that's why even if after election day, President Trump wins and Republicans hold the Senate and
00:20:25.460
Republicans miraculously took a majority in the house, still the day after they'd be fighting just
00:20:30.420
for survival because the other side is engaged in perpetual political warfare and it's a zero sum game
00:20:36.460
for them. It's all or nothing. And they'll do anything and everything they possibly can within
00:20:40.820
the law and outside the law, ultimately, to triumph over us. Yeah. You make me think of about a year
00:20:46.040
ago, we had an interview with a fellow, I can't remember his name right now. I think he was a
00:20:49.600
historical hydrologist or something who focused on once a century floods. And he was making the case
00:20:58.020
that, you know, once a century floods doesn't mean you have to wait 100 years for it to happen.
00:21:04.100
It's just, it could happen two years in a row, theoretically. And what are the odds of that
00:21:09.300
happening and how it applies to, can you get insurance for your house in a floodplain?
00:21:13.580
He was saying, apply that to political unrest. He says, America has had two once a century floods
00:21:20.360
politically, the Revolutionary War and the Civil War. And he said, what are the odds of a once a
00:21:26.360
century flood happening in your lifetime of an American? And he was trying to make the case that
00:21:32.040
it is a real possibility, not a one in a million never happened thing. And he was making the case
00:21:37.780
for buying a firearm, keep it in your attic. And he was explaining why Silicon Valley billionaires
00:21:42.760
might build a safe room. I got to say, we've had a summer of riots. We've had an attempted soft coup
00:21:53.000
perpetually. I think that historical hydrologist is sort of right. I mean, we saw that couple,
00:22:02.040
I'm trying to remember if it was in St. Louis or where they were, who the mob came up to their house.
00:22:08.940
The mom and dad came out with firearms to protect their house. It was a beautiful house. Maybe you
00:22:14.340
recall the neighborhood I'm talking about. And they were charged with brandishing firearms.
00:22:19.060
We are at that once a century flood that that hydrologist was talking about. I really think so.
00:22:26.280
And my God, bat in the hatches because it's coming.
00:22:29.600
Well, look, we've seen scenes that are reminiscent of at least what's described in texts of the Chinese
00:22:37.500
Maoist cultural revolution, the Bolsheviks and Mensheviks duking it out. And we are living that
00:22:44.360
in America right now. And it's not to say that it's the vast majority that's that way. But certainly
00:22:49.080
those at the commanding heights of society, to keep it in that sort of leftist milieu,
00:22:55.700
those at the commanding heights have completely conceded to this radical movement, either out of
00:23:02.000
cowardice, out of what they perceive to be their own self-interest, or because they're true believers
00:23:07.180
themselves. And unfortunately, I think far too great a percentage are true believers because they've
00:23:11.980
been educated at the schools and indoctrinated in the schools and a culture which has put forth this
00:23:17.380
anti-American, progressive, radically leftist, intersectionalist, we can run through the adjective,
00:23:23.400
worldview. So to your point, look, we've seen images of this in America that are un-American,
00:23:29.500
fundamentally, images. And there have been riots and essentially and looting and criminality run
00:23:36.880
rampant in the past. In the seventies, you had radical leftist movements, and there were dozens
00:23:41.800
of bombings that took place in America among these radicals, many of whom are now on the faculty at
00:23:47.940
universities around the country. But what is fundamentally different today is that you have
00:23:52.940
one party that will not stand up to this sort of thing. What is acceptable for leading Democrats
00:23:58.860
across this country today would have been unacceptable for Democrats a generation ago,
00:24:02.920
maybe even 10 years ago. So the acceleration of that radicalism and what's radical becoming
00:24:08.600
mainstream among the political establishment is something that I do believe, I rarely say
00:24:14.820
unprecedented, but it may be unprecedented where you have just an insurrection on the part of our
00:24:19.720
so-called leaders. So you have a senator in Massachusetts, Ed Markey, who says originalism is
00:24:25.680
sexist, racist, et cetera. This is in context of Amy Comey Barrett, the Supreme Court nomination,
00:24:32.260
fight. When you have someone in the U.S. Senate saying that basically originalism, the founding
00:24:38.120
ideology, what undergirds our constitution or declaration of independence and the like
00:24:43.360
is an inherently evil and immoral sort of philosophy, that means you have people in the
00:24:48.700
Senate who are rejecting the very institution they serve. And that's where we are in America
00:24:52.600
today. And you can't long survive if the representatives of half the country are putting forth a view that
00:24:57.620
seeks to take the country down. Yeah. You know, I think there are people who ideologically want to
00:25:03.060
undermine America from within, but I think they've actually been aided by forces from without
00:25:08.520
Yuri Bezmenov, the Cold War defector from the Soviet Union to Canada actually did a video series and you can
00:25:15.960
see it on YouTube. It's everywhere about how you demoralize the country and you can make it right for
00:25:21.880
this sort of upheaval. That can happen internally, but I think, and of course the Democrats say, oh,
00:25:28.980
Russia, Russia, Russia. Well, I think there actually is a huge interest in China to, if not undermine
00:25:36.820
America, at least to tame it and stop it from pushing back on China's ascendancy militarily,
00:25:43.540
economically, commercially, in terms of cybersecurity. And I want to bring in your essay
00:25:48.560
in Newsweek magazine. I'm impressed that you were published there. The headline of your piece is
00:25:53.960
Joe Biden clinched communist China's vote in the final debate. And I think that's a foreign affairs
00:26:02.880
and sort of an espionage and great game story, but it's also very much a domestic story too.
00:26:09.440
China doesn't just want to push us aside militarily. They don't want us to block their dumped goods.
00:26:18.140
They don't want us to block their tech. They don't want our factories reshored
00:26:22.600
in North America. They want to keep things going just perfectly as they have been over the last 20
00:26:29.740
years. I think China is a very real foreign and domestic threat, the likes of which maybe America
00:26:36.560
has never seen. Maybe there's a lot of foreign threats, but that same country being a foreign and
00:26:40.860
domestic threat. This feels new. Let me make three quick points. The first is that the greatest
00:26:48.060
beneficiary of Russia, Russia, Russia, besides the Democratic Party who has put forth this narrative
00:26:54.420
that our president is compromised by the Russians on the basis of absurd allegations that have been
00:27:00.380
totally debunked while similar allegations on the other side are ignored. The biggest beneficiary of that
00:27:05.160
is China, which is far richer, stronger, and more powerful than Russia. So all the focus on Russia has
00:27:11.540
diminished our resources and turned our attention away from the far greater immediate, medium-term and long-term
00:27:17.760
threat, which is communist China. Number two, in terms of the kind of domestic impact of this unrest and the
00:27:25.500
foreign relation to it, the entire basis, at least stated basis, of U.S.-China relations and integration,
00:27:34.040
accommodation, and what I would describe as appeasement over the decades, once we got past
00:27:39.720
the throes of the Cold War, was that economic integration and liberalization would lead to
00:27:45.800
political liberalization, social liberalization, and essentially peace, a kumbaya sort of world
00:27:51.620
between the U.S. and China. The fact of the matter is that the U.S. has become more like China than
00:27:56.480
China has become like us. And so when we talk about the censorship of big tech and we talk about state
00:28:03.380
media and control of the narrative and what is acceptable, what we're seeing in America today
00:28:08.860
scarily resembles what we have in China, where there is one media, there is one party line,
00:28:15.960
and if you run afoul of it, your life could literally be in danger there. Thankfully, we're not here yet,
00:28:20.340
but then you have people taking it into their own hands to try to force their views on Americans today.
00:28:25.220
Number three, Joe Biden is someone who supported that political establishment project agenda of
00:28:32.040
integration and appeasement and accommodation for decades at every single level from his perch as
00:28:38.240
the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, as a ranking member there, and then as a vice
00:28:44.020
president where he was responsible for the China portfolio. And at every turn, Joe Biden supported
00:28:49.780
China's rise. He said it wouldn't be a disaster for the American middle class and particularly our
00:28:55.680
manufacturing and industry. He said that China's rise would be a benefit to the American economy.
00:29:01.380
He said, and there are direct quotes of this, that China had repudiated communism and rejected it and
00:29:07.000
admitted it was a failure, essentially, when it came to granting China permanent normalized trade
00:29:12.580
relations and then most favored nation status, which ultimately created a glide path to China,
00:29:17.580
China's accession to the World Trade Organization, which was the rocket fuel for its rise over the
00:29:23.020
last couple of decades. At every turn, Joe Biden has been an appeaser, in effect, an aider and a
00:29:28.700
better of the Chinese Communist Party's rise. And he's even said it's a good thing. It's a positive thing
00:29:33.660
as recently as beyond 2010. And then, of course, in 2019, he said China isn't real competition for us.
00:29:40.540
He said, come on, man, which is what he always says. So what I suggest is that in the last debate,
00:29:46.680
Joe Biden went back to this hobby horse of China and in several ways essentially said his
00:29:52.440
administration would return to that untenable status quo that has put the world in a position
00:29:57.240
where China really could be the sole superpower and we could be its tribute states, its vassals,
00:30:04.400
essentially. And Joe Biden's been the vessel of China's rise at the top purchase of the U.S.
00:30:12.920
federal government. And in that last debate, he proved it in several ways, which we can walk
00:30:17.720
through. But the fact of the matter is he would be a minister for the country. And that's before we
00:30:23.720
even get into his family's dealings with communist China-linked individuals and entities, which in
00:30:28.280
and of themselves compromised Joe Biden. Yeah. You know, I see news that the second Chinese aircraft
00:30:34.040
carrier claims to be operational and why should we doubt it? I think the U.S. Navy is still
00:30:41.240
qualitatively superior to China's. But I don't know how long I would say that. I mean, they used to be
00:30:48.280
flying old, junky versions of MiGs. Now they've basically stolen the tech and have replicated F-22s and
00:30:57.640
perhaps soon F-35s. I think that they are a genuine military threat to America.
00:31:05.880
I think a lot of these arguments that you've just outlined could have been seen to the public eye.
00:31:10.520
But now that we see behind the scenes when Hunter Biden, his son's laptop is being revealed.
00:31:16.440
I mean, I've heard of honey traps before when you when you compromise someone with sex or drugs or money.
00:31:23.560
Well, I mean, Hunter Biden is Winnie the Pooh to that honey trap. He took all of them.
00:31:28.600
It's shocking information on that laptop. But there's basically been a cone of silence
00:31:34.200
from any mainstream media other than the alternative media on the right,
00:31:40.280
the New York Post, which has been censored by Twitter for talking about it, and Tucker Carlson on
00:31:44.440
Fox. I don't know if the news has gone larger than what Jake Tapper of CNN calls the right-wing
00:31:51.320
echo chamber. And let me ask you about that. I think that what's in that laptop doesn't just show
00:31:58.680
that Joe Biden's son is completely, and he's probably being extorted right now, although he
00:32:04.280
wouldn't even know it because he's happy to do for them whatever they want. But there's references to
00:32:09.960
Joe Biden himself of cutting Joe Biden himself in on funds. And we don't know if that's true yet,
00:32:19.080
if those things actually happen. But there's no inquiry. We've seen every witch hunt for what the
00:32:24.600
Trump kids are doing and alleged collusion with Trump for four years. Here you have photographic
00:32:31.880
and video evidence and countless emails. And it's not just lack of interest. They're positively
00:32:39.480
bearing it. As Dave Berg would say, they're covering that story with a pillow until it stops moving.
00:32:44.440
Do you think if that story were recovered naturally and normally, it would make a difference in the
00:32:50.360
election? Or is it, as you said at the beginning, people have already made up their minds about
00:32:56.600
I think in some ways, it's a fait accompli. As you said, those who are actually following all of
00:33:05.560
the revelations of this story probably were already Trump supporters to begin with.
00:33:09.880
The criticality of the story is that Biden's whole meta narrative is I'm a return to decency and
00:33:18.360
character and normalcy, which I guess normalcy he is in the sense of it. He's a corrupt swamp creature
00:33:24.760
who spent almost 50 years empowering what's turned out to be the West's worst adversary in communist
00:33:30.920
China. So influence peddling and corruption, yeah, that is a return to normalcy and the swamp of the
00:33:36.040
political establishment. But character and decency, it goes directly to the core of it because the
00:33:41.000
story really isn't about Hunter. In some ways, you could make a case that Hunter is a troubled person
00:33:47.400
and his family essentially exposed his demons and made it much worse by putting him in the position
00:33:54.840
of being the one out there running all these so-called business operations with our worst
00:34:00.440
adversaries. And the emails themselves, many of which have been authenticated, indicate that he was
00:34:07.320
kicking lots of that income back to his father, that his father may have been cut into some of these
00:34:13.480
deals. We don't know. We don't necessarily have a smoking gun. We do know that Joe Biden apparently
00:34:18.600
has lied about the fact that he never talked with his son or his family members about this business,
00:34:23.240
which is just laughable. But the Tony Bobulinski interview puts an end to that lie. But I think
00:34:30.120
the bigger thing is, let's say every one of these dealings was above board in the sense of there wasn't
00:34:34.920
money laundering and supposedly there's a money laundering investigation around this. There wasn't
00:34:39.080
money laundering. Joe Biden never got a penny. His family didn't serve as cutouts for him, essentially
00:34:44.360
collecting money on his behalf and purchasing gifts or other things on his behalf as a result of the
00:34:49.320
business. The fact of the matter is the mere appearance of corruption or potential of corruption,
00:34:55.000
where you have a man who is a vice president of the United States dealing with China and many of
00:34:58.680
our other adversaries, and his family is doing business with those linked to the governments of
00:35:03.240
those corrupt and or adversarial places, including in strategically significant sectors,
00:35:08.600
that alone, that appearance of corruption, that appearance of impropriety and the potential for
00:35:13.720
compromise, enough should be disqualifying. And if you were to look at the basic forms for vetting
00:35:19.560
any national security official in America, your viewers can go online, look up an SF-86 form,
00:35:25.080
standard form 86, that every person who applies for a national security or foreign policy position
00:35:30.840
has to go through in their vetting. It points out you need to put forth all of your family relations
00:35:37.000
and friends relations with anyone who is a foreigner. And if they have any ties to the
00:35:41.560
government or the military or intelligence have to be disclosed, and the nature of your dealings
00:35:45.480
have to be disclosed. Now, obviously, Joe Biden was a vice president, so he's going to have dealings
00:35:49.800
with all of these foreigners, but that his family is involved in business dealings associated with
00:35:55.000
adversarial and corrupt regimes alone, raise so infinite red flags to the point where if Joe Biden was not
00:36:01.480
Joe Biden, I don't believe he could come close to getting a security clearance. And that is why it's
00:36:06.600
such a critical issue. It gets to the heart of this, again, this lie about character and decency,
00:36:12.920
but it also shows he is truly compromised. And if we really care about foreign interference,
00:36:17.640
international security, as has been talked about endlessly for almost four years now,
00:36:22.360
this is a real-life Steele dossier, and this is a real-life compromise candidate.
00:36:27.000
Incredible. Ben Weingarten, great to catch up with you. Look forward to seeing you on Tuesday night
00:36:31.800
to be one of our Sherpas guiding us through what is sure to be a momentous night. I am nervous. I feel
00:36:38.440
just like I did four years ago. I am pessimistic, but a secret part of me is hopeful that all the
00:36:44.920
experts are wrong as they were back then. We'll see you then, my friend.
00:36:50.600
All right, there you have it. Ben Weingarten, his new essay in Newsweek magazine is called
00:36:54.440
Joe Biden clinched Communist China's vote in the final debate. Stay with us. More ahead of you.
00:37:11.320
Hey, welcome back on my monologue last night. Stuart writes,
00:37:14.600
mostly peaceful terrorism. Oh, yeah. The media, you know what? I mean, I'll just never get over that
00:37:20.360
laugh in line. You know, CNN standing in front of a riot and arson, mostly peaceful protest.
00:37:27.480
Jan writes, freedom of expression with respect is right up there with some animals are more equal
00:37:31.960
than others. Yeah, what does respect even mean? To the killer, it meant if you respect my religious
00:37:41.640
prophet, you can speak freely about everything except that. That's not freedom of speech at all,
00:37:48.760
is it? Well, that's our show today, folks. I'm looking forward to next week very much.
00:37:53.560
I can hardly wait for election night in the U.S. I think it will be a momentous occasion. I'm secretly
00:37:58.840
hopeful. Until then, on behalf of all of us here at Rebel World Headquarters, to you at home,