Juno News - Fighting Trudeau’s Mandates

00:00:00.000 well hello everybody welcome back and I hope you're doing well wherever you are thanks again

00:00:23.640 for tuning in and I'm so glad to have you here this past week there was some good news at long

00:00:29.980 last the federal government announced that they were going to allow their last remaining pandemic

00:00:34.700 restrictions to expire on October 1st essentially arrive can or a ride can't as it's popularly known

00:00:43.240 will become optional in addition to this testing and quarantine requirements for those entering

00:00:49.840 Canada as well as mask mandates and on planes and trains will no longer be in place so it seems like

00:00:57.160 finally we're getting closer to joining the rest of the world in hopefully putting the pandemic

00:01:02.980 behind us Canada as you know something that I've been pointing out for months now has been an extreme

00:01:09.280 outlier in terms of how long stringent restrictions have been maintained in the face of a retreating

00:01:14.920 pandemic today I'm pleased to welcome back Shawn Rickard and Carl Harrison you might recall Shawn

00:01:21.280 and Carl are two British born entrepreneurs Canadians who brought a civil lawsuit against

00:01:28.840 the federal government's vaccine mandate for travel you might also recall that last month based on the

00:01:35.860 cross-examination of key government witnesses by their attorney Sam Pressvelos I broke the story for

00:01:42.940 Barry Wise's common sense platform that the government the Trudeau government's vaccine mandate for travel had no

00:01:49.600 scientific rationale now after the federal government suspended the vaccine mandates both for travel

00:01:56.980 and for the civil service on June 16th the Attorney General filed a mootness motion basically the

00:02:03.940 government's position is that now that these mandates have been suspended the lawsuit challenging them is no

00:02:11.360 longer relevant it is now moot and therefore should be dismissed on September 21st the Federal Court of

00:02:17.740 Canada under Judge Jocelyn Gagné began hearing submissions for press for laws and lawyers representing

00:02:24.160 the Attorney General which I attended via Zoom we're still awaiting a decision from the judge on whether she

00:02:30.860 thinks the case is moot or not if it's not then the case gets its day in court now here's why I think the

00:02:38.260 case deserves its day in court it's not just for Shawn and Carl but for the millions of Canadians whose lives were

00:02:45.340 drastically affected by the vaccine mandates and for those of us who cherish our constitutionally

00:02:51.880 guaranteed individual rights and liberties the case also has wider implications and significance when

00:02:59.080 it comes to things like public scrutiny and accountability now if the federal court were to

00:03:05.020 side with the government and basically agreeing that the case is moot because the mandates have now been

00:03:10.060 suspended or lifted it would effectively legitimize this practice of restricting our constitutionally

00:03:16.600 protected rights and freedoms so long as the restrictions are removed before the courts have a

00:03:21.820 chance to hold the government to account as a matter of fact let's not forget that the Trudeau government

00:03:28.480 used a version of this tactic already remember the emergencies act in which they invoked to get rid of the

00:03:37.480 protesters from the freedom convoy protest this past February well the government withdrew it just before

00:03:44.560 it came up for a debate in the Senate now none of this is good for a society that's governed by the rule

00:03:51.080 of law so to talk about the mootness hearing and where we go from here please welcome Shawn and Carl to the show

00:03:59.860 Shawn and Carl welcome welcome back to my show it's great to have you here so let me begin with

00:04:06.940 uh let me let me begin with this question can either of you give me a brief summary um of uh what

00:04:14.020 happened uh in court on September 21 with the mootness hearing go ahead Carl thanks Shawn um yes yes we can we

00:04:25.660 can um and obviously we we have to be cautious because the you know that we don't have a decision from the

00:04:33.820 court in court on this and um so Assistant Chief Justice Gagné is still considering the pleadings that

00:04:41.420 were made to her uh last Wednesday um but uh yeah I mean we we had a whole day in court um in front of a

00:04:50.140 um uh Judge Gagné um and um all four cases uh challenging the travel mandates uh were represented there

00:05:01.180 uh so ourselves um represented by um our lawyer Sam Presvellos and uh the Brian Peckford group represented by Keith

00:05:09.380 Wilson and Ava from JCCF and uh and Maxime Bernier was there as well in person with um his uh attorney

00:05:17.940 Saint-Bachand and um and then uh Nabil Ben-Noam from uh Quebec who's representing himself and all um

00:05:25.460 four parties made representations um and obviously the government um made pleadings as well explaining why

00:05:33.140 they thought that the issue was now moot um and obviously all the four cases are strongly opposing that

00:05:40.900 um and uh we set out very clearly I think why the issues um are not moot um not least because the

00:05:51.780 government continues to make it very clear that they could bring all or some of the measures back at any

00:05:59.540 time um and uh we have to wait now and see whether um uh Judge Gagné is um willing to grant the

00:06:12.900 government its wishes and set the and dismiss the cases we obviously hope not and if if she decides

00:06:18.820 that one or more of the cases should go forward then they'll go forward on the 31st of uh October

00:06:25.700 for five days in the same court and then also in front of ACJ Gagné and um we will we'll hopefully

00:06:34.260 get the opportunity to present our case in full and that would also give the government a chance

00:06:38.100 to explain itself I think to Canadians more widely as to how we arrived at this point so that's I think

00:06:46.020 a fair summary where we are we don't know when we'll get a decision from Judge Gagné that it could be

00:06:51.780 you know in days or it she she could take a few weeks she's reserved judgment of course it's a 0.92

00:06:57.060 complicated motion and it has um substantial uh implications um right and we'll yeah we'll we'll

00:07:08.820 get to the implications a little later on uh Sean do you want to jump in and uh add anything to what

00:07:14.420 Carl said yeah I mean it's um it it's we're kind of um you know hanging here right now waiting for

00:07:24.980 this decision and we totally understand why it would take you know it that we've we've we've heard

00:07:31.700 rumors it could be anywhere from 10 to 14 days to receive a judgment it may go longer as Carl said but

00:07:37.620 at the end of the day there's a there's a lot of evidence that needs to be that she has to sort 0.92

00:07:42.420 through a lot of things to consider I think um my impression was when we were in court was that

00:07:49.700 she she did sit up and take notice I don't think it was um she was dismissive in any way and I think

00:07:56.100 she was fair and I think um I I'm confident I I really am in the fact that it it's it's I've got

00:08:05.540 this crazy analogy that some people might uh jump on me for but it it's almost like you know you you're

00:08:12.020 an abuse you've been abusing somebody and you go to court and it's like well I'm not doing it anymore

00:08:17.540 and I'm probably not going to do it again so it's kind of moot now but I mean that's kind of where we feel

00:08:24.260 we are right now we've been fighting this case for um close to a year I mean I started this whole

00:08:30.020 initiative back in October of 2022 and um you know the amount of time money effort blood sweat tears

00:08:41.140 everything that's gone into this um and and also not to forget very important the what we uncovered

00:08:48.660 during the cross-examination process of this whole proceedings that needs to be heard in a court um I

00:08:55.940 don't think this is something that can be just sort of shrugged off or swept under the rug this needs

00:09:01.140 to go the the full duration at the right to the end they need to let us get to that finish line

00:09:07.540 and at least let a judge decide whether constitutional rights were violated um you know whether other

00:09:15.460 violations were were involved here with regard to the the claims of the science and then the science

00:09:21.780 not being there when they implemented the demanding so just to cut myself off there yeah it's very

00:09:28.580 important um and um we're hoping and we have our fingers and toes crossed that we'll get to a final

00:09:37.140 hearing here um so um so you know sean and carl i mean uh i wonder how much of the government uh dropping

00:09:48.820 the last remaining measures on travel this past monday had to do with your case how much of that had to

00:09:55.300 do with the fact that pier poliever was recently elected as leader of the conservative party um do you

00:10:02.100 have any views on that a hundred percent okay go for it i'll let carl go sorry i didn't mean to jump

00:10:09.940 in but yeah yeah no i mean i mean i think there's many factors at play here i i would never um i would

00:10:16.580 never be so brazen or bold to assume that pierre poliever never had anything to do with this i i did

00:10:23.220 to be clear i voted um in the leadership base and i voted for pierre poliever and i would vote for

00:10:28.340 him in a general election right now um i don't think that anybody should be claiming um full

00:10:36.020 responsibility for these mandates i think our lawsuits which again have been going on for almost

00:10:40.900 a year in the court and not just ours the other three as well uh the peckford case the bernier and

00:10:46.660 the bills case of all um kind of we've we've made the government sit up and take notice um there's things

00:10:56.580 that have been revealed in these cases that they probably don't want the public to know about

00:11:02.420 which we'll get into the mainstream media not covering this in this story for the last year

00:11:07.620 in a moment but uh i i think we definitely had some um we were responsible in some way for these

00:11:15.380 mandates being lifted um i i don't see how it couldn't and the fact that the government are so

00:11:21.620 adamant about our case never being heard i mean they've been throwing these motions at us since

00:11:27.380 the beginning if you remember right back at the start they tried to uh they filed a motion to have

00:11:33.220 carl and i's um just for the viewers who are catching up to have our affidavits stricken from the record

00:11:41.140 they didn't want to judge to read our affidavits why um and now we're we're at a point where they

00:11:47.620 you know conveniently suspend the mandates and now literally a day or two later they file a motion

00:11:55.380 for mootness that this case shouldn't be heard and this case should be heard and i'll hand it over to

00:12:00.420 carl on that note i i think all sean's uh points there are fair and it's definitely a combination of

00:12:08.980 factors um obviously uh pierre pollard's certainly warming up in the house now and you can see that

00:12:17.860 he's having an impact and he's looking more and more confident and making it more and more difficult

00:12:23.940 for the prime minister and for the deputy prime minister to actually deal with him so there obviously

00:12:30.500 is going to be a government concern and there's lots and there are two or three polls in recent days

00:12:35.380 are all showing the liberal party sliding behind um the conservative party i mean perhaps as um

00:12:42.900 people move back to uh the conservative party from the people's party uh from the 2021 election i don't

00:12:50.660 really know but there are certainly some polls that are indicating that seven or eight point differences

00:12:56.420 emerging and that's going to cause a problem for the liberal i'm sure that in the prime minister's

00:13:01.220 office there's lots of people hard at work trying to figure out what to do next um and there was

00:13:06.500 always um a problem for uh the prime minister that he would face if he faced pierre polyev in the house

00:13:14.500 polyev seems more agile um you know intellectually he seems more humorous he just seems to present the

00:13:22.100 points better and when i was in ottawa last week for the hearing i went to question period on the uh

00:13:28.340 thursday um in the house and listened and you could see that at the time you could see that

00:13:34.100 um the front bench of the government is concerned about pierre polyev he's he's nimble and agile and

00:13:40.420 and they'll find him difficult to deal with so that's obviously a factor our cases all four of them

00:13:45.300 are certainly a factor and another factor is just the the the overwhelming energy of connect

00:13:52.580 millions of canadians whether vaccinated or unvaccinated or not who just think this is wrong

00:13:57.860 and have poured their heart and soul into uh their keyboards and have um delivered the prime minister

00:14:05.300 a harsh blow through various uh um hashtags on twitter for example such as trudeau must go which

00:14:14.260 is and so on and so forth um and some of those people were very grateful to for actually coming to

00:14:19.780 the hearing in ottawa last week we actually had some uh supporters um who were there and those are exactly the

00:14:26.660 people those those people um are you know very much also responsible for forcing the government

00:14:33.380 to reconsider its position yeah i was going to ask you what um uh how many people showed up to the hearing

00:14:40.580 and uh either in person or via zoom uh was there a good turnout generally speaking

00:14:46.500 yeah i mean you know obviously it's uh um a long journey to water for other people so it was local

00:14:54.660 people and certainly you know maybe 30 to 50 people have arrived at the courthouse and uh that was great

00:15:00.660 to see and they spoke to us and the other applicants and um and some of them watched the whole uh proceedings

00:15:08.100 for the whole day uh inside the court inside the uh court entrance where they were uh you know the

00:15:13.860 court uh set that up so that people could could watch it there and i i mean i i think there were

00:15:19.300 approaching 5 000 people watching it online and this is very very important um because it shows that

00:15:26.580 there's intense public interest in the case and you'll remember that when you wrote your piece

00:15:33.700 for uh barry weiss's common sense and that was picked up by media all over the world um that uh

00:15:40.820 the federal court went to a very unusual step one that i understand they've never done before

00:15:46.020 going to uh social media twitter in particular to um send out a link to the documents so that members

00:15:54.020 of the public and canadians generally could actually see what you were talking about what what you were

00:15:58.980 speaking of and um so obviously the court's very very well aware and we'll know that you know justice

00:16:05.940 gagne is very aware that there is public interest yeah i was uh really taken aback when the federal

00:16:12.660 court of canada tweeted um saying that given the extraordinary interest in this case we're making

00:16:18.420 this link available to members of the public and uh um and i yeah i was told by many people that this has

00:16:24.660 never happened before um so um yeah no it was very very unusual um back to the uh back to the hearing

00:16:33.060 um uh sean and carl i was struck by something that the council for the attorney general was saying uh and

00:16:40.500 it was something that was repeated uh several times during the course of the proceedings uh when robert

00:16:46.900 drummond um i believe he's counsel for the attorney general he argued and i quote him i think it's fair

00:16:53.620 to say that there is no evidence that such travel measures are returning the statements made by the

00:16:58.980 ministers are political statements and press releases not legal statements uh when i heard this

00:17:04.980 my reaction was one of amazement i couldn't believe that we were being told to ignore statements by

00:17:10.340 politicians because they have no legal force um what was your reaction was it similar uh did uh did

00:17:17.620 any of this make sense to you it was the same we we had the exact same reaction it's it's just incredible

00:17:24.740 that um it's almost like they were throwing these ministers under the bus because i mean these these

00:17:31.940 were the these were the individuals that were responsible for bringing these mandates in and putting

00:17:36.660 them in place again this did we got to remember and we can maybe get into this in a bit this didn't

00:17:42.100 go through a legislative process this this was like an executive order signed off by a minister

00:17:48.260 so when these ministers who bring in these mandates then go on on television and make these announcements

00:17:54.180 that they're literally going to be um you know initially preventing people who are not vaccinated from

00:18:00.260 getting a plane a train um or a ship and um and then you know subsequently in june then saying that

00:18:09.700 they're going to temporarily suspend the mandates and make it very clear in their announcements that

00:18:15.220 they can they'll bring them back at any time if they feel if they see fit and then for the uh attorney

00:18:21.700 general's counsel to say oh well don't listen to them um you can't take that you know verbatim it's

00:18:30.420 that's just them talking that's just a minister talking it's not legal um yeah it's just astonishing

00:18:38.340 absolutely astonishing i mean i think i think our lawyer sam prezellos commented on that and and

00:18:46.340 rightly so pointing out that we we live in a country we live in a democracy where the words

00:18:53.940 words that mean something don't have to come out of the mouth of a lawyer yeah i i did i think that

00:19:00.500 resonated with the judge with the judge it's quite extraordinary that the the attorney general would

00:19:07.860 suggest that the canadian people should ignore a formal public statement from the mouths of three

00:19:18.020 government ministers um and it's more extraordinary that another cabinet member would suggest that the

00:19:25.060 court and canadians should indeed do that yeah i i liked what sam prezellos had to say uh sam

00:19:31.300 unfortunately couldn't join us on the podcast uh but this is what he said he said uh my friend

00:19:36.900 referring to the attorney general would like this court to believe uh that media statements don't

00:19:42.980 matter they're not legal statements uh i'm not sure what type of democracy we exist in if we cannot

00:19:48.740 trust the truthfulness of statements being made by government ministers and that's a great point you

00:19:54.340 know what kind of democracy is this if we cannot trust the statements made by government ministers

00:19:59.300 right well or or in the case you have an attorney general essentially telling you to ignore them

00:20:07.860 ignore them and dismiss it you know don't worry about that yeah yeah sorry carl yeah um yeah sorry carl go

00:20:15.300 ahead yeah i mean i think what's what's interesting that we've we've seen recently in the last few days

00:20:21.780 um is um as the the government's moved to um closed or tried to turn the page on um its remaining measures

00:20:34.260 at the border we've seen other um heavyweights weighing in now so we saw was air canada yesterday

00:20:44.100 releasing a statement which wasn't covered by the mainstream media almost at all and remains on newswire

00:20:49.540 and in a couple of other places but quite a remarkable statement from air canada which um

00:20:56.340 says this it says air canada welcomes the removal of these restrictions acknowledging that

00:21:01.460 air travel is safe and that the measures were not justified by science which is an extraordinary

00:21:08.820 that is extraordinary yeah that is extraordinary and you wonder how long they've been wanting to say

00:21:14.660 that or how long they've been aware that the measures were not justified by science and i wonder

00:21:21.380 in the wording whether they're suggesting that the government by removing the restrictions is

00:21:25.780 acknowledging the measures were not justified by science or whether that's the opinion of air canada

00:21:30.260 but it's kind of ironic that they were one of the most um heavy-handed enforcers i've said exactly

00:21:36.100 they usually did that if uh government ministers were on the same flight i have noticed that every

00:21:41.540 time there was a government minister on a flight to ottawa they would repeat three or four times that

00:21:45.940 you had to keep your mask on and but the compliance just kept um you know just kept um you know it was

00:21:52.420 wasn't really um that they weren't enforcing it at least the last couple of months that i've been flying

00:21:59.940 there's been hardly any compliance except when you fly to ottawa uh because there's usually a government

00:22:04.500 minister on board i i think um yeah didn't you call last week when we left ottawa yeah no i i flew out

00:22:13.860 so yeah i flew out of ottawa and it was um yeah certainly at the airport and certainly it was and on

00:22:18.740 on the flight it was uh fairly rigid enforcement but that all seems set to or they certainly seem set to

00:22:25.380 not renew that at the end of the week yeah um you know i um i heard from some people who tuned into

00:22:32.340 the zoom hearing that uh the government almost seemed kind of heartless in defending its case

00:22:38.500 um did it uh come across that way to you at all they they're i gotta watch what i say here yeah i i

00:22:47.620 think i think these um these lawyers are a special kind of people and they've kind of expressed that

00:22:55.620 it's nothing new to us since i mean at the beginning it was but i i think they're very um

00:23:02.420 calculated and and they have a job to do right in fairness um their job is to defend one side our

00:23:08.900 lawyer is is is to get our case across but yeah they they can be very cold and calculated as can the

00:23:16.500 bureaucrats uh as you saw in some of the um transcripts from the yes the cross-examinations yeah

00:23:24.900 i'll leave it at that before i get myself in trouble i think um sean summarized it well there

00:23:31.140 they got a job to do yeah um i i i think these measures and the impact and and the court cases

00:23:40.820 are very important for all canadians not those canadians who have chosen to

00:23:46.500 not be uh not have the injections um but everybody uh the the the consequences of allowing a government

00:23:56.900 to be able to dictate people's health as a micro managed level like this are extraordinarily broad

00:24:04.340 and dangerous and need to be addressed and challenged by by the courts um so sadly whilst

00:24:12.100 it does affect millions of canadians governments authoritarian governments governments with unusual

00:24:16.580 motives and sometimes malign intentions have always managed to find people that they can employ to

00:24:22.580 enable them to do it it's not like everybody turns around and says we're not going to help you with

00:24:27.060 that there's always going to be somebody there who's going to do that so yeah i mean you know

00:24:31.700 people have a job to do we understand that uh i'd hope in doing that job that the people doing it

00:24:37.220 consider how these measures might impact them in a wider way going forward unless we consider them as a

00:24:43.780 as a as a country now there was another point too that um that some people missed some i i we talked

00:24:51.380 about it on the day carl but um the fact that they they never if you notice whenever they're talking

00:24:57.540 about these mandates and you've got to remember we're we're in a hearing that's trying to declare

00:25:02.260 our cases moot but they never close the door on anything they always leave the door open just in case

00:25:09.380 right it's because even um i forget his name the first gentleman up for the um for the attorney general's

00:25:15.300 council um but even he said that that um you know it it's it's unlikely that they're gonna have to do

00:25:22.900 this again but if they do it'll be under different circumstances so you know we'll worry about that

00:25:29.380 when it happens but right now it's moot but they they're always hinting that they can bring it back

00:25:35.220 at any time or they may have to bring it back or however the wording is and even trudeau's been

00:25:41.220 doing that the last few days but and people are starting to pick up on that too it's never completely

00:25:46.420 it's like it's done it's finished go on with your lives you know um it's never completely over there's

00:25:53.380 always that right at the end of the conversation that big but or maybe right exactly yeah and that

00:26:01.060 leads me leads me to my next question uh which is related to what you just said uh sean which is

00:26:07.860 um what is at stake here in this in the case in other words why do you both sean and carl think the

00:26:15.460 case is not moot why shouldn't uh uh the judge just say yeah case dismissed and uh why do you think

00:26:23.060 this case deserves its day in court basically there there are things that have been that the people's

00:26:29.860 lives were affected by this and until i got into this case i mean my life was affected in one way

00:26:34.900 carl's was affected in another everybody has their everybody was affected in a different way by this

00:26:41.220 but the fact that people were unable to visit dying relatives um that we've got people on our group

00:26:49.540 husband and wives who haven't seen each other in three years or two and a half years

00:26:55.060 because they if they came back they wouldn't be able they wouldn't be able to leave again and

00:26:59.220 because their husbands i should just clarify you know husbands that work out of the country or um

00:27:04.340 there's also relationships between you know maybe a fiance that lives in um lives in the us and somebody

00:27:12.580 lives here or anywhere in the world and people's lives were turned upside down and um i mean there's

00:27:18.660 one thing restricting people's mobility rights which in itself i think is a crime in my opinion um and

00:27:24.980 we this i guess where i'm going with this in a nutshell is that we need to ensure that this is heard by

00:27:32.820 a judge and that the rationale for doing this is exposed to the public because we know it wasn't based

00:27:40.260 on science we have evidence to prove that and we need to make sure this never ever happens again

00:27:48.100 in the way that it did it can i'm not saying there's ever going to be a situation where

00:27:54.020 you know stringent measures have to be put in place but

00:27:58.100 in under the the situation that we were in and the and and the the way that they did it this has this

00:28:04.900 can never happen again and that's why we need it to be heard in court because we're hoping a judge will

00:28:10.340 agree with us on that yeah i mean there is sean articulates that well there's there's um there are

00:28:19.220 some general reasons why it should be heard the canadians have a right to i think have full public

00:28:27.380 scrutiny of health measures this isn't a matter of national security um it doesn't have that

00:28:34.180 sensitivity to it it might be sensitive to the prime minister's office or it might be sensitive to

00:28:40.500 the minister's office but i think there needs to be a full um and transparent understanding of what

00:28:47.460 happened to take us to this point because what we know as sean said from the evidence that you know it

00:28:52.820 wasn't based on a scientific rationale neither the public health agency of canada nor health canada

00:28:59.380 recommended these uh the measures to government they were taken within government now there's a

00:29:08.260 a there there's a i can't remember what it is but there's a winston churchill quote which talks about

00:29:13.060 how you should never allow the state apparatus apparatus to get into the hands of of experts and

00:29:18.820 clearly justin trudeau to some extent agrees with him on that when it suits him you know so expert

00:29:24.420 opinion is important when he needs it and it's not when he doesn't but um there are some specifics

00:29:31.620 as well that need to be considered and sam prasvelas has argued this in our case that it shouldn't be

00:29:38.820 an issue for canadians to have to sacrifice one charter right for another you know can i travel or can i

00:29:47.380 maintain my right to um decide what goes into my body do i have to make a choice between my job

00:29:54.660 and my and what goes into my body none of these things are correct or appropriate

00:29:59.700 even in perhaps the most extreme circumstances in the case of covid it was never that extreme

00:30:06.900 and it didn't need to be done in such a way and i think it's possible that by now even the prime

00:30:13.380 minister is learning some lessons but from this and if we think back to his language in the summer

00:30:19.780 of 2021 and how incendiary and inflammatory and divisive and discriminatory it was then if at the

00:30:27.460 time he had introduced these measures by suggesting that he was doing so reluctantly he was producing the

00:30:34.020 scientific basis on which he was doing it he was telling canadians that he would remove them as soon

00:30:39.140 as possible he was apologizing for the fact that it would inconvenience millions of canadians and

00:30:44.500 that he respected their personal choices he would have found himself in a different place by now

00:30:49.540 probably but that's not what our prime minister did he decided to use it as a wedge issue in a

00:30:54.660 political campaign for his personal gain in an election and that's why he has millions of canadians

00:31:02.900 coming out now and speaking against him and that's that's going to be his legacy that those the words

00:31:09.300 he said will ultimately be this prime minister's legacy not the one he wants but that's what it's

00:31:14.100 going to be right sean did you want to jump in and no i just said he literally weaponized it and not

00:31:21.060 only weaponized it it was just done in such a such a vicious heinous way it was it was just ugly i mean

00:31:27.300 we've all seen those videos going around now one thing i did want to touch on was that every time

00:31:33.300 we talk about this so we put out even the jordan peterson video uh interview that we did with you

00:31:38.180 rupert um people are always like ah that's that's all fake well i'm gonna call anybody out now who wants

00:31:45.860 to call this fake and they called our they actually called our court documents the transcripts they called

00:31:51.300 them fake because the problem with the i don't know whether it's the left or just those people

00:31:57.780 over there that they don't want to research and do anything it's literally whatever the mainstream media

00:32:02.900 tells them whatever the government tells them we're branded as uh disinformation or extremists um

00:32:11.140 but i'm gonna call people out right now if they want to find me on social media then go to any of my

00:32:15.460 social media sites my name's right there literally look it up on facebook instagram or getter uh because

00:32:22.580 i'm banned from twitter um and go there and i have links where you can download a searchable pdf

00:32:31.300 1400 pages of documents which you went through yourself rupert yeah and they can download it and go

00:32:38.100 through and look at exhibits d f um they're listed right there in the link anyway but they can download

00:32:46.580 the four transcripts and read them for themselves yeah because i'm getting a bit tired of people

00:32:51.700 literally just coming in and busting in on our social media and saying you guys are missed disinformation

00:32:57.380 you're lying your documents are fake these are court documents of of government witnesses under oath

00:33:04.900 testifying in federal court so if they want to go take a look at it find me on social media go

00:33:09.540 download the link i've put it on all platforms and read for yourself that's uh that's extraordinary

00:33:15.220 sean because that was the initial reaction to my story when i first broke it on august 2nd

00:33:21.220 that for the first couple of days people were saying that i was making this up and this uh there was no

00:33:26.020 such case and um and even a cbc reporter whose beat is uh the federal court or the judicial system in

00:33:33.860 general um was asking me where he could find these documents and uh and i had to kind of hold his

00:33:41.700 hand and tell him you know this is what you need to do and this is not even my area of expertise um

00:33:48.580 and i had a few of those i had a few of them contact me and it just blew my mind that these people were

00:33:53.940 seasoned journalists like big big publications and tv station tv news yeah and they're asking how do i get

00:34:01.540 the documents it's like what you've never requested documents from a federal court i guess that goes

00:34:06.100 to tell us why we get so much um bs from them on the news because they clearly don't know how to do

00:34:13.460 the homework right yeah well i think you know there's a certain amount of naivete here that if

00:34:17.940 the mainstream media doesn't cover it then it doesn't exist right um and worse than that it's not

00:34:24.100 it's not even it's it's it's it's almost that people have been conditioned to think that way now i mean

00:34:29.300 look at look at our case and and i gotta give you a big shout out here if it wasn't for people like

00:34:35.220 you um who who picked up this story in the beginning and and you know and then we worked

00:34:41.140 because of you it's just it amazes me that the telegraph one of the uk's biggest newspapers

00:34:48.180 published this story after reading your piece right and that they wanted you to write a piece for them

00:34:53.780 it went out on gb news in the uk it went out on sky news i think in australia went all over the globe

00:35:00.580 except canada can there's not one mainstream network in canada that has mentioned this case

00:35:07.540 and to the point where they've almost where we've sent them information and they've kind of buried it

00:35:12.180 somewhere because you know they have it we've sent it to them and they just don't want to report on it

00:35:17.780 so and it's very disturbing as to why that would be because and i think jordan peterson in our

00:35:24.260 interview said it best it's like one of the biggest stories and you know in 10 years and nobody wants

00:35:31.300 to report on it why yeah yeah no big shout out to you anyway thank you thank you thank you yeah thank

00:35:39.700 you sean yeah and i needs more journalists like you i appreciate that uh but honestly i keep saying this

00:35:46.900 to everybody i who says this to me that i um you know i wasn't doing anything extraordinary here i

00:35:52.820 thought that this was interesting and important and i was just doing my job i guess and uh um and

00:35:59.620 you know i'm i'm i appreciate the support and i that really means a lot to me um but yeah i think this

00:36:05.540 case has um as i argued in the pages of the national post today i believe it's in print today that when

00:36:12.660 it you know this case has wider significance when it comes to things like accountability um that you

00:36:18.420 know if the court agrees with the government that the case is moot and therefore should be dismissed

00:36:22.980 because just because the mandates have been suspended i think it would effectively legitimize um you know

00:36:29.700 this habit or this practice of restricting our rights um and if the restrictions are removed uh before

00:36:37.460 the courts have a chance uh to hear them uh and to hold the government to account and uh and and you

00:36:43.700 know and as a matter of fact i mean there's there is precedence for this right uh you you might recall

00:36:48.820 that the trudeau government used a version of this tactic uh while um you know by invoking the emergencies

00:36:55.540 act uh and and then we drew it uh just before it came up for a debate in the senate so and i think if

00:37:03.620 we we we live in a law-governed society um the last time i checked and and i feel that none of this

00:37:10.580 stuff is good uh if you if you live in a law-governed society i think i i don't know if some people will

00:37:17.620 think this is a stretch but if this case yeah just based on the evidence we have and obviously you know

00:37:23.380 until until it's all heard and seen you know we've lived this for for almost a year now yeah if this

00:37:29.860 case isn't heard based on the evidence alone i think our democracy in canada is in big big trouble

00:37:37.620 i really do i strongly believe that sorry carl no it's it's it's a good point we'll we'll we were able

00:37:47.460 um in the hearing to draw the court's attention to a recent uh series of decisions in british columbia

00:37:56.740 actually that were made by the chief justice of the supreme court in british columbia and um

00:38:04.340 those were all ultimately dismissals of challenges to um mandatory obligations the same kind of things

00:38:14.660 that you know we're talking about in our case but at a provincial level the vaccine passports i think is

00:38:20.900 the term that was used so the cases were dismissed by the chief justice but the government in that

00:38:26.660 case applied the same pressure and filed a motion for him not to hear them at all um on the grounds

00:38:33.460 that they were moot and he chose to exercise his discretion um to go ahead and and hear the cases

00:38:41.540 um we were able to bring that to the the attention of um uh mr scania last week um and and i think that

00:38:49.860 that goes some way to to helping the court uh see that that that's an appropriate route to go whatever 0.86

00:38:57.380 the outcome of decision is it's right to hear the case you know the mootness in canada is decided

00:39:02.340 largely around a case called the boroski case and there's a test synonymously called the boroski test

00:39:09.540 and two parts is is the issue actually moot in in legal terms um is the first part and even if it is

00:39:17.220 moot the court has very very wide discretion to go ahead and hear the case um in fact it's it's quite

00:39:23.540 possible for a judge also to decide to hear the case before deciding whether or not it's moot um which

00:39:31.060 in fact is what um um chief justice hinkston did in british columbia so um justice gagne has a lot of

00:39:39.060 flexibility in how she approaches this and and hopefully she can see that this is exactly the

00:39:46.580 sort of issue that the second part of the boroski test is made for this is where that discretion really

00:39:53.060 counts and um and you know hopefully that's um that that that's certainly an option that's open

00:40:00.260 to her and and and hopefully you know she may consider that and there was pleadings were all um

00:40:06.100 put to her and in in court and very experienced justice um uh who you know will no doubt think about

00:40:14.740 it very carefully and come to a very considered decision yeah um well um what what are you looking

00:40:20.980 for in terms of uh from the public for example so that this case is heard in court well we've we've

00:40:29.220 been running um we've been running a give send go up until now it's still up i'm running um you know

00:40:35.700 to raise funds obviously the cost of these cases you know many members of the public they have no idea

00:40:41.140 they're very expensive we're gonna be moving that all over um just as a heads up to everybody um

00:40:49.780 actually i'll give people the dates if that's okay for the hearing so if we're if we're successful in

00:40:54.100 our motion in if the judge rules in our favor on the mootness motion um then we'll be heading to a

00:41:03.220 uh final five-day hearing in ottawa um on uh october 31st and that'll run until november 4th

00:41:11.300 so either way if if we if if we're unsuccessful we're very likely going to be appealing this um

00:41:20.820 which is going to be another cost in itself and another process um every time you kind of leave

00:41:27.460 the tracks and go off and deal with a different issue then obviously there's costs associated with

00:41:32.580 that so what carl's been working on for the last few months he set up um uh it's a it's a charitable

00:41:39.860 organization it's called the institute for freedom of justice institute for freedom and justice

00:41:45.300 and so we're going to be transitioning every everything over to that and the reason being

00:41:49.380 is we we don't like relying on platforms like give send go they've been amazing

00:41:54.020 to us don't get me wrong but if anything ever were to happen we don't have any control over that

00:41:59.380 which is why we've also been accepting e-transfers which are all listed on the give send go page and

00:42:05.380 also um even mail-in options some people have been mailing us checks and even cash so there's those

00:42:11.620 options we're going to be transitioning everything over including the e-transfer option where everything

00:42:16.500 will be going to the institute for freedom and justice sorry carl i keep forgetting the name um

00:42:22.580 and what we'll do what that allows us to do then also is to issue tax receipts because we've had some

00:42:28.420 pretty large donations come in and even on the smaller donations people can claim i think it correct me

00:42:34.260 if i'm wrong carl it's up to about 40 percent back on any donations right depends on their their rate

00:42:39.220 of tax yeah be able to self-set it against their own tax so if you're donating um or you know we have

00:42:44.980 people that donate every month then that's that we're going to be transitioning that over and that's

00:42:50.020 probably going to happen in the next week or so just so people know but in the meantime they can go

00:42:54.260 to give sing go um and they can continue to donate there and it's the uh the canadian freedom the

00:43:01.540 canadian freedom litigation fund give sing go canadian freedom okay carl do you want to weigh in

00:43:11.860 no sean's covered that very well yeah and we will we'll complete that process in the coming days and

00:43:17.700 then sean will be able to um let everybody know i'll be updating everything on my social media as well

00:43:23.700 and i'll also be updating it on the gifts and go page as well and the and the institute for freedom of

00:43:28.740 justice will carry on supporting um okay the the case and um and it'll do its work so the the the

00:43:36.180 charitable foundation is going to focus on um area on education and um around uh the constitution and

00:43:43.860 around uh political understanding um you know and also um it will support key areas of uh litigation and

00:43:52.740 legal challenges where those challenges can support the uh the the the charter rights uh of canadians

00:43:59.940 yeah and people should know that we're not gonna we're not we're not gonna give up um we're gonna

00:44:04.900 continue to fight tooth and nail uh as i said even if we're unsuccessful in the mootness motion we will be

00:44:10.100 appealing that if we are successful in the mootness motion and we go to our final trial and we're

00:44:16.340 unsuccessful in that then we'll be appealing that so we're not going anywhere but we do need we do

00:44:22.100 need help to keep this going um and and anything the and and everything that's been received up until

00:44:28.420 now we're eternally grateful for that the amount of support from canadians there's i mean there's about

00:44:34.180 six million people that were affected by this uh essentially it's just been the support's been

00:44:40.180 amazing well thank you to everybody yeah no i'm uh there's there's a lot of support for the two of

00:44:45.860 you uh especially and of course sam uh press fellows um and uh and i only i can only uh you know i

00:44:54.340 predict that support is only going to get uh uh bigger uh with time uh is there before we wrap up is

00:45:00.740 there anything you want to tell our viewers and listeners i think we've covered pretty much everything

00:45:07.460 just just again um look us up on social media go to the give send go um and again thank you everybody

00:45:15.620 who's who's been supporting us and donating it's it's absolutely phenomenal and and please rest

00:45:21.220 assured we will continue to fight this two for nil yeah uh well on that note uh sean and carl um and

00:45:28.580 sam presfilos who couldn't join us uh here uh thank you so much for bringing the case this far and

00:45:34.500 trying to hold the government to account um a lot of people um support you and i wish you all the

00:45:40.900 very best with the next stages of your case and of course i hope to have you both back soon yeah

00:45:49.540 hopefully we'll see you in court on the 31st i hope to be there if not in person definitely via zoom

00:45:56.660 yeah well thank you very much again rupa for everything you've done uh getting this story out

00:46:01.940 really appreciate it oh my pleasure my pleasure yeah my pleasure thanks guys see you soon

Juno News - September 30, 2022

Fighting Trudeau’s Mandates

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript