PROOF： The Liberals “want total state control over the internet” — and the Conservatives love the idea
Episode Stats
Length
1 hour and 13 minutes
Words per Minute
161.60068
Summary
The Liberals want to regulate social media, and the Tories think they re not going hard enough. Today's episode of The Ezra LeVant Show is a mashup of two stories. First, I talk about Jody Wilson-Raybould's bombshell testimony to a parliamentary committee on election meddling. Then, I'm joined by a special guest, Manny Montenegro.
Transcript
00:00:00.480
Hello, my Rebels. There's so many of you. We're all, it's a big rebellion. You're listening to
00:00:06.360
the audio-only podcast of The Ezra LeVant Show. You know, I do this show every single day on the
00:00:10.740
telly, but you need to be a premium subscriber to see it with your eyes. Now, the good news is that's
00:00:16.300
just eight bucks a month, or if you buy a year in advance, it's just 80 bucks. That's two months
00:00:20.580
free. And if you go to the rebel.media slash shows and type in the coupon code podcast,
00:00:26.740
you get even more money off. It's almost like we're paying you to watch it. And I really think
00:00:31.560
you'd get a kick out of it. I do a daily show. My friend Sheila Gunn-Reed does a show. David Menzies
00:00:36.820
does a show. And by the way, that money pays our bills, and it's how we stay strong. We're now in
00:00:42.580
our fifth year of Speaking Truth to Power. Today, I talk about, I punished myself. I watched hours of
00:00:51.840
video from a parliamentary committee where Karina Gould, Justin Trudeau's minister in charge of
00:00:56.960
election meddling, outlined how she wants to meddle in the election with a panel that'll weigh in on
00:01:04.960
things that it doesn't think are true. But the crazy part is the conservative response. You've got
00:01:10.720
to watch this, or if you're listening, you've got to listen to it. Without further to do, here's the
00:01:16.360
show. You're listening to a Rebel Media Podcast. Tonight, the liberals plan to regulate social
00:01:23.480
media, and the conservatives think they're not going hard enough? It's February 28th,
00:01:28.580
and this is the Ezra LeVant Show. Why should others go to jail when you're a biggest carbon
00:01:34.780
consumer I know? There's 8,500 customers here, and you won't give them an answer. The only thing I
00:01:40.600
have to say to the government will go buy a publisher is because it's my bloody right to do so.
00:01:51.080
Coming up after my opening monologue, I talk in depth with Manny Montenegrino about Jody Wilson-Raybould's
00:01:57.960
bombshell testimony yesterday burying Justin Trudeau and his entire inner circle. Please make sure you
00:02:04.840
stick around and watch that entire detailed interview with Manny. But first, I want to tell you about
00:02:09.880
something that happened two days ago. Tommy Robinson's Facebook page was deleted. It was just deleted.
00:02:15.420
He had one million followers. It was either the most popular or the third most popular Facebook page
00:02:22.840
in the UK, depending on how you measure. He was in a league with their prime minister, Theresa May,
00:02:28.080
and their opposition leader, Jeremy Corbyn. And Facebook just deleted it. That's more interference
00:02:34.740
in the UK democracy than anything else I've seen or heard of in years. And it was all done in complete
00:02:40.280
secrecy. Behind the scenes, did Theresa May herself demand it? Did a Muslim activist demand it? Here's
00:02:47.500
one Muslim activist who actually works with the BBC, who claims he was the one who got the dirty deed done.
00:02:55.260
Who knows? And that's the point. Talk about a lack of transparency. Was it a foreign government?
00:02:59.940
The government of Pakistan? They hate Tommy. Was it a rival political movement? No one knows.
00:03:06.500
And the government rather likes it that way because that mystery, that darkness, well,
00:03:10.260
that's where censors would prefer to operate rather than in the sunlight, rather than in the public.
00:03:17.580
If you were Justin Trudeau, would you rather, say, try to prosecute the rebel in a real court or even a
00:03:25.420
kangaroo court like the Human Rights Commission? Or would you rather maybe just have your chum,
00:03:29.940
close friend, trusted friend at Facebook, just turn us off? And when I say trusted friend,
00:03:37.280
I mean a trusted friend. Facebook's head of policy for Canada is this guy. His name is Kevin Chan.
00:03:44.620
He used to work for the Liberal Party of Canada in the leader's office. Oh, and would you look at that?
00:03:50.400
He happens to also sit on the Liberal Party's in-house think tank called Canada 2020. It's so chummy.
00:03:58.340
So yeah, when Trudeau publicly threatened Facebook last year that they better start censoring his
00:04:05.200
enemies in the run-up to this year's election, he really didn't need to threaten them because
00:04:09.600
they're already on his team. But he threatened them anyways. That's what the Libranos do.
00:04:14.900
So how do you do it? With private threats. But the Liberals are emboldened these days.
00:04:21.800
They want to actually start passing laws and hiring police and sending money and power to censor
00:04:29.020
and silence. Their $595 million bailout of the few remaining private sector media in the country
00:04:34.700
will probably help silence any squawking. Look at this. Look at this. Gould says she doesn't have full
00:04:42.020
confidence Facebook will meet Ottawa's expectations to implement electoral safeguard.
00:04:46.180
And look at this. I don't have the assurances that give me the full confidence that they will
00:04:53.000
be completely seized with this, which is why I continue to have conversations with them.
00:04:57.860
Democratic Institutions Minister Karina Gould told the Ethics Committee. That is Trudeau's point
00:05:04.480
person in cabinet in charge of censorship in the run-up to the election. She is saying
00:05:10.600
it's not enough what Facebook is doing. They want to do more. But we don't know what her
00:05:17.540
conversations with Facebook are. She says she's in conversations, but they're not on the record.
00:05:21.920
Kevin Chan refuses to answer questions. And Gould refuses to answer questions. What is she talking
00:05:26.980
to Facebook about? Does she want to do in Canada what they just did to Tommy in the UK?
00:05:35.040
There's not a lot of curiosity about it from the media, though.
00:05:37.320
Say, do you think they'd be asking a few questions if it were Stephen Harper,
00:05:41.100
who is meeting in secret with Facebook, talking about their censorship in the 2019 election campaign?
00:05:47.980
As in asking them to censor? Here's the Globe and Mail on the same story.
00:05:54.320
Liberals may have to require social media companies to act on hate speech,
00:05:58.280
Minister of Democratic Institutions says. Let me read just one line. Minister of Democratic
00:06:04.680
Institutions, Karina Gould says that the governing liberals may have to require social media giants
00:06:09.060
to act when they fail to remove hate speech from their platforms. Like when they took down Tommy
00:06:14.840
Robinson's page. No charges, no crime, no trial, no ruling, no appeal. Just do it.
00:06:24.520
Is that what the liberals want to do in Canada? And the Globe reported this neutral. Actually,
00:06:29.780
not even neutrally. I think they liked it. They want Kevin Chan and Mark Zuckerberg to just take
00:06:35.960
down hate speech. Whatever that means. I think it actually means speech that liberals themselves hate.
00:06:42.980
But take it down without any fuss. No due process, no freedom of speech, no trial, no hearing. Just do it,
00:06:49.200
okay? Now these stories were written from when Karina Gould appeared before a parliamentary committee on the
00:06:55.740
subject. So I sat down, and I watched some of that committee on video online. And I'd like to show you a few
00:07:03.660
clips of it. These first two are questions, and they refer to a government panel that Karina Gould and the
00:07:10.940
liberals want to set up. A panel with government experts appointed by Trudeau, who will oversee
00:07:16.980
conversations, social media, reporting in the election campaign. As in, the government
00:07:23.980
will look over who's saying what in our election campaign. And if there's something that they
00:07:30.540
think might change the course of election, well, they'll weigh in to stop it. Well, what do they
00:07:38.700
mean by that? Do they mean someone trying to hack voting machines? In that case, if someone was trying
00:07:43.700
to change the course of elections by hacking voting machines, obviously we want to stop it, but we
00:07:48.200
don't have those electric voting machines in Canada like they do in the U.S. We use paper ballots. So
00:07:54.540
what do they mean by someone changing the course of an election? What's an example of when Trudeau's
00:08:02.760
committee, Karina's Gould's committee, would weigh in to stop an election from going the wrong way?
00:08:08.860
What's an example of that? Well, a liberal MP named Anita Vandenbelt asked Gould that question. Take a look.
00:08:16.060
We looked at allied countries and like-minded countries around the world to see what mechanisms
00:08:22.860
they had and have in place. And what stuck out for me was the French example of the Conseil d'État
00:08:31.680
that weighed in when there was the leak from the Macron campaign to basically say this is, you know,
00:08:41.140
a threat against our democracy. And they advised the media not to report on it. That's a step further
00:08:48.780
than what this is anticipating. We tried to come up with something that would fit within the Canadian
00:08:53.080
context. The Conseil d'État in France has been around for a very long time.
00:08:58.300
I know what Macron leaks was. Did you hear her say that? That was internal campaign documents
00:09:03.640
from Emmanuel Macron's election campaign to be the president of France. Now, those leaks were
00:09:09.480
published, released to the world online about a week before the French election. They were deeply
00:09:14.400
embarrassing to Macron. They showed his scheming, his corruption, his ideological extremism, his
00:09:19.820
personal scandals. I don't know if the emails were leaked or hacked or someone just chose a really weak
00:09:24.760
password or someone inside the campaign wanted to blow a whistle. I don't know. And so there may have
00:09:30.740
been a crime involved with the hacking. Could be. But the materials that were released were real.
00:09:37.140
They were legitimate. They were news. They weren't state secrets. They were made public and they were
00:09:42.880
definitely in the public interest. But it was embarrassing to Emmanuel Macron. And so the French
00:09:48.740
government, you heard her say it there, advised the French media to publish none of it a week before
00:09:55.900
the election. And they all complied. Now, I think it was a stitch up. Maybe they just didn't want Marine
00:10:03.140
Le Pen to be the president. So they wouldn't have published it anyways. The French media complied. But
00:10:09.060
that's an example. That was the first example she gave about how her panel would weigh in. So it wasn't
00:10:17.280
a lie. It wasn't fake news. It was real news that was embarrassing to the left-wing candidate.
00:10:24.660
That was the example she chose. Here she emphasized it again.
00:10:29.400
Can you give the kind of examples of the kinds of things that would trigger this mechanism?
00:10:34.720
I'm cautious in doing that because I think everything is very context dependent.
00:10:38.480
And I wouldn't want to prejudge the outcome of the panel and their decision. However, I think it's safe to
00:10:47.320
assume that some of the major incidents that we've seen around the world, for example, the Macron leaks or
00:10:53.020
what the U.S. was grappling with at the time would be things of sufficient value to inform Canadians.
00:11:00.220
But again, it will be very context dependent and it will be within the context of the Canadian election,
00:11:05.600
which is different, right? Twice she mentioned Macron leaks. What would the analogy be here in
00:11:12.620
Canada? It would be if Gerald Butts had his emails leaked and we finally learned all the truth
00:11:19.240
about why Jody Wilson-Raybould was fired by Trudeau and the meddling with that vice admiral in Halifax.
00:11:27.940
Some huge bombshells would surely come out. Remember, Trudeau and his people originally said that story was fake.
00:11:35.600
They said it was fake news. They're still sort of saying that, but after yesterday, I don't think
00:11:41.580
they'll get away with it. They trotted out that crackpot clerk of the Privy Council the other day
00:11:46.500
to say it was all gossip and lies and defamation, except for the inconvenience of the fact that
00:11:51.080
Wilson-Raybould herself quit cabinet over it and lawyered up. But other than that, people,
00:11:55.880
it's fake news, it's fake news. Please ignore it. Do you see my point? Of course, Trudeau and Gould
00:12:01.860
and Vandenberg and the partisan clerk want to silence leaks and whistleblowing and scoops that are
00:12:09.900
embarrassing to Trudeau. And that's actually the analogy, the example Gould specifically used twice,
00:12:17.920
hiding incredibly important facts from the people during an election campaign. The Macron leaks were
00:12:25.320
not fake. They were really his scheming. And the government ordered the media not to embarrass a
00:12:31.180
candidate. That is the example used twice by Karina Gould. Peter Kant, a conservative MP,
00:12:39.160
asked whether or not Gould cared about foreign meddling in Canada, especially through front groups
00:12:44.680
like Lead Now that take foreign money, said Kent. That's a real problem, not a fake problem like
00:12:51.180
Russian hacking of paper ballots. Watch how that exchange went. Lead Now is funded by foreign
00:12:57.460
charitable funds, channeled through organizations like Tides Canada. So I'm not sure that there's
00:13:03.380
evidence of that. But that would be something that... We would refer you to testimony in this
00:13:09.020
committee of Ms. Vivian Crouse. So, again, I, you know, we have the Commissioner of Canada
00:13:16.680
elections that would be responsible for investigating that. That's not something that has come up and I
00:13:23.920
would, I would caution against those allegations. But I do think that it is important to note that in
00:13:30.460
C-76, that was seen at the Procedure and House Affairs Committee. And, you know, I see Ms. Cousy here,
00:13:36.360
who played a substantial role in that we, you know, were able to have, you know, significant
00:13:42.220
all-party consensus with regards to banning foreign funding with regards to third parties
00:13:47.500
in our elections. Now, we know what Vivian Crouse reported about foreign funding of radical
00:13:54.420
environmental groups. We know that's a fact because Vivian Crouse proved it all with IRS documents,
00:13:59.140
big U.S. left-wing charities like the Tides Foundation, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund. They have
00:14:03.620
to disclose who they give their money to, to the IRS. It's public. It's not a secret. But Karina Gould
00:14:09.440
wouldn't even acknowledge that. She wouldn't even acknowledge that it's happening. Because, you see,
00:14:14.160
that foreign meddling helped Trudeau. All right, up next in this committee meeting was Charlie Angus,
00:14:22.100
the new Democrat. I think he's a left-wing kook, to be honest. But I'll give him this. He's not easily
00:14:27.760
dazzled or bought off by Facebook or other tech companies. And he knows how the liberals work.
00:14:33.620
Watch this. Who at Facebook did you meet with? At Facebook, I met with Kevin Chan here. And then
00:14:41.220
I would have to get you the names of the five other individuals because I don't remember off the top.
00:14:45.220
So you met with Kevin Chan, who was not registered as a lobbyist, who met with numerous people in the
00:14:51.940
government's office, who's a former member working for the Liberals. So Kevin Chan was your voice?
00:14:57.660
As I said, there were... I gotta say, you know, we spent...
00:15:01.020
Just sorry, no, I'm asking my questions here. Do I have permission? Because I'm trying to answer it.
00:15:03.460
I'm asking my questions here if it was Kevin Chan.
00:15:05.960
We spent over a year studying this. We spent over a year studying this. We could not get a straight
00:15:11.020
answer out of Facebook. So if Kevin Chan was your source, I just want that on the record.
00:15:15.280
But Mr. Angus, I said there were five other individuals who we met with as well...
00:15:19.740
...who came from Washington and Silicon Valley.
00:15:26.300
Kool didn't know their names. She didn't know the names of anyone else from Facebook because
00:15:31.020
none of them mattered. She only knows their key man at Facebook. Kevin Chan, former Liberal
00:15:37.420
Party staffer, current Liberal Party think tanker, head of policy for Facebook Canada. You don't need
00:15:42.540
to know anyone else. They're just the staff. Hey, did you see any of that exchange in the mainstream
00:15:48.140
media? No, you did not. And good for Charlie Angus for raising the insane conduct of that
00:15:55.180
Privy Council clerk, Michael Wernick, who just happens to be one of the people who will sit
00:15:59.740
on this new government interference panel to monitor mean things said in the election campaign
00:16:05.820
and then react if there's a Macron leaks. Take a look.
00:16:08.540
Yes, I understand it. So I guess my concern is I share Mr. Wernick's concern. I share Mr. Wernick's concern
00:16:15.020
about the rising tide of political extremism. But I was very surprised that he suggested political
00:16:21.180
assassination in the midst of a parliamentary hearing on whether the government had done wrong.
00:16:29.260
Do you not realize that that would breach the rules for the Privy Council, that they're not to
00:16:35.340
wade into matters of conjecture and controversy, yet he started out a question to the panel about
00:16:42.220
whether or not the government was involved in interfering with the rule of law. And he related
00:16:48.140
it not just to political assassination, but he says, I worry that the reputations of honorable people
00:16:54.060
who serve their country being besmirched and dragged through the market square. I worry about the trolling
00:16:59.980
from the vomitorium of social media entering the open media area. Most of all, I worry about people
00:17:05.820
losing faith. So is that the position of the government, or is that his opinion?
00:17:11.100
You would have to ask him that question. That was his personal view, is my understanding.
00:17:17.020
Well, we learned yesterday from Jody Wilson-Rabel that Michael Wernick was one of the enforcers
00:17:21.900
of Trudeau's shakedown, Trudeau's attempt to get the charges dropped against SNC-Lavalin.
00:17:26.460
But Wernick's outbursts on its own show that he's going to be a meddler on this panel of people who are
00:17:34.380
enforcing social media politeness. Of course he's going to be a meddler. That's the purpose of this
00:17:40.620
anti-meddling agency, is to meddle when necessary. Telling journalists not to report something,
00:17:48.060
that's the meddling. Listen to how crazy Wernick is. I can't even believe he hasn't been fired yet
00:17:56.380
after yesterday's comments by Jody Wilson-Rabel. But imagine putting this guy on a secret panel
00:18:04.700
charged with ensuring elections don't engage in fake news or something. Remember this?
00:18:09.820
The Globe and Mail article contains errors, unfounded speculation, and in some cases,
00:18:17.260
simply defamatory. In my observation and my experience, they have always, always conducted
00:18:23.340
themselves to the highest standards of integrity. You may not like their politics or their policies
00:18:28.860
or their tweets, but they have always been guided by trying to do the right thing. Indicated that it
00:18:34.860
was entirely her call to make that she was the decider. And that is a message that the Prime Minister
00:18:43.340
conveyed to the Minister on every situation that I'm aware of that it came up. I worry about the
00:18:49.340
rising tide of incitements to violence when people use terms like treason and traitor in open discourse.
00:18:56.380
Those are the words that lead to assassination. I'm worried that somebody's going to be shot in this
00:19:00.620
country this year during the political campaign. What a kook. He's not non-partisan. Oh, the Liberals
00:19:07.340
have never done anything wrong. Days later, we learn that he was in the center of it. But let me tell you
00:19:13.660
how deep this crazy thinking goes in the Liberals. I want to show you a question at committee from the
00:19:18.780
Liberal MP Raj Saini. He doesn't just want to silence foreign meddlers. That's their excuse that
00:19:25.180
foreigners are doing all these unsavory things in Canada. Raj Saini doesn't just want to silence
00:19:30.780
newspaper publishers or campaign publishers or even the media. He doesn't want to just do broad strokes.
00:19:38.220
He's not a forest guy. He's not a forest for the trees guy. He's an individual leaf guy.
00:19:44.780
Raj Saini literally wants the government to censor individual comments online, on Facebook, on comment boards
00:19:51.260
made by individual Canadians like you. If you like something, maybe. If you dislike something, maybe.
00:19:56.940
If you use the wrong emoticon, this guy wants you censored. Listen to this control freak.
00:20:02.620
However, there's one point I want to ask you on, if there's something that your department or some
00:20:06.380
of the officials here could comment on, is that sometimes in whether it be Reddit or Facebook,
00:20:10.700
there's a comment section. And sometimes there can be infiltration by foreign actors or by other
00:20:16.780
people who want to disrupt the election mechanism that we have here, where they can insert misinformation
00:20:22.060
or disinformation within the comments section. As is, is there some protocol that we're that we are
00:20:27.740
looking at to prevent that from happening? Now Gould didn't run with that question, but that's not the
00:20:34.780
point. My point is, that is the thinking in the liberal government. They want total state control over
00:20:43.740
the internet right down to what your grandma comments on a news story. Here, this guy thinks
00:20:50.300
that the government should tell us what's true and what's not true.
00:20:54.700
As you know, the election campaign is coming up. There may be things that are said in social media
00:21:00.140
about certain candidates, true or untrue. What's the mechanism to resolve something that is untrue?
00:21:05.820
So in C-76, there was a tightening based on the recommendations from the former CEO of Elections
00:21:13.100
Canada to tighten the language surrounding false statements made against candidates. The idea was
00:21:19.580
that the previous clause in the Elections Act was too vague, that it was so unenforceable. So we
00:21:29.580
tightened it up so that it would be based on statements that you could prove or disprove. So for example,
00:21:34.380
if someone accused candidate X of having a criminal record, that's something that you could prove or
00:21:39.660
disprove. And the mechanism, like all with regards to our elections legislation, is a complaint filed to
00:21:45.660
the Commissioner of Canada elections for which they would then respond. And the resources to the
00:21:52.140
Commissioner have been increased. And I think another very important element of this is that the
00:21:57.100
Commissioner has been both moved back into Elections Canada, but also empowered to initiate and lay
00:22:08.380
charges as well as compel testimony. And so their powers have been strengthened so that they can be
00:22:16.380
So if you say something false that the government thinks is false, you will have charges laid against
00:22:22.860
you and your testimony will be compelled. Is that how we resolve what's true or false in election?
00:22:29.660
It's funny that false statement part of the law. I looked it up. Here, let me read it to you. This is
00:22:33.740
from their Bill C-76. Publishing false statement to effect election results. No person or entity shall,
00:22:42.940
with the intention of effecting the results of an election, make or publish during the election period
00:22:48.460
a false statement about the citizenship, place of birth, education, professional qualifications,
00:22:53.980
or membership in a group or association of a candidate, a prospective candidate, the leader of a political
00:22:59.980
party or a public figure associated with a political party. Really? Really? So we're going to have the
00:23:08.540
government now checking every single thing people say. And if it's wrong, the answer isn't to rebut it,
00:23:14.940
it's to prosecute them. And this liberal government's going to be trustworthy to do that fairly.
00:23:21.180
Now, it's now against the law to say something false and defamatory. But then you can go to a real court.
00:23:31.020
But what they're doing here is setting up a liberal handpick election court with the power to compel
00:23:37.980
testimony that's going to hear special political crimes. If you say something false about someone's
00:23:43.660
education or qualifications or where they're from, and the government itself is going to enforce this,
00:23:49.980
some elections agency will, not a proper court. Okay, I'll bite.
00:23:55.180
Maryam Monsef, the crooked cabinet minister who admitted she lied on her refugee application in
00:24:02.220
Canada. She lied and said she's from Afghanistan when she's not. Remember her?
00:24:12.460
I believe I was. No, you little liar. You were born in Iran. So does she have to go to jail?
00:24:20.380
For lying about herself? Or how about Christy Duncan, who lied about her qualifications?
00:24:26.540
She lied and said she was a Nobel Prize winner. Gee, I wonder if that's hard to check. Does she have to
00:24:32.780
go to jail now because she lied about her professional qualifications?
00:24:35.660
I don't think they should, by the way. I don't think we should criminalize campaign banter. I think it's
00:24:43.340
up to voters to decide what's true or not. And who on earth gets to judge what is a fair comment or an
00:24:48.860
unfair one? Isn't that our job as voters? But the whole thing is built on a lie. The liberals have
00:24:54.540
actually convinced themselves that Donald Trump won the election in 2016 because of Russian hacking.
00:25:02.540
You heard Karina Gould earlier say, Macron leaks and the business in 2016 in America. Really? Well,
00:25:09.740
two years and $20 million worth of investigations by Robert Mueller and all his prosecutors haven't
00:25:14.300
found any Russian collusion. But listen to this. Karina Gould is implying that the 2000 election,
00:25:20.460
2016 election was unfair and rigged and a disaster and has to be stopped up here.
00:25:26.060
And so we announced $7 million for our digital citizenship initiative that will provide funding
00:25:33.980
to civil society organizations in the realms of digital media and civic literacy. And I think that
00:25:42.540
this is an extraordinarily important initiative. We, I think over the past couple of years, particularly
00:25:49.340
with the 2016 US elections, it was a bit of a wake up call to Western democracies in the sense that
00:25:55.260
we were taking our democracy a little bit for granted. And I think it's important to ensure
00:26:00.620
that we continue to talk about democracy and democratic values in our own countries.
00:26:07.660
Otherwise, we could stand the chance of losing it. What the hell is she saying?
00:26:14.700
What was 2016 and the destruction of democracy in America? Or was it a wonderful expression of
00:26:21.260
democracy? Where the candidate who outspent the other two to one, the corrupt Hillary Clinton,
00:26:27.580
lost despite all the establishment? That was a wonderful expression of democracy. But at the very
00:26:32.700
least, we know there was no Russian corruption. So says Mueller's investigation. She, I don't know if
00:26:38.220
she actually believes that America lost its democracy. And if we don't stop that sort of thing from happening
00:26:44.220
here, we could lose our democracy too. I don't know if she believes that. She seems like a smart lady.
00:26:49.740
Maybe she's just whipped herself up and only talks to other Trump haters, and there's a lot of them
00:26:54.060
in the Liberal Party. Or maybe she knows it's a crock, but just is using that as an excuse to regulate
00:26:59.980
you and me. It was so awful. But then Stephanie Cusey, the conservative MP from Calgary, finally spoke.
00:27:07.500
I knew her about 25 years ago. We actually went to college together. So what did she have to say in
00:27:12.940
committee? How did she start things off? Was she like Charlie Angus? Did finally, did someone finally
00:27:20.700
take Karina Gould on and take the liberals to task? Either for their censorship or their coziness with
00:27:27.500
Facebook? Yeah, no, it was sort of the opposite. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair and Minister. Always
00:27:36.060
lovely to see you. I love that necklace, by the way. That's just beautiful. Also, I want to say that I
00:27:40.300
really enjoyed your speech yesterday at the AI. And you know what? It was very informal. And I really,
00:27:46.220
I think you should go with that format more when you come even to committees, because you just,
00:27:49.660
you do it so well. So I just, I wanted to compliment you on that.
00:27:54.380
Okay, now please tell me there was just some friendly banter as a warm-up
00:27:58.540
before the official opposition did some official opposing. Yeah, no.
00:28:03.020
So I'm asking you, please, if you are ready in regards to the social media platform,
00:28:10.060
willing to make the hard decisions, to take the hard actions, and not six months from now, but now, please.
00:28:19.340
That's your question. Charlie Angus was talking about collusion between Facebook and the liberals.
00:28:25.660
We heard all sorts of plans for censorship, all sorts of schemes, even censoring comments.
00:28:32.460
We heard the statement that, you know, if there's some real news that could alter the course of the
00:28:38.620
election, the government should weigh in. We heard that twice about Macron leaks. And the question from
00:28:43.900
the conservatives is to go harder and faster? Is that the approach of the conservatives? The liberals
00:28:51.660
want to control the internet. They want a government censorship agency and a government meddling
00:28:56.780
agency with that kook Michael Wernick on it. They're working hand in glove with liberal executives at
00:29:02.940
Facebook. And all the conservatives have to say is, will you go harder and faster and just do it already?
00:29:09.740
And might I say you're looking wonderful today? That is crazy, my friends. That is danger.
00:29:15.740
They're coming for you. They're coming for me. They're coming for anyone who makes comments on
00:29:21.420
Facebook they don't like. You heard Rad Sany. They literally want to arrest people and charge them
00:29:25.980
for crimes for criticizing Trudeau too much. Like this kook, a liberal MP named Nathaniel Erskine Smith.
00:29:32.780
Take a look. They said Trudeau is a traitor to our country and deserves to be hung for his treasonous crimes.
00:29:38.860
And that's posted on Facebook. That's left on Facebook. Facebook doesn't take it down.
00:29:43.500
So should we expect social media companies to act or should we require them to act?
00:29:47.740
So I should clarify that my expectations have to fall within the electoral context at this point
00:29:54.780
as I'm Minister of Democratic Institutions. However, that being said, I think that we are moving
00:30:02.220
in a direction where we need to require social media companies to act. That is outside the scope of my
00:30:08.620
specific mandate right now. But I think that when we have very clear evidence that they are
00:30:17.660
contravening laws here in Canada, that they should be acting responsibly in that manner.
00:30:24.940
That's the liberal line. That's the liberal plan. Michael Wernick, that extremist clerk is saying it.
00:30:31.180
Karina Gould is saying it. Rad Sany is saying it.
00:30:34.620
This latest guy, Nathaniel, is saying it. They think the convoy that went to Ottawa asking for
00:30:41.340
pipelines to be built, they think these people are the criminals. Because some anonymous person on
00:30:46.940
Facebook purportedly called Trudeau a traitor. The law needs to act. Now, calling Trudeau a traitor might
00:30:54.140
be rude. But it's not a crime to be rude to politicians. The CBC liberals called Stephen Harper a Nazi.
00:31:03.660
They called him Stasi Steve and Herr Hitler. Remember this?
00:31:08.220
So, help save poor Stasi Steve this season. God knows Herr Harper doesn't have enough sense to
00:31:17.260
save himself. Herr Harper, that's delicious. So that's fine. That's fine discourse. That's the
00:31:26.380
government of Canada's Mary Walsh. That's fine discourse. By the way,
00:31:32.460
here's a massive petition a couple years back. Arrest and charge Stephen Harper for treason.
00:31:37.340
This was promoted in the mainstream media, calling for the RCMP to actually arrest Harper for treason.
00:31:42.540
More than 10,000 signatures on it. See, that was fine. Way, way back four years ago,
00:31:48.540
when the target of that hate was Stephen Harper. But today, Facebook needs to be regulated to tone it
00:31:54.700
down. Because Trudeau is the prime minister. And we need a government agency telling us what to believe,
00:31:59.820
and what not to believe. And the best the conservatives have in reply is to compliment
00:32:05.100
the chief censor on how fashionable she looks, and to tell her to censor harder and faster.
00:32:11.980
Oh, they will. Oh, they will. Stay with us for more.
00:32:14.860
For a period of approximately four months between September and December of 2018,
00:32:35.500
I experienced a consistent and sustained effort by many people within the government to seek to
00:32:41.980
politically interfere in the exercise of prosecutorial discretion in my role as the Attorney General
00:32:48.540
of Canada in an inappropriate effort to secure a deferred prosecution agreement with SNC-Lavalin.
00:32:54.860
It was important for Jody Wilson-Raybould to speak openly at the Justice Committee today,
00:33:00.620
and I'm glad she had the chance to do so. I strongly maintain, as I have from the beginning,
00:33:08.140
that I and my staff always acted appropriately and professionally. I therefore completely disagree
00:33:18.140
with the former Attorney General's characterization of events.
00:33:21.980
Well, there you have it. As we showed you in great length yesterday, over an hour's worth of
00:33:28.220
commentary, Jody Wilson-Raybould meticulously laid out a very complicated campaign to get her
00:33:35.660
to drop the criminal charges against SNC-Lavalin. Ten different phone calls, ten different meetings,
00:33:43.660
emails, text messages, threats, bullying, including from the Prime Minister himself. And you saw he simply
00:33:51.340
waved it off yesterday at a partisan event. He didn't refute any of the details. He just said,
00:33:56.700
no, no, I'm going to brazen it out. Well, will he get away with it? One person I've been following
00:34:02.700
very carefully on Twitter to help me analyze the situation is our friend Manny Montenegrino.
00:34:09.420
He is the boss of a consultancy, a think tank, a one-man think tank in Ottawa. But for our purposes,
00:34:15.980
he's also the former lawyer to Stephen Harper and a former national manager of a major law firm.
00:34:24.220
Manny joins us now via Skype. Manny, I can hardly wait to hear your take on things. Jump right in.
00:34:30.140
What do you make of yesterday's events? Well, there is so much, Ezra. And I can stand here and say,
00:34:36.540
as a lawyer, I am deeply, deeply offended. As a Canadian, I am deeply, deeply offended.
00:34:43.500
I bring to you, Ezra, from a legal perspective of what happened. And when problems like this emerge,
00:34:51.020
the very first thing I do is look at the criminal code, look at the act. Section 139.1 says,
00:34:59.500
everyone who willfully attempts in any manner to obstruct, pervert, or defeat the course of a judicial
00:35:08.380
proceeding is subject to a criminal penalty. Now, those words are pretty simple. It says,
00:35:15.660
in any manner who willfully attempts. You listened to the ex-Attorney General,
00:35:21.900
her timeline was, it was persistent and it continued. It went for four months, unabated,
00:35:30.140
10 meetings, 11 emails, 11 people involved. The prime minister got 11 people involved to try to
00:35:39.420
defeat the course of a judicial proceeding. It was willful. It was in any manner. Normally,
00:35:46.300
the legislation thinks about one or two meetings. This is far past meets the test of 139.1.
00:35:53.420
Ezra, there is even, it's even worse than that. I noted from the testimony of the Attorney General,
00:36:02.460
as she then was, she made a point that alarmed me and it hasn't been picked up. And that is,
00:36:09.900
is the SNC-Lavalin received a lawyer from the directors of prosecution, received a letter saying,
00:36:16.860
we will not proceed with a DPA. That was in October. What SNC-Lavalin did immediately,
00:36:27.100
which they have the right to do, is go on a motion to a judge to say that the Attorney General is wrong.
00:36:34.780
And that's, they're entitled to do that. They could go to a court and say, we're entitled to the DPA.
00:36:39.180
Now, think of this, Ezra. We now have the Attorney General who said in September,
00:36:45.020
we are not moving with a DPA. The Attorney General on September 17th tells the prime minister,
00:36:51.740
we are not moving with a DPA. Legal counsel for SNC-Lavalin take a motion to the court. There's an
00:36:59.820
active motion before a judge. And they continue the persistent lobbying and trying to manipulate and
00:37:08.540
thwart the course of justice while there is a case before the courts. Right. I mean, that,
00:37:14.140
that, that is, that is unprecedented. Let me jump in just for our viewers. As we described yesterday,
00:37:21.260
DPA is Deferred Prosecution Agreement. Manny, I know you're a lawyer and that's a second nature to you.
00:37:27.740
That's basically a fancy way of saying a plea bargain where this large engineering firm, SNC-Lavalin,
00:37:33.820
I could avoid the messiness and embarrassment of a trial and just basically pay money and say,
00:37:38.860
yeah, we did it. Don't take it to court. So, but you make such an important point, Manny, is that
00:37:46.220
this wasn't just saying, hey, prosecutors don't prosecute us anymore. The decision was made to
00:37:51.740
prosecute. The decision was made not to give them a plea bargain. They properly appealed that to a judge.
00:37:58.380
Right. And still Trudeau and Butts and team, they still tried to, to, to roll Jody Wilson-Raybould,
00:38:07.900
even though it was before a judge now. That is enormously important that everyone skipped over.
00:38:15.500
There is an active case before a court and they are still trying to manipulate and thwart justice.
00:38:23.180
Now, Ezra, as well, you have to look. I, I was so impressed with the testimony of the ex-attorney
00:38:31.260
general. She stood there for four hours. Her testimony was extremely credible. And why do I say
00:38:38.060
that? It was sworn to a testimony. She was detailed. She was meticulous. She took
00:38:45.500
comprehensive notes throughout the whole four months. She repeated the notes. She had details in time.
00:38:53.340
hers was not a political speech. And in law, when you have a witness that is, is giving evidence
00:39:02.220
against their own interests, we have a liberal cabinet minister that is destroying her career
00:39:09.900
and future. There can't be a higher point of credibility of a witness. Every word that woman has
00:39:17.500
said, every word that she had said is extremely credible. There were no political machinations,
00:39:25.980
unlike the clerk. So when you look at the testimony, she is, she is just maybe destroying
00:39:32.700
her political career in order to get to the truth. That is credible. And that has to be given extreme
00:39:38.940
great weight. You know, that's such a good point. And Trudeau, who later said, oh, no, it's not true.
00:39:45.020
No specificity, no specific refutations. In fact, he later said, oh, I didn't watch it. But whatever it
00:39:50.860
was, it wasn't true. Let me let me say one thing. And Manny, you would have more experience than this
00:39:56.540
at this than me. The attorney general, I mean, law is, is all about paperwork. There's a paper trail
00:40:05.660
for everything. Everything's filed in triplicate, quadruplicate, copies here and there, files,
00:40:10.540
notes. The civil service is very bureaucratic. I mean, you can call it red tape if you like,
00:40:16.860
but nothing moves without paperwork. So if Jody Wilson-Raybould claims these phone calls happened,
00:40:22.460
claims these meetings happened, there is undoubtedly minutes and memos and meetings and schedules and
00:40:28.460
calendars. So I don't think it's even possible that she could be fibbing about if a meeting happened.
00:40:35.500
And there were so many other people involved in these meetings, her deputy minister, her chief of
00:40:41.500
staff, various advisors. It, I think it's absolutely credible that these things happen. Yeah. But,
00:40:49.100
but go ahead. I wouldn't spend a second trying to challenge the testimony of Jody, our attorney,
00:40:57.660
our ex attorney general. I wouldn't spend a second. But here's my other, here's the other side of that
00:41:02.140
coin, Manny. And here's, you, you know, and you and I've talked about this briefly. There's another
00:41:07.900
case going on in Atlantic Canada right now, a vice admiral of the Navy who's been prosecuted
00:41:13.980
by the liberals, Scott Bryson resigned over it. And, and it came out that the PMO, that Justin Trudeau's
00:41:20.700
office had all these meetings about that case and they kept no notes. Well, the only group I've ever
00:41:28.620
heard of that has serious substantive meetings that don't keep notes is organized crime. They
00:41:34.140
don't write things down because they don't want to compare the, the, the gang that doesn't keep
00:41:40.380
notes to this meticulous, uh, straight arrow who's keeping a lot of notes. I know who I believe.
00:41:47.100
Well, yeah. And, and, and you know what, I don't, you don't have to go far when you're putting the
00:41:53.100
test of the credibility of, of our, the ex attorney general who basically has given up her, her standing,
00:42:01.660
her cabinet post, perhaps be kicked out of the caucus. We haven't seen that yet. Everything to
00:42:07.500
uphold the law versus the prime minister who has been found by an independent judiciary,
00:42:15.340
the ethics commissioner five times to be in breach of ethics. And also she found him not to be
00:42:22.380
credible in his testimony that the trip to the Aga Cannons private luxury island was because he was an
00:42:30.140
old friend that he hasn't seen for 30 years. The, the, the justice committee, the, the ethics commissioner,
00:42:36.540
a justice equivalent to a county, a judge said, I don't find you credible. She struck down that
00:42:44.220
evidence. So I don't need to be political about this. I have, I have a person that has been found
00:42:50.540
by a quasi court to be not credible. And I have the attorney general, ex attorney general, giving
00:42:57.500
everything up in order to speak the truth. I am well past that. So, um, when I, when I test credibility,
00:43:04.700
I, it's, it's, it's not a political and it's not a partisan thing that I'm doing here. I've got my
00:43:10.140
lawyer hat on. There's no question any judge in the world would take the credibility of the attorney
00:43:16.540
general who is acting against her own personal interests. Whereas the prime minister is trying
00:43:21.580
to keep his job. Uh, there's no question as to who's more credible in this, in this, uh, whole, um,
00:43:27.740
saga. Um, now, now let me, yeah, you know, I am so offended and, and I'm glad to see, uh,
00:43:35.500
Jody Wilson-Raybould's father come to her defense. I, I, I, for some reason or another, uh, I feel a
00:43:41.020
kinship to him because I have a wonderful, strong daughter as he does, but he's coming to her defense.
00:43:47.020
And, and for, for the prime minister sit there after hearing the testimony and saying that, well,
00:43:54.060
it's, it's, it's, uh, it was always her decision. You know, let me give you an analogy, uh, Ezra.
00:43:59.980
This is like a guy who spent four months with 11 people to knock over a bank and, and, and, and,
00:44:07.580
and he's in the bank and, and he finds this really strong principled bank manager that holds him at bay
00:44:15.180
and kicks him out. And then he comes out of there, the bank robber to the police and says, well, wait a
00:44:21.820
minute. She, it was always her, uh, decision to give me the money. She has not given me the money.
00:44:27.900
So therefore everything's okay. That's not how the law works. It's an attempt to obstruct justice.
00:44:33.660
It isn't trying to, the reason why he wasn't successful is because of Jody Wilson-Raybould.
00:44:39.740
The reason why he didn't succeed in taking the money from the bank is because the bank manager
00:44:46.460
was principled and stopped it. Right. You know, let's put up on the screen one more time,
00:44:50.780
section 139. One of the criminal code, because you pointed out to me, look at the language there.
00:44:57.180
Uh, everyone who willfully attempts in any manner. So you just have to attempt, you don't have to be
00:45:04.860
successful and it can be in any manner. It doesn't have to be an undue manner or a heavy manner.
00:45:11.500
Every one who willfully attempts in any manner. And let me put up section 139 too, just for one
00:45:17.020
second here, because 139 too, uh, this is the next paragraph. I'm just going to read this out,
00:45:21.740
Manny obstructing justice. Everyone who willfully attempts in any manner, other than a manner
00:45:27.100
described in subsection one to obstruct, pervert, or defeat the course of justice is guilty of an
00:45:32.860
indictable offense and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years. So this is heavy
00:45:40.700
duty. I have a question for you. Um, you've been talking about the ethics commissioner, Manny,
00:45:46.940
but that the worst that will happen. I mean, Trudeau was convicted four times, five times by the
00:45:50.620
ethics. Slap on the wrist. But this is the criminal code. Will the cops get involved, Manny?
00:45:56.060
I think they have to get involved. And, and, and, and let me tell you again, I go to the testimony
00:46:02.060
of our ex attorney general. She said she has a text from Gerald Butts written confirmation
00:46:09.500
where he says there is no solution that doesn't include interference interference with the attorney
00:46:15.980
general. They understood that she stood aground and there's no solution to what the prime minister
00:46:21.980
wanted other than interference. That is an admission of section 139 one breach. I mean, it is,
00:46:28.060
you can't get any more clear. So I say you, when you ask me, Ezra, I compared to what happened to
00:46:35.340
Senator Duffy, Senator Duffy, there was no sworn testimony. There was nothing except accusations of
00:46:44.060
his expensing improperly $90,000, expensing a senator that has the ability to expense out of his own
00:46:54.140
expense account, $90,000. It was paid back, but there was still enough talk that the RCMP felt
00:47:02.700
that they had to investigate. There were no sworn testimony. We have a sworn testimony testimony from
00:47:08.700
the highest lawmaker of Canada that's there protecting our judiciary. We have a sworn testimony,
00:47:17.420
four hours of evidence saying there was a four-month sustained, persistent attempt to breach the natural
00:47:26.060
flow of justice, to breach a judicial proceeding. That wasn't there for Duffy. And so when you ask me,
00:47:35.500
should the RCMP get involved? I cannot see how they cannot get involved, given what they did with Duffy.
00:47:44.300
Here's what has to happen, Ezra. Number one, there has to be a full and wholesome investigation by the RCMP.
00:47:51.100
Number two, there has to be charges laid, because I can just simply myself point to, as I did with the
00:47:58.860
text and the evidence given by the Attorney General, there are charges laid. And of course, and let me be
00:48:04.220
very clear, everyone enjoys the due process, the presumption of innocence, and the only people that
00:48:14.220
can decide as to whether there is a criminal code breach is not the Attorney General, it's not Manny,
00:48:21.100
it's not you, it's not any media, it's no one, it is a court. It is a judge where there's a wholesome
00:48:27.180
proceeding. And if that happens, then that is where there's either guilt or not guilty.
00:48:33.180
So, so it has to happen, in my opinion. Yeah. Well, yesterday, Jody Wilson-Raybould said something
00:48:40.060
that was that line about Gerald Butt saying there's going to be interference one way or another.
00:48:44.780
That's right. That's a smoking gun. But she also said that once they had run out of patience with her,
00:48:51.020
because she had blocked this for four months, that they said to her Chief of Staff,
00:48:56.140
or Deputy Minister, I can't remember which, they said, we're going to have a new Attorney General,
00:49:01.260
and the first thing he's going to do is deal with SNC-Levland. So they gave away the game. And again,
00:49:06.460
remember, this is corroborated by the other people, she says, the Chiefs of Staff, the Deputy Ministers.
00:49:13.100
So that new Attorney General is a Montreal old boy named David Lamedi, who is from McGill,
00:49:21.020
just like Trudeau and Gerald Butts. He's part of the liberal scene in that city. He was actually
00:49:27.340
lobbied directly by SNC-Levland, according to the Office of the Lobbyist Commissioner. And he said on TV
00:49:36.140
a couple of weeks ago that he felt no need to investigate because he took the Prime Minister at
00:49:41.500
his word. And he actually said he was still considering giving the plea bargain, the DPA-deferred
00:49:47.100
prosecution agreement to SNC-Levland. How can David Lamedi, the new Attorney General,
00:49:52.940
either stay on that position or even stay in the job, given what we saw yesterday?
00:49:59.420
Ezra, I don't even want to mention that man's name. As a lawyer for 32 years,
00:50:05.260
he has offended every position and every tenet of the law. He is not worthy of it. He is the exact
00:50:18.700
opposite. How proud I felt of our ex-Attorney General reaching the highest form of ethics and duty to Canada.
00:50:28.780
He has, he is the polar opposite. And I don't even want to give him a second of time. He is,
00:50:36.300
it is embarrassing that someone who is in charge of upholding Canada's laws says,
00:50:42.140
I won't even investigate. I won't even, I just accept the Prime Minister's word and moves along,
00:50:47.900
and is happy and gleeful that he's got the Cabinet post. He took the Cabinet post of the,
00:50:54.380
of a very ethical, you know, Indigenous woman. This old boy from Montreal took the Cabinet post
00:51:02.940
because he was prepared to, to, to sacrifice Canada's, uh, uh, judicial system. Ezra, there's
00:51:09.500
another point that I, that as you can see, I'm, I'm charged up and, uh, and, and, and it's because
00:51:14.780
it's a lot because it's, it affects everything that I've done for 32 years. It's an attack on,
00:51:20.140
on, on my profession. It's attack on law. It's attack on Canada. This country is great
00:51:26.300
because we have a great judicial system. Simple. Now, this is where that it really gets emotional
00:51:33.900
for me. Um, as you know, Ezra, on December 12th, two Canadians were, were kidnapped and put in jail
00:51:42.300
in China because there's a retaliation for the Huawei CEO being put in custody in Canada.
00:51:50.060
These two Canadians and one other Canadian got his sentence changed, uh, to a, to a 10 year to,
00:51:56.140
to death. We are going to lose a Canadian. He's going to die. And two other Canadians are there.
00:52:02.940
And 13 others were also, but this happened on December 12th. Ezra, the timeline is very important.
00:52:09.260
On December 12th, Canadians were, were, were caught and the prime minister, I don't know how,
00:52:15.580
how despicable a person can do by sitting, is watching Canadians. The prime minister is there
00:52:21.500
to protect Canadians, to sit there and go on TV and say, we can't do anything because we are a rule
00:52:27.580
of law country. While he has been spending four months to try to help another company, not, not Huawei,
00:52:34.700
S and C. I mean, I don't care which company you talk about, but he's trying four months.
00:52:39.420
And on December 19th, seven days after the full force pressure with the clerk of the privy council
00:52:47.020
under the prime minister's thumb, trying to force the attorney general to, to, to break a rule of law
00:52:53.260
while Canadians are sitting in jail. And he, he lets them pair. There can be no greater offense to me,
00:53:01.740
a person who believes in natural justice, a person who believes in Canadians, a person who believes
00:53:06.700
that the prime minister has to protect every Canadian to sit there, letting people rot in jail
00:53:12.620
for our rule of law, while he breaks the rule of law for S and C. Lavalin. Yeah. That's a very powerful
00:53:19.340
contrast. Uh, I want to ask you, um, about something I've seen on Twitter. Uh, I mean, we all
00:53:27.260
watched, we were really, I was riveted and like you, I was, I was emotionally touched by the fact
00:53:31.900
that someone would take such an ethical stance. I can't imagine standing up to the prime minister
00:53:38.060
and 10 of his henchmen and looking him in the eye and saying, I will not move that. I don't know where
00:53:42.700
she got that courage, obviously from her dad, who's was a fighter in his own day too. And her name,
00:53:48.300
her name is, I mean, her, her, her, her indigenous name, her indigenous name. And, and, and, and she
00:53:54.860
says, I come from a matriarch of people that speak to truth. This, Ezra, if you go back in my tweets,
00:54:02.540
I called it from the beginning. A lot of people are saying, Oh no, it's a setup. I saw this. I don't
00:54:07.100
know, uh, the ex attorney general, but what I saw was in a completely principled individual,
00:54:12.700
a, from a strong family. And I saw that this would happen. Yeah. I've never seen anything
00:54:18.060
like it in my whole life in Canada. Now I was, I was recording my show last night. Uh, so I didn't
00:54:23.900
see it live, but I saw on Twitter that she was asked, why did you stay in cabinet at all given
00:54:29.420
what happened? And I, I haven't watched the video clip myself to verify, but I read that someone
00:54:34.580
reported that her answer was because I wanted to stay in cabinet to make sure he didn't sneak this
00:54:39.980
deal through. Even after I left, that's, that's an incredible statement. So she actually stayed
00:54:46.220
around to see that through to justice. If, if that report I read is accurate, that's amazing.
00:54:53.580
That's exactly what she said. And that is why, you know, I, you know, she is incredibly credible.
00:54:59.180
Oh, why? And it is offensive to me. I mean, I sit there and, and, and cringe when I saw the, the,
00:55:07.260
the, uh, justice committee lawyers. And I tweeted about it, the liberal, sorry, not the lawyers,
00:55:12.460
the justice committee MPs, uh, questioned the liberals questioning her and her integrity.
00:55:18.140
And I was saying, how foolish you have a witness that is, that is totally credible. And you're asking,
00:55:25.180
well, why didn't you come forward sooner? Why did it was embarrassing? They should be ashamed of
00:55:31.260
themselves. But these are, these, you know, for lack of a better word, these are punks trying to
00:55:36.940
try outsmart a very smart lawyer. And, uh, and I laughed at it. I would have let the liberals keep
00:55:43.580
asking questions till, till, till, till me, because they were doing themselves more harm. It is, uh, it is,
00:55:50.620
uh, you know, as a, to kind of look at everything, uh, and, and, and there's so much about this case that
00:55:57.820
people have to look at. We have seen that clearly the prime minister and 11 others are prepared to
00:56:05.100
corrupt the rule of law. I mean, that is without question, but there's something else that we need
00:56:10.220
to talk about Ezra. And that also came out by, but with, with, with, uh, the testimony, the chief of
00:56:17.980
staff, uh, Telford, she said to the attorney general, I know it's not your opinion, but if you change your
00:56:26.780
mind, we can get a lot of friendly, I don't know if she used the word friendly, but a lot of op-eds in
00:56:32.780
a lot of journals to support your new illegal decision. Now, now Ezra, I, I believe, I believe
00:56:41.580
in the media. I think a great country needs an independent free thinking media. You see me tweeting
00:56:48.460
all the time when I see biased media. I think as much as I think that the law is the most important,
00:56:55.340
uh, uh, uh, thing that a great country can have and basically a free, uh, unencumbered, uh, judicial
00:57:04.380
system. I believe that the second, if not close to first is a free media. We have an admission by the
00:57:13.500
attorney general of Canada or then was that the prime minister has available to him media at his
00:57:21.980
beck and call to set the narrative of what may be an illegal act. And that to me, so Ezra, I look at
00:57:30.780
the corruption, the possible corruption of the justice system. I look at the admitted corruption of the free
00:57:39.500
media, our, our independent media. And then the third one, which really, uh, also bothers me is
00:57:46.220
a corruption of our, of our bureaucracy, our independent bureaucracy, the testimony of, of
00:57:52.780
Michael Wernick compared to the testimony of, of, uh, the ex attorney general. I mean, he was more
00:58:00.700
biased than, than David Lamedi in his, in his, in his trumping the, the, the liberal brand
00:58:09.340
and helping Justin Trudeau. So what this whole case, when I look at it and I carefully looked at
00:58:15.660
it hours and hours and hours is we have evidence of corruption of our judicial system. We have
00:58:21.500
evidence of corruption of our independent media, and we have evidence of corruption of our independent
00:58:26.940
bureaucracy. And then this is not, these are not, these are provable facts from the words of the
00:58:34.060
attorney general. When you have the three most important things being corrupted by a government,
00:58:40.540
it, it, we are no longer Canada. We are Venezuela, Cuba. I don't care where, what analogy you want to
00:58:49.180
use, but when you are corrupting the independence of our judiciary, when you are corrupting the
00:58:54.220
independence of our media, and I don't want to get into that $600 million. I I'm trying to stay
00:58:59.740
straight with the facts and the evidence that the attorney general gave. And when you have a clerk
00:59:04.620
trying to incite and emote Canadians and gave a political speech and you saw the, the ex attorney
00:59:12.140
general, it wasn't politics and she's a politician. It was pure fact. That's what we should have heard
00:59:17.980
from Michael Werner. Wow. We're talking with Manny Montanagrino, former managing partner of a national
00:59:23.740
law firm and the CEO of ThinkSharp. Manny, you've been very generous with your time and
00:59:28.620
very thoughtful analysis. I have two final questions for you. Um, I, I've seen on Twitter
00:59:34.940
this morning, Christia Freeland, the foreign minister saying that she believes Jody Wilson-Raybould.
00:59:41.580
And I, and I, and I'm sure she does. And I see Selena, Selena Cesar Chavanis, another Toronto area MP,
00:59:49.340
uh, who was parliamentary secretary to Trudeau. Now she's parliamentary secretary for some other
00:59:53.820
thing. So these are a front bench cabinet minister, Christia Freeland and a parliamentary secretary,
00:59:59.820
which is a pretty good gig. It's like a junior cabinet minister. They're both saying they believe
01:00:05.180
her, but neither of them has stepped down from cabinet and they're just giving this virtue signaling
01:00:13.180
tweet. How, what should a liberal do if a liberal watched what we watched and felt how we felt. And
01:00:20.700
as Freeland and Cesar Chavanis say, they feel what's the right thing for them to do. I've, I don't think
01:00:27.100
it's, um, I don't think it's sustainable to say, I believe these charges of corruption against Trudeau,
01:00:33.500
but I'm willing to remain in Trudeau's cabinet. What should these women do? What should any women
01:00:38.140
or men in caucus or cabinet do? Well, clearly, I mean, what should happen and, uh, Andrew Scherr of
01:00:45.020
the conservative party got it right. He said that the prime minister has to step down. You have serious
01:00:50.460
allegations of, of criminal conduct by 11 people in your close top circle. There's nothing else you
01:00:58.860
can do, but step down. And if he steps down, they can stay in place and do their job and be great
01:01:04.540
liberals and do, and, and, and, and, and move towards, you know, their, their common goal.
01:01:09.740
But if he does not step down, you're right. They are put in a position. Now, what I think is happening,
01:01:15.740
Ezra, I mean, which is just absurd. There's so much evidence of, of culpability. You have Gerald
01:01:22.300
Butts who left, resigned. You cannot say your best friend, prime minister, you've known since,
01:01:29.740
since, since university, your closest friend resigns and you say there's nothing there. Now,
01:01:37.260
you know, that can't be true. So, so you have, and by the way, it was Gerald Butts who recruited,
01:01:45.260
uh, the ex, um, uh, attorney general. They are friends prior that he recruited her. So, uh,
01:01:52.060
Jody was recruited by Gerald Butts. So when you have Jody, so that's why he's resigned. He knows
01:01:58.300
that he's in deep trouble. So when you asked me that question, it's an interesting, you have
01:02:04.540
a liberal MP who stood under oath and said, I don't trust the cabinet. I don't trust the prime
01:02:12.620
minister or pretty much laid out a criminal case against the prime minister. And she still remains
01:02:18.780
a liberal. And the prime minister was asked, are you going to get rid of her? Well, let me think about
01:02:24.460
that. Well, you know why he can't get rid of her because the moment he gets rid of the most ethical
01:02:29.900
liberal in that party, and I'm sure, I'm sure she's got great support is when they will all step
01:02:36.060
down. So, so, so that's why they're not stepping down because there's faint hope that the prime
01:02:41.500
minister might do something right. There's, and, and, you know, I, I loved, uh, Jody's testimony
01:02:47.020
when she said, uh, why did, you know, when this, you know, just, just the foolish questions by the
01:02:52.620
liberal, uh, people on the justice committee, I mean, completely ignorant people who are trying
01:02:57.900
to cross-examine a very brilliant lawyer. But when she, and she replied to one of them,
01:03:02.860
and I forget which it was, but one of those, uh, and she said, I waited and waited. And I,
01:03:09.740
I took the prime minister after the December 19th. Why didn't you do something? Why didn't you stand up?
01:03:15.340
Because I took the prime minister's word. She felt that the prime minister finally got the message
01:03:21.740
until she got kicked out of her position. These fools on the justice committee, these liberal
01:03:28.700
fools don't understand the gravity and don't understand the, the, the force that they are,
01:03:34.860
they are, uh, uh, against. And Judy Wilson-Raybould is, I tell you, I have seen, you know,
01:03:42.380
hundreds and hundreds of lawyers and, and I've been with great lawyers. And let me tell you,
01:03:47.260
I have never been more impressed, uh, with, uh, with her testimony and more impressed with her, uh,
01:03:53.340
with her, uh, uh, uh, protection of, of, of Canadian law. And what I love about it, Ezra,
01:03:59.820
and boy, you learn a lot in life. And, you know, even at my age, you learn a lot, but when the,
01:04:04.380
when the female Aboriginal lawyer, uh, Indigenous lawyer says, uh, that, that a lot of Canada's
01:04:13.980
problems with the Indigenous people were related to not observing the rule of law by a, by we'll say
01:04:22.220
the then corrupt government, this is the person that's speaking truth to justice.
01:04:27.660
Yeah. Isn't that true? I got one last question for you, man. As I mentioned earlier, uh, you're
01:04:32.860
not just a keen analyst and observer. You're not just someone who has a lot of experience with
01:04:37.740
lawyers running a large firm, but you yourself were an advisor, the lawyer to a prime minister,
01:04:45.980
Stephen Harper. Right. So I want to give you a tough question, put aside your own moral and
01:04:53.180
political thoughts on things and pretend for a moment that you were the private lawyer to Justin
01:04:59.100
Trudeau. So your duty is to your client, Trudeau. What legal advice would you give Justin Trudeau
01:05:08.140
having seen what you've seen? Well, I mean, right now, I think, um, the ex attorney general, Jody,
01:05:15.580
uh, did give her great advice. I thought she was brilliant advising the prime minister that be
01:05:22.460
careful. You are treading. This is September. You're treading on very, very dangerous ground.
01:05:28.460
Uh, he does not listen to good advice. I mean, it's clearly, I mean, I could go through so, but if I
01:05:36.460
were advising him and if I were advising the 11 people named, I would, I would get a big horn. One of those
01:05:45.180
big horns going to, and just, and let out that big fog horn to get them out of their arrogant,
01:05:53.100
self-loving world that they think they're in with all the power, because the law is a different world.
01:06:00.140
Uh, I can't believe how many times, and I've been in meetings as well, as you know, uh, the problem
01:06:05.980
with the PMO as it stands now, there isn't a lawyer in there. I don't think there is. I, I mean, I,
01:06:11.180
I looked, I tried to find out. I know Jerry Butch is an lawyer. I know the prime minister is an
01:06:15.260
lawyer. I know Kay Telford's not a lawyer. There are no lawyers in there. A lawyer would have said,
01:06:20.300
in that room, would have said, uh, guys, wake up. This is, we're into serious stuff. So there
01:06:25.180
isn't a lawyer in that room. So the advice I give to the, to, to everyone there now,
01:06:31.500
get yourself a very good criminal lawyer. As for the prime minister, I mean, you know,
01:06:37.980
you know, I, I would love to see him resign. I mean, sometimes, you know, you know, the attorney
01:06:44.220
general put Canada ahead of her political career, ahead of her job. You would expect that the prime
01:06:49.580
minister do the same. And he, and, and he is the last person that would put Canada ahead of anything
01:06:54.540
that, that, that, that, that he seeks or desires. And we've seen too many examples of that.
01:06:59.260
Wow. Well, another masterclass in law, politics, and patriotism by our friend,
01:07:05.260
Manny Montenegrino. What a great pleasure. Thank you so much, not only for your time,
01:07:09.820
but for your wisdom. It's clear you have studied this very carefully. In fact, I, I'm going to follow
01:07:14.460
up on my own time. Some of the, the leads you've mentioned here today, Manny, just great to have
01:07:19.500
you with us today. Thank you. No problem, Ezra.
01:07:21.900
There you have it. Manny Montenegrino, the CEO of ThinkSharp and former lawyer to Stephen Harper.
01:07:41.660
Hey, welcome back to my show yesterday about Jody Wilson-Raybould's testimony and the SNC-Lavalin
01:07:47.340
There's no way that Canadians can trust anyone in Justin's cabinet now. How can this government
01:07:52.620
perform its job for Canada after this? I wonder just how deep this corruption goes. They are all
01:07:57.340
tainted now. You know, it's funny. I see, uh, for example, Christia Freeland and Selena Cesar
01:08:04.940
Chavannes saying, we, we believe you, sister, solidarity, feminists forever. They say they believe
01:08:12.140
Jody Wilson-Raybould, and I think it's wise to believe her. I think she's very credible as Manny
01:08:15.980
Montenegrino explained. Um, so why are you still in cabinet?
01:08:21.420
So you totally stand with Jody Wilson-Raybould, but actually you're standing in cabinet because
01:08:27.580
you love your limo and driver and boosted salary and all the travel. Yeah. Christia Freeland will
01:08:34.060
never quit on principle, uh, because she doesn't have principles. She prefers to jet set around
01:08:38.700
and swan around. And she loves that look that Justin Trudeau gives her when they'll lock eyes.
01:08:45.100
He's got this weird thing he does with all of his female cabinet ministers. He, he's not just a close
01:08:49.900
talker. He literally touches foreheads with them and he embraces them in a weird way that surely drives
01:08:56.700
his wife Sophie crazy. Linda writes, she wouldn't go along with their wink, wink, nod, nod crap.
01:09:03.900
I want to jump up and down and cheer. Last truth is a chance. Yeah. I got to say, I mean, I, I don't
01:09:08.300
even want to say anymore that I disagree with some of Jody Wilson-Raybould's politics and ideology,
01:09:12.300
because that is not a, that is so irrelevant. I mean, she could be a communist for all I care
01:09:18.380
about the present matter, which is the rule of law. She's not a communist. The rule of law,
01:09:24.220
that no one's above it or below it. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. You can't
01:09:29.260
sneak your way out of it. You can't lobby your way out of it. You committed a crime. You're going
01:09:32.460
to be prosecuted. Oh, I love the fact that she stood for that. And yes, I, I find it also delicious,
01:09:39.980
the irony that she's an Aboriginal woman who's, who understands the essence of Queen Elizabeth's laws
01:09:47.180
and our legal tradition, going back to the Magna Carta and even earlier. Yes. I love that delicious
01:09:51.580
irony. I love the fact that Justin Trudeau thought that she was just a token, a double token,
01:09:56.620
a woman and a minority. Oh, surely she'll understand I'm the source of all her power. No,
01:10:01.420
no, no. Isn't it perfect that she was the only one with principle? And I say again,
01:10:09.420
do you really think this is the only time that Trudeau and Butts and crew have done this?
01:10:14.380
Or is it more likely this is the only time there was one honest person who stood up to them?
01:10:19.260
Hmm. Billy writes, the Libranos attempted to interfere in the judicial process while admitting
01:10:25.340
the reason was for reelection of the provincial and federal liberals. That's called election
01:10:29.420
rigging. Yeah, exactly. Today I did my show on foreign meddling. Foreigners didn't meddle in our
01:10:35.420
court system now, did they? And that was Justin Trudeau. On rebel reporters being assaulted,
01:10:41.740
Rich writes, three rebel reporters were assaulted by common street thugs and not a word of it was heard
01:10:46.780
from the mainstream media. However, a CBC reporter was jokingly licked on the ear by some performer
01:10:51.820
at a comedy club and all hell breaks loose in the hallowed halls of the anointed ones. Yeah,
01:10:56.700
you know, I saw that. It was really gross, by the way. And I should point out that that weird ear
01:11:02.140
licker is a CBC talent. He actually had a role on the show Little Mosque on the Prairies. He played the
01:11:08.460
dumb redneck. Oh, I'm just a dumb redneck. They had the dumb redneck on there to show how
01:11:14.060
modern, progressive, and thoughtful the Little Mosque on the Prairies was. So he played Joe
01:11:18.140
Peterson. I'm just a dumb redneck. So it was a CBC talent that licked the ear of a CBC journalist.
01:11:24.780
It was super gross. On Facebook censorship and Tommy Robinson, Nicky writes,
01:11:29.980
I am blocked from posting these. I asked them to review. They reviewed it saying I had broken their
01:11:34.700
standards and closed the case, yet others have got it on and it's not deleted. So I guess they know I
01:11:40.380
support Tommy. Here's the pictures. And Nicky sends along. So you can see here, just oh, Tommy, Tommy.
01:11:48.060
And they're saying, literally, this is against their terms of service. Show another one.
01:11:58.620
We've reviewed your photo and it doesn't follow our community standards. Case closed. Your temporary
01:12:04.060
block from posting. The block will last three days. You won't be able to post on Facebook till it's
01:12:08.620
finished. If you post something again, you'll be blocked for seven days. And then again, even longer,
01:12:14.540
just for saying, Tommy, Tommy, Tommy Robinson. Just saying those words. It's like Voldemort. You
01:12:21.660
can't even get to whisper. Oh, I like this guy, Tommy Robinson. That's Facebook in the UK today.
01:12:29.740
And that's what Karina Gould and Raj Sany and the rest of the liberals want in Canada today. And all the
01:12:39.340
conservative MP can say is, why don't you just do it and look fabulous? We're doomed. On that happy
01:12:48.220
note, let me wish you good night. Until tomorrow, keep fighting for freedom.